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.amended
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 XII.A 420 E. Cooper Ave. - Substantial Amendment - Public Hearing XIII.OLD BUSINESS Site Visit - 420 East Cooper Ave. - 12:00pm Staff Memo.420 E Cooper Ave.20240722.pdf Draft HPC Resolution #, Series of 2024.pdf Exhibit A - HP Design Guidelines Analysis.pdf Exhibit B - Application - Insubstantial Amendment Request.pdf Exhibit C - Insubstantial Amendment Determination.pdf Exhibit D - Application Update - Red Onion Roof Support Process.pdf 1 1 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 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. 2 2 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 3 3 Page 1 of 4 Memorandum TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THROUGH: Ben Anderson, Community Development Director FROM: Stuart Hayden, Interim Principal Planner, Historic Preservation MEETING DATE: July 24, 2024 RE: 420 E. Cooper Ave. – Substantial Amendment; PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT/OWNER: 414 422 EAST COOPER AVENUE LLC REPRESENTATIVE: BendonAdams, LLC LOCATION: Street Address: 420 E. Cooper Ave. Legal Description: Lots N, O and the westerly 9.44 feet of Lot P, Block 89, City and Township of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: 2737-182-16-301 CURRENT ZONING & USE CC (Commercial Core); Commercial PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change SUMMARY: The applicant requests a Substantial Amendment to a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development at 420 E. Cooper Ave. for the purposes of disassembling and reassembling historic bricks to install new roof joist to be sistered to historic roof framing, and removing and replacing historic bricks from the west wall of the historic resource to install steel lintels and to sister new joists to historic roof framing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Substantial Amendment with conditions. Figure 1. Site Location Map – 420 E. Cooper Ave. 4 Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND: In May 2024, Community Development Department staff became aware that the latest building permit change order application (0085-2023-BCHO) included heretofore unapproved structural work to the historic resource. Before staff stopped the work and referred the applicant to Sec. 26.415.070 for proper land use approvals, nine roof joist were installed by saw-cutting through and removing the historic masonry from at least 11 locations in the west wall. The subsequent application for an insubstantial amendment (Exhibit B) requested approval from the project monitoring committee for the removal and replacement of the top six or seven courses of historic brick from the northmost 36 feet of the east wall to replace 24 historic trusses with new joists, the removal and replacement of the top six or seven courses of historic brick from the southmost 18 feet of the west wall to replace 12 historic trusses with new roof joists, and the removal and replacement of about 348 square feet of historic brick from the middle of the west wall to replace another 29 historic trusses with new roof joists and install an 18-inch-tall steel lintel above the previously approved wall openings between 418 and 420 E. Cooper Ave. After the HPC project monitoring committee issued its denial of the insubstantial amendment request (Exhibit C) on June 12, 2024, the applicant unsuccessfully appealed the matter to the Community Development Director. On June 25, the Community Development Director offered the following conciliatory proposal: 1. Consideration by HPC as a Substantial Amendment at the July 24th HPC regular meeting. This is the soonest meeting we can get on the agenda while making notice requirements. This is a code described remedy – where either the ComDev Director can remand an amendment request to HPC or the applicant may appeal. 2. Your application for the Insubstantial Amendment is sufficient for consideration by HPC for the Substantial Amendment. If you would choose to add to the application, you may do so, but there is not a requirement to submit new materials. If you do choose to add materials, we ask that you do so no later than July 12th so that new materials can be reviewed and included in HPC packet. 3. Staff’s position related to the Substantial Amendment request will be as follows: • We recognize the need to find a solution to the intersecting issues that have arisen during the project. • We are concerned about the aggregation of modifications to the Red Onion Building and this significant change to the construction methods from approvals adds to this aggregate effect. • We will acknowledge the denial of the Insubstantial Amendment but will otherwise describe the proposal in neutral terms. The unapproved work (installation of the first 9 LVLs) will not be a point of emphasis and we will not be seeking a remedy in the enforcement realm. On June 24, 2024, the applicant submitted a detail drawing (Exhibit D) updating the proposed roof support process. This update illustrates the proposal to carefully disassemble and reassemble the historic bricks on the north end of the east wall and south end of the west wall to accommodate the installation of the new roof joists. This detail also depicts the new roof joists 5 Page 3 of 4 sistered to the historic roof framing (joists, chords, and webbing), details omitted from the insubstantial amendment request, but important to the monitoring committee’s determination. No additional materials were provided by the July 12th deadline. REQUEST OF HPC: The Applicant is requesting the following approval: • Substantial Amendment (Sec. 26.415.070(e)(2)) to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted. The HPC is the final review authority for Substantial Amendments. PROJECT SUMMARY: • Disassembly and Reassembly of Historic Material. The application proposes to disassemble and reinstall up to 13 historic bricks at each of 24 locations on the north end of the east wall and at each of 12 locations on the south end of the west wall to install new roof joist to be sistered to historic roof framing. • Removal and Replacement of Historic Material. The application proposes to permanently remove and replace roughly 348 square feet of historic brick from the west wall of the historic resource to install two 18-inches-tall, 24-feet-long steel lintels, and to sister 24 new joists to historic roof framing. STAFF REVIEW: As detailed in Exhibit A, the application for substantial amendment to the Certificate of Appropriateness at 420 E. Cooper Ave. is partially consistent and partially inconsistent with the relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The proposal to carefully disassemble and reassemble the historic brick and sister new roof joist to existing framing meets the applicable guidelines. The work is not strictly necessary for repairing deteriorated wall sections, but is relatively limited in scope and will have an auxiliary restorative benefit without permanently removing historic material. The proposal to remove and replace roughly 348 square feet of historic brick from the middle of the west wall of the historic resource, however, does not meet the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Rather than “preserve original building materials” as called for by Guideline 2.1., the application proposes to discard historic material from a major portion of the wall. Despite direction from Guideline 2.3 to “replace only the amount required” where “damaged beyond repair,” the application seeks to replace approximately 22% of the entire second story of the west wall to accommodate two large (~216 square feet and 129 square feet) openings therein, further degrading the building’s historic integrity. As proposed, interior views of the west historic brick wall 6 Page 4 of 4 will be reserved for the women’s restroom, the kitchen, furniture storage, dry storage, and about twenty feet on the south side of the bar. Maintaining the existing material, repairing deteriorated historic features, and replacing only those elements that cannot be repaired is one of four basic principles that form the foundation of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. It is not a technical detail, but rather elemental to the treatment of historic properties. Accordingly, maintaining the historic brick, repairing it in place, and replacing it only where necessary is an appropriate treatment of the historic resource. The disassembly and reinstallation of the historic brick to accommodate the installation of new roof joist to be sistered to existing roof framing is relatively non-invasive and limited enough in scope to suffice this principle. The wholesale replacement of historic material to accommodate the complete removal of historic material (previously approved or otherwise) does not satisfy the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was not referred out to other City departments. Their requirements may, nevertheless, affect the permit review if warranted. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend the HPC approve the application for Substantial Amendment with the following conditions: 1. Historic brick shall not be replaced unless irreparably damaged. 2. Installation of the nine partially installed new roof joists is to be completed in accordance to the process herein approved for the north end of the east wall and the south end of the west wall using similar brick salvaged from elsewhere on the historic resource. ATTACHMENTS: Draft HPC Resolution # __, Series of 2024 Exhibit A – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines - Staff Findings Exhibit B – Application - Historic Preservation Insubstantial Amendment Request Exhibit C – Insubstantial Amendment Request Determination Exhibit D – Application Addendum - Red Onion Roof Support Process 7 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #__, (SERIES OF 2024) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 420 EAST COOPER AVENUE, LOTS N, O AND THE WESTERLY 9.44 FEET OF LOT P, BLOCK 89, CITY AND TOWNSHIP OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-301 WHEREAS, the applicant, 414 422 East Cooper Avenue, LLC, represented by BendonAdams, LLC, has requested HPC approval for a Substantial Amendment for the property located at 420 East Cooper Avenue, Lots N, O and the westerly 9.44 feet of Lot P, Block 89, City and Township of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for approval of Substantial Amendment, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070(e)(2) of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, as a historic landmark, the site is exempt from Residential Design Standards review; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards and design guidelines, and recommended approval of the Substantial Amendment with conditions; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 24, 2024, the HPC reviewed and considered the application, staff memo, and public comments, and found the application consistent with the applicable review standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of _ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves with conditions the Substantial Amendment for the property located at 420 East Cooper Avenue, Lots N, O and the westerly 9.44 feet of Lot P, Block 89, City and Township of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado; as follows: Section 1: Substantial Amendment. 8 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024 Page 2 of 3 HPC hereby approves the Substantial Amendment as proposed with the following conditions: 1. Historic brick shall not be replaced unless irreparably damaged. 2. Installation of the nine partially installed new roof joists is to be completed in accordance to the process herein approved for the north end of the east wall and the south end of the west wall using similar brick salvaged from elsewhere on the historic resource. Section 2: 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 3: 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 4: 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. Section 5: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site-specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 420 East Cooper Avenue. 9 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024 Page 3 of 3 Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24th day of July, 2024. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: __________________________________ ____________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Kara Thompson, Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 10 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit A Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.070(e) – Substantial Amendment to a Certificate of Appropriateness (2) Substantial amendments. a. All changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment. b. An application for a substantial amendment shall include the following materials, as determined appropriate by the Community Development Director: 1. A revised site plan. 2. Revised scaled elevations and drawings. 3. Representations of building materials and finishes. 4. Photographs and other exhibits to illustrate the proposed changes. c. The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for approval of a substantial amendment and waive any submittals not considered necessary for consideration. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. d. Notice for the review of an application for a substantial amendment will include publication, posting and mailing pursuant to Section 26.304.060(e)(3) Paragraphs a, b and c. e. Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the extent of the changes relative to the approved plans and how the proposed revisions affect the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Codes. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed revisions and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove, or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. f. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. 11 Page 2 of 3 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines & Findings The applicant requests a Substantial Amendment to the Certificate of Appropriateness at 420 E. Cooper Ave. for the purposes of disassembling and reassembling historic materials; and removing and replacing historic material. 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. Met/Not Met 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. Unclear 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. Not Met Chapter 7: Roofs Finding 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material. • Using recognized preservation methods, repair deteriorated historic material when possible. • When replacement is necessary, replace the roofing in kind, and/or use a material that is similar to the original in both style and physical qualities. Met 12 Page 3 of 3 Staff Findings: Chapter 2 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines is particularly relevant to this application for a Substantial Amendment to the Certificate of Appropriateness at 420 E. Cooper Ave. Disassembly and Reassembly of Historic Material. Insofar as it does not constitute a “major portion” of either wall, disassembling and reinstalling up to 13 historic bricks at each of 24 locations on the north end of the east wall and at each of 12 locations on the south end of the west wall suffices Guideline 2.1. Although the materials could likely be repaired in place, the masonry will return to and be preserved in the same place. The proposed brick finish is undefined in the application. The historic finish of the brick is also not indicated. Whether the finish of the materials meets Guideline 2.2, therefore, is unknown. The installation of the new roof joists is considered with the disassembly and reassembly of historic materials. Sistering the new joists to the historic roof framing (roof joist, bottom chord, and web) meets Guideline 7.7 by preserving the original roof material. Removal and Replacement of Historic Material. The application also proposes to permanently remove and replace roughly 348 square feet of historic brick from the west wall of the historic resource, contradicting the clear directive to “preserve original building materials” in Guideline 2.1. Rebuilding, let alone replacing, a major portion of an exterior wall, as proposed, may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. Previous approvals have already permitted the removal of about 22% of the entire second story of the west wall to accommodate two large (~216 square feet and ~129 square feet) openings. This application proposes to double the amount of historic material removed for this purpose. As proposed, interior views of the west historic brick wall will be reserved for the women’s restroom, the kitchen, furniture storage, dry storage, and about twenty feet on the south side of the bar. Replacing this much material is antithetical to the direction of Guideline 2.3 to “replace only the amount required” where “damaged beyond repair.” The proposed brick finish is undefined in the application. The historic finish of the historic brick is also not known. Whether the finish of the materials meets Guideline 2.2, therefore, is unclear. 13 Historic PreservationInsubstantial Amendment Request MASTER BLDNG PERMIT #: Submittal Items for Monitoring Committee Review: Disclaimer: Issuance of this approval is specific to the design review and based on the information provided by the applicant. It will be the applicant’s responsibility to update permit information for re-review and approval by all relevant review agencies. DATE: HPC Resolution Meeting Minutes Specification sheets and/or samples of proposed materials Address circumstances discovered in the course of construction that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the approval process; or Are necessary for conformance with building safety or accessibility codes and do not materially change the approved plans; or Approve specific building materials, finishes, design of ornamental trim and other such detail not provided in the HPC approved plans; or Change the shape, location or material of a building element or feature but maintains the same quality and approximate appearance of that found in the approved plans. Which of the following criteria does this request meet (per Section 26.415.070(e)(1)(a)? LAND USE PLANNING APPLICATION #: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: PHONE NUMBER:EMAIL ADDRESS: If none, contact the historic preservation planner for more information about substantial amendments. Written Description of Request: Side-by-side drawings of existing conditions, approved designs, and modifications proposed by this request. Description of how this request meets all relevant standards and/or guidelines. 14 (ATTACH RELEVANT SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS WITH SIGNED DETERMINATION FORM) Disclaimer: Issuance of this approval is specific to the design review and based on the information provided by the applicant. It will be the applicant’s responsibility to update permit information for re-review and approval by all relevant review agencies. Monitoring Committee Signatures: Determination provided this day of 2024 APPROVED DENIED REMANDED TO THE HPC MONITORING COMMITTEE USE ONLY APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS Historic PreservationInsubstantial Amendment Request DATE: MASTER BLDNG PERMIT #: LAND USE PLANNING APPLICATION #: PROJECT ADDRESS: Monitoring Committee Determination: Details/Comments: 15 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM City of Aspen/Historic Preservation Stuart Hayden Cc: Denis Murray via email Re: 420 East Cooper – Red Onion structural amendment Dear Stuart, The Red Onion (420 East Cooper) is a designated local landmark, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. The building is currently under construction pursuant to HPC approvals and a valid building permit 0028.2021.BCOM. A general history of the approvals which includes 414/418, 422, and 434 East Cooper is provided below. History The Red Onion building is a midblock landmark that was previously linked to 418 and 422 East Cooper as a large restaurant and nightclub venue in the 1960s/70s. Upper floor windows on both the east and west side have been altered over time based on historic photographs. The windows on the west elevation were covered in the 1970s/80s when 418 E Cooper was constructed. The 1904 Sanborne Fire Insurance Map shows that the windows on the west side of the Red Onion were likely covered by the front portion of an adjacent two story building. 414- 418 434 422 420 Figure 1: Visual representation of the building discussed within this report. 420 (white roof) is the historic landmark. 16 420 East Cooper – Insubstantial Amendment Page 2 of 3 Past Approvals In 2016 HPC approved the demolition and replacement of the existing structures at 422 and 434 East Cooper Avenue (Resolutions 26-2015, and 35-2016). A new building was approved for 434 East Cooper and 422 East Cooper was approved to function as commercial space and general access to 434 East Cooper. The project approvals were amended in 2019 to allow access from 422 East Cooper into the upper level of 420 East Cooper which is proposed to be operated by JAS (Jazz Aspen Snowmass) and connected to the second floor of 418 East Cooper. New openings in the east and west party walls of the Red Onion were approved by HPC in 2019 to accommodate the JAS venue to operate on the second floor of both 420 and 418 East Cooper (Resolution 14-2019) with access from 422 East Cooper. Mechanical equipment and skylights were approved on top of the Red Onion. After the HPC approval, various administrative approvals have been granted regarding view plane exemptions, growth management, and typical project monitoring review like mechanical equipment revisions. Relevant to this discussion, in 2023, HPC was asked to discuss changes to the openings on the west wall as a Board on April 12, 2023 (staff memo and meeting minutes are Figure 2 – 5: Historic images of Red Onion (top); 1904 Sanborn Map (bottom left); Expanded Red Onion venue (bottom right). 17 420 East Cooper – Insubstantial Amendment Page 3 of 4 provided as Exhibits 1 and 2). Openings on the west wall were proposed to be enlarged beyond the 2019 approval, so the Board was asked to provide feedback. HPC discussed the importance of exposed brick on the interior of the upper floor west wall, and ultimately directed the project monitor (Jeff Halferty) to approve the amended openings which were a similar total size to the 2019 approval (see Exhibit 5). Request As demonstrated in Exhibit 5, there is no significant change to the 2023 approved openings in the west wall. The requested insubstantial amendment relates to the structural stability of the brick, or lack thereof, and the appropriate construction technique to properly carry loads while meeting the intent of the HPC approval to have exposed brick within the Red Onion. This request is driven by the deteriorated condition of the brick on the upper portion (above the ceiling line) of the Red Onion which was not discovered and analyzed until interior demolition was completed and the brick party walls were fully exposed. The brick is failing (see photos on next page and attached reports) and cannot carry the required loads as a structural wall to construct the approved project. Letters from SP Engineers (Exhibit 6) and Atkinson-Noland (Exhibit 7) are included to demonstrate existing condition and proposed replacement bricks. There are two solutions to this problem that need HP monitor review and approval: 1) Brick repair and replacement. The brick above the ceiling line needs to be repaired and in many places replaced. The brick is falling apart and is not structurally sound. The historic Red Onion brick needs to structurally accept a connection to the 418 building to the west, as the two structures need to be stitched together to safely travel between both buildings as per the approval. In other words, the brick needs to be stable enough to accept an anchor that attaches the building together (see image below, and Exhibit 6) – and the current brick is crumbling. 19th century brick used in Aspen is very soft and overtime degrades to the point of replacement. This common condition is found throughout town on the majority of 19th century brick buildings. Replacement brick and mortar will match existing historic brick. The area of brick replacement is above the ceiling line and out of view from the Pedestrian Malls. Further, the building is painted and any patches will be hidden behind the paint. Photographs of the deteriorated brick discovered after interior demolition are on the follow page. Figure 6: Detail of required anchor between 418 and 420 buildings. 18 420 East Cooper – Insubstantial Amendment Page 4 of 5 2) Install LVLs through upper east and west walls. The east and west walls need to be strengthened, in the form of LVLs, to structurally support the loads on the roof and the approved interior openings in the party walls. The original approval included installation of some LVLs to address structural stability, but it has been determined that LVLs spaced out the entire length of the building are required. The HPC approval for interior exposed brick means that framed walls cannot be constructed within the historic building to carry the loads – rather, the brick walls need to be strengthened to carry the loads. In addition, ADA clearances cannot be met if interior framed walls are added. The team has come up with a solution that meets the intent of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the direction from HPC. In order to preserve the historic roof (which is in fairly good condition) and understanding that existing brick needs to be replaced in the upper section of the building anyway - the proposal is to slide the LVLs through the east and west side party walls. The openings will be repaired with new brick by Heritage Masonry (an experienced mason who also worked on Figure 7-10: Photographs of existing brick. 19 420 East Cooper – Insubstantial Amendment Page 5 of 6 201 E. Main) to fully hide the LVLs on the exterior. The upper floor of the Red Onion is mostly hidden from view or covered by roof flashing or the second floor of the JAS venue at 418. To date, 9 LVLs out of a total of 64 LVLs, have been installed before it the City requested a check in with HPC on the construction technique. Images of the LVLs in portion of west wall. The LVLs would be cut and the exterior brick repaired for a seamless appearance. Relevant Design Guidelines 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. Figure 11 – 13: Photographs of existing conditions. 20 420 East Cooper – Insubstantial Amendment Page 6 of 7 • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. Response – Character defining masonry on the front facades is not impacted by this proposal. Only the upper portion of the east and west party walls are impacted, and these bricks are deteriorated and need to be replaced. The historic character of the interior walls will be preserved and exposed to patrons of JAS, which was important to HPC’s decision in 2023. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. Response – The proposed work is on a secondary surface, not the primary street facaing façade. Deteriorated or unstable bricks will be replaced, and bricks that need to be removed to accommodate the LVL will be replaced or reused if possible. 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. • Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. Response – Brick is proposed to replace brick. Mortar will match existing. A preliminary analysis by Atkinson-Nolan is attached as Exhibit 7. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. • Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. Response- Any removed brick will be reused if possible. The historic bond will be replicated as part of the repair/replacement. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. Response – Brick will be replaced with matching brick that is structurally sound (refer to Exhibit 7). 21 420 East Cooper – Insubstantial Amendment Page 7 of 7 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. Response – The historic roof is preserved in the proposed method. The team explored removing the roof and using a crane to drop the LVLs into the building, rather than sliding through the party walls, but the roof is in decent shape as opposed to many of the deteriorated bricks which would need replacement anyway. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. Response - See response above (HPDG 7.1) 12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic buildings and districts. • All new construction must comply completely with the International Building Code (IBC) for accessibility. Special provisions for historic buildings exist in the law that allow some flexibility when designing solutions which meet accessibility standards. Response – The interior exposed brick accommodate required clearance for ADA based on the approved layout. Adding framed walls, as opposed to the proposed LVL method, reduces the interior pathways and required clearances such that the interior JAS space would not meet ADA requirements. Thank you for your consideration of this amendment. We look forward to discussing it with you. I can arrange a site visit to review the current condition. Kind Regards, Sara Adams, AICP BendonAdams, LLC Exhibits 1- Staff memo April 12, 2023 2- HPC meeting minutes April 12, 2023 3- HPC Resolution 14-2019 4- HPC approved drawings 2019 5- Proposed amendment with comparison to 2023 approval 6- Engineering letter 7- Atkinson-Nolan letter 22 Page 1 of 2 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Planning Director MEETING DATE: April 12, 2023 RE: 414-420 E. Cooper Avenue, JAS renovation- Project Monitoring BACKGROUND: In 2019, HPC approved a minor development application for the renovation of the upper floor of the historic Red Onion (420 E. Cooper Avenue) and non-historic Red Onion Office building to the west (414-416 E. Cooper Avenue) to accommodate a venue space for Jazz Aspen Snowmass. The project was primarily an interior remodel, with some modifications to the exterior of the Red Onion Office building, including an expansion towards the alley and installation of skylights. The historic Red Onion building is a mid-block building that has been abutted on the west by the two story Red Onion Offices building for many years, and on the east by a one story building. On the ground floor, all three structures were internally linked in the past when the Red Onion restaurant and bar operation was much larger. Historic photos indicate that there were some original upper floor window openings on each side of the Red Onion; see c. 1950s photos from the Aspen Historical Society below. The upper west windows remained in place until they were covered over in the 70s/80s. The east wall appears to have some original windows that were filled in by the time this photo was taken. The row of east upper windows in place now are not original and appear to have been added in the 1980s, likely when the space was remodeled for office use. Exhibit 1 23 Page 2 of 2 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com The JAS project has approval to add/alter penetrations through the east and west side walls of the historic Red Onion to create a better flow through the venue space and to access a new elevator/stair column that will be on the east side of the building in the Restoration Hardware project at 434 E. Cooper. During the 2019 review, staff and HPC did not discuss or object to these wall penetrations, presumably viewing them as minimal in scope and necessary. When the project was submitted for building permit, staff flagged a concern that the permit set showed a significant opening in the west wall of the historic Red Onion, nearly front to back, leading into the main performance area for the venue, supported by a new interior structure. Staff and Project Monitor Jeff Halferty discussed the extent of demolition and ultimately determined that HPC input is necessary for work beyond what was represented in the approval process. The project architects, Charles Cunniffe Architects, have studied their design and have reduced the amount of new brick removal from what was shown in the building permit to 550 square feet on the east and west combined; 22 square feet more than the board reviewed. The discussion is somewhat complicated by the fact that on both the east and west walls, windows have been added or filled in the past, so that arguably the new changes, on top of the old changes, are adding up to significant loss of integrity. That said, the existing approval stands and staff does not encourage HPC to overcomplicate the execution of this project. The architects have indicated that the character of the brick is valued and that it will remain exposed on the interior. Demolition affecting sidewalls of historic structures in the downtown area is a topic that has not been common in past reviews of commercial development, in staff’s recollection. Many historic structures in the downtown are sandwiched between other buildings and their side walls may or may not be exposed to view at all. There have not been many examples of connecting adjacent buildings across property lines, and few or none that have generated such extensive openings as proposed in the subject project. Staff feels that this is an important discussion for HPC to have and that the JAS project should not meaningfully exceed the extent of demolition that was previously understood. Staff asks that HPC provide direction to staff and monitor to either: • Accept the attached revised proposal without further evaluation; or • Work with the architect to align new openings, to the extent possible, with areas of brick that are already disturbed in order to limit demolition of in-situ historic masonry to the extent possible, while accommodating the functional needs of JAS. ATTACHMENTS: Applicant proposal 24 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 12TH, 2023 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:30pm. Commissioners in attendance: Peter Fornell, Roger Moyer, Jeffery Halferty and Kara Thompson. Commissioners not in attendance: Ms. Pitchford, Ms. Surfas and Ms. Sanzone Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Ms. Thompson motioned to approve the minutes from 1/25/23. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, abstained; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 3-0, motion passes. Ms. Thompson motioned to approve the minutes from 2/1/23. Mr. Fornell seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, abstained; Ms. Thompson, yes. 3-0, motion passes. Ms. Thompson motioned to approve the minutes from 2/22/23. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 4-0, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS: Mr. Halferty commented on a film he saw at a film festival at the Isis Theatre, called “Home of the Brave: When Southbury Said No to the Nazis”. It dealt with Nazi Bund camps in Southbury, CT and how the town came together to pass new zoning laws that banned these camps. Ms. Thompson asked Ms. Simon about the possibility of getting back to conducting site visits at least on bigger projects. Ms. Simon agreed and said, if it serves a purpose to visit a site together, they can do that, otherwise she hoped commissioners were visiting on their own before a project comes before them. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Simon started by noting a few staff review applications that had come through lately. These included projects at the Yellow Brick School Building, 135 West Francis, and the addition of a patio in front of the Explore Bookstore building. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon mentioned that at the May 10th meeting, HPC would be seeing an item regarding a private nomination to put 835 West Main St. on the National Registry of Historic Places. The cabin at that address was designed by Fritz Benedict and occupied for most of its life by Bruce Berger. She said the process requires both HPC and the Mayor make a recommendation. She invited the commissioners to come see the house on Friday, May 5th at noon. Ms. Simon also mentioned that there will be a virtual meeting of the Ski Town Forum from 1pm – 3pm on May 10th. Exhibit 2 25 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 12TH, 2023 PROJECT MONITORING: 414 – 420 E. Cooper Ave. JAS Renovation Ms. Simon introduced the item and went over some of the history of the project. She noted that HPC had reviewed and approved the previous application. She mentioned the remodel came in for building permit recently and the opening on the west side of the historic Red Onion leading into the adjacent building was much larger than HPC had originally seen. After discussion with Mr. Halferty, the project monitor, it was decided it needed to come back before the board. She said the focus of this conversation should be that no historic brick that is in its original location be removed if it doesn’t have to be, to make sure that new openings overlap areas that are disturbed as much as possible and that the applicant fill in any non-historic openings that they can. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Charles Cunniffe, Charles Cunniffe Architects Mr. Cunniffe introduced himself and Mr. Noah Czech. He started by reading a letter from Jim Horowitz the President of Jazz Aspen Snowmass into the record. Ms. Simon then showed a few historic pictures of the east and west sides of the building pointing out that on the east side there is no clear evidence of there ever being any windows, yet there are about eight windows now. She gave some thoughts on when these non-historic windows were added. She also noted that in the pictures you can see a few historic windows on the building’s west side. Mr. Cunniffe showed the floor plan that was previously approved by HPC. He pointed out space that was originally planned as restrooms, but since then M Development deferred to Restoration Hardware and gave them priority over the space, causing this project to reconfigure their space. He went on to show the original approved floor plans as well as the new proposed ones and described the differences, including the layout and wall openings that in the original plans totaled about 550 square feet of brick to be removed. He said the submitted plans from M Development showed all the walls removed, which was not the applicant’s intent. He then went over the proposed plans that he said pretty much align with the original approval, except for the relocation of a hallway and the new restroom space. He noted that the new plans would increase the amount of brick removal by about 22 square feet. He said their intent is to, as much as possible, align the new openings with existing ones. He described in detail these alignments. He then went on to describe changes to the east wall and the nine non-historic windows. These would be filled in using historic brick. Mr. Halferty, as project monitor, explained his reasons for brining this back to HPC for their thoughts. Mr. Cunniffe also mentioned that the historic brick that was removed, would be used to line other interior walls in the building, in order to keep it in the space. Ms. Thompson wanted to clarify that this is a different plan than what was submitted for permit. Ms. Simon said yes, this is a revision. Mr. Fornell asked if any of these changes will be visible for the exterior of the building. Mr. Cunniffe said no. He went on to further describe how the existing exterior walls will appear from the interior of the new space. Ms. Simon noted that while the applicant team has no intention to drywall over any of the interior walls, they could. She said that while HPC does not review interiors, this is being discussed because it is arguably demolition of historic fabric. Ms. Thompson said she supported this as an improvement and had no problem with what is presented. Mr. Moyer and Mr. Fornell concurred. 26 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 12TH, 2023 Mr. Cunniffe said that they will now pass these plans on to M Development to incorporate into their permit drawing as a revision. CALL UP REPORTS: None. SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Johnson said that she reviewed public notice, and that notice was provided per the code for both agenda items. NEW BUSINESS: 214 W. Bleeker Street – Minor Development, Relocation and Variation Review; PUBLIC HEARING Applicant Presentation: Jason Ro – Ro Rockett Design Mr. Ro introduced himself and Mr. Bryant Suh. He then described the project as having a historic Victorian structure on the street side than has previously been added onto with a non-historic addition at the rear extending to the alleyway. He described their proposed project, at least above grade, as mostly an interior renovation, with some minor exterior adjustments primarily at the rear non-historic portion. The plan also includes a full excavation and construction of a basement. He then showed a few historic and current pictures of the building from the street and described some of the differences. He noted that looking at historic pictures over time the historic Victorian has mostly stayed intact, pointing out a few differences related to the front porch level relative to the natural grade and the foundation wall being clad in sandstone. He said the house is essentially a lift in place, excavate and build out the basement and then reset the house. They are applying for a setback variance because in the existing state the house does encroach past the current setback guidelines and their intent is to keep it in its historic location and not move it. He went over the existing elevations, pointing out where they believe the historic asset ends and the non-historic addition begins. He noted that after studying the FAR, the house was built out to its FAR capacity back in the 1990s. Knowing this they are adding a basement but are proposing to remove a portion of the interior square footage in an attempt to remain compliant. The historic shed at the back of the property does still put them over the FAR limit. He showed pictures of the existing shed and noted that while not in this application, they are planning on coming back to apply for an FAR bonus based on them moving the historic shed and relocating it to relieve the locational pressure between the shed and the non-historic addition of the building. He then went on to describe some of their restoration plans for the historic portion of the house, including the attempt to recreate the original height of the front porch relative to the grade. Next, he talked about an existing tree on the property and their collaborative work with the Parks department. He then went over the chimney in the historic portion and noted that for purposes of moving the house, it will need to be taken down and then reconstructed. He further described the current proximity of the historic shed to the non-historic portion and their proposal to shift it to the east to allow for more space. Next, he showed the proposed elevations, describing a few new features. Mr. Fornell stated that the historic shed in set on the lot line and asked if after the move to the east if it would still be on the lot line. Mr. Ro said that is only moving in the easterly direction and would still be on the lot line. Mr. Fornell then asked if he heard correctly that the applicant would be coming back later to ask for an FAR bonus Mr. Ro said yes. They had misinterpreted the FAR impact of the shed when they submitted this application. 27 RECEPTION#: 658727, R: $23.007 D: $0.00 DOC CODE: RESOLUTION Pg 1 of 3,09/16/2019 at 02:46:03 PM Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO RESOLUTION #14,SERIES OF 2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION GRANTING MINOR DEVELOPMENT, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 414-422 E. COOPER AVENUE, LOTS N, O AND P, BLOCK 89, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-301 WHEREAS, the applicant, 414-422 East Cooper Avenue LLC, represented by BendonAdams and Modif Architecture, has requested HPC approval for Minor Development Review, Commercial Design Review, Growth Management, Transportation and Parking mitigation for the property located at 414-422 E. Cooper Avenue, Lots N, O and P, Block 89. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the review is subject to the Municipal Code in place at the time of application completeness on June 11, 2019; and WHEREAS, a Development Review Committee meeting was held on July 17, 2019, resulting in referral comments from City departments which have been incorporated into the evaluation of this application; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on August 14, 2019. HPC considered the application, the staff memo, Development Review Committee comments, and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of 7 to O. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section_ 1: Minor Development Review HPC hereby approves Minor Development, Commercial Design Review, Growth Management, Transportation and Parking mitigation for the project at 414-422 E. Cooper Avenue with the following conditions: 1. All conditions of approval related to the demolition and replacement of the structure at 422 E. Cooper Avenue, as expressed in HPC Resolution #35, Series of 2016, remain in effect. 2. At building permit review, the applicant must document the existing Second Tier Commercial Space on this site and verify that no reduction is occurring. Per Section 26.412.080.A of the Aspen Municipal Code, Second Tier Commercial Space Applicability, no portion of Second Tier Commercial Space may be used as storage, office, and the like, for another commercial space. No portion of the ground floor on this property may function as net leasable space serving the second floor use. HPC Resolution #14, Series of 2019 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit 3 28 3. The new FTEs generated by this project and requiring affordable housing mitigation are approximately 0.02. All calculations used to determine the required mitigation will be confirmed during the building permit review process. The applicant may mitigate via Affordable Housing Credits or cash-in-lieu, which must be at a Category 4 level, provided prior to issuance of the permit. 4. The project involves an increase of approximately 1,760 square feet of new net leasable space with a mitigation requirement is 1.76 parking units, all of which can be mitigated through a cash-in-lieu fee of$38,000 per space. Final calculation of the new net leasable space will be confirmed during the building permit review process. 5. Transportation Impact Assessment and mitigation for new trips generated by the development will be finalized through Engineering during building permit review. 6. Applicant must coordinate with City Departments to address referral comments to the extent possible, prior to submitting for building permit review. 7. This approval is subject to the issuance of an administrative approval for development within a view plane. 8. HPC staff and monitor must review and approve samples of all exterior materials prior to issuance of building permit. 9. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 18o days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 414-422 E.Cooper Avenue. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development ,order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and HPC Resolution #14, Series of 2019 Page 2 of 3 29 ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 2: 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 3: Existing LitiSation 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 A: 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 the L ay of 4,2019. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: James R. True, City Attorney Gr en Greenwood, Chair ATTEST: c Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk HPC Resolution #14, Series of 2019 Page 3of3 30 PROJECTSITEScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif. 1 1/2" = 1’−0"8/2/2019 11:45:34 AM1−COVER2018−00106−07−2019COVER SHEET414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, COREMODELASPEN, COVICINITY MAPDRAWING LISTN3D VIGNETTESHEET NUMBERSHEET NAMEX - 101 PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR WALL DEMOPLAN AND ELEVATIONSX - 102 PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR WALL DEMO PLANAND ELEVATIONSX - 103 PROPOSED ROOF DEMO PLANSHEET NUMBERSHEET NAMEFAR-1 CALCULATION SUMMARYFAR-2 FAR CALCULATIONSFAR-3 FAR CALCULATIONSFAR-4 FAR CALCULATIONSFAR-5 FAR CALCULATIONSNL-2 EXIST. NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSNL-3 NET LEASABLE COMPARISONNL-4 NET LEASABLE COMPARISONNL-5 NET LEASABLE COMPARISONNL-6 NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSNL-7 NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSNL-8 NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSPA-1 EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITYPA-2 PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITYTIA TIA SITE PLANVP-1 VIEW PLANE MAPX - 100 DEMOLITION CALCULATIONSSHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME1-COVER COVER SHEET1 OF 1 IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLATA-010 PROPOSED SITE PLANA-110B COMPARISON BASEMENT LEVELA-111B COMPARISON GROUND LEVELA-112B COMPARISON SECOND FLOOR LEVELA-113A COMPARISON ROOF PLAN LEVEL OPTION AA-200 PROPOSED ELEVATIONSA-201 PROPOSED ELEVATIONSA-301 BUIDLING SECTIONA-302 BUILDING SECTIONA-500 VIEW PLANE STUDYA-501 VIEW PLANE STUDYA-502 INTERIOR PERSPECTIVEA-503 EXTERIOR VIGNETTESA-504 EXTERIOR VIGNETTESA-600 BUILDING MATERIALS414-420 EAST COOPER AVENUELOCAL JURISDICTION:THE CITY OF ASPEN130 S. GALENA STREETASPEN, CO 81611TEL (970) 429-2681CONTACT:- BY DEPARTMENTTENANT:JAZZ ASPEN SNOWMASS110 E HALLAM ST. # 104, ASPEN, CO 81611TEL: (970) 920-4996LANDLORD:414-422 EAST COOPER AVENUE, LLC.2001 N. HALSTED ST., SUITE 304CHICAGO, IL 60614TEL. (312) 850-1680CONTACT: JEFF RICHMANARCHITECT:MODIF. ARCHITECTURE, LLC.1229 N. NORTH BRANCH STREET, SUITE 206 CHICAGO, IL 60642TEL: 312-288-2009CONTACT: ROB AVILA, RA, LEED APGENERAL CONTRACTOR:CENTAUR361 W. CHESTNUT ST., SUITE 20CHICAGO, IL 60610TEL (312) 644-4472CONTACT: BRAD HRIBARMEP ENGINEER:ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS40801 US HWY 6 & 24, STE 214AVON, CO 81620TEL: 970-748-8520CONTACT: STANTON HUMPHRIES, P.E.LAND USE SETLAND PLANNER:BENDONADAMS300 S. SPRING ST. #202ASPEN, CO. 8161TEL 970-925-2855CONTACT: SARA ADAMS, AICPNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNERExhibit 42019 HPC Approval Set31 C:\General CADD 12\Gxd\35243CA.gxd -- 06/06/2019 -- 02:14 PM -- Scale 1 : 120.0000 32 G G G G 7921.83' TOP BACK CURB 30.09' TT E EEEEE D DYH3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1" 3.9370 ' 1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3.9370' 1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685' MINIMUMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1" 3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"3. 9370' 1.9685' M I NIM UMSPACI NG 1"ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTALLEY COOPER AVE. PEDESTRIAN MALL TERRACE WHEELER OPERA HOUSE VIEW PLANE LIMITPROPERTY LINE414 -420 E. COOPER AVE. 422−434 E. COOPER PROPOSED TWO STORY DEVELOPMENT N.I.C.SOUTH GALENA STREETCOOPER AVE. PEDESTRIAN MALL ALLEY 300 SF INTERIOR TRASH AREA FDN. DRYWELL EGRESS DOOR OVERHEAD DOOR ENTRY/EGRESS DOORS ENTRY/EGRESS DOORS ENTRY/EGRESS DOORS ENTRY/EGRESS DOORS ENTRY/EGRESS DOORS 420 E. COOPER KITCHEN 422 E. COOPER EXIST. 414 −422 E. COOPER FACADE10’ − 0"12’ − 0" NEW BUILDING TRANSFORMER LOCATED ACROSS THE ALLEY ON PROPERTY UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE SAME OWNERSHIP 300 SF. INTERIOR TRASH AREA Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/32" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:02:41 PMA−010 2018−001 06−07−2019 PROPOSED SITE PLAN414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/32" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN N NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER33 UP UP UP UP UP 246 SF STAIR #2 64 SF ELEV. 204 SF STAIR #1 125 SF MECH. RM. 205 SF WATER/ MECH. RM. 420 E. COOPER EXISTING BASEMENT 015 NO CHANGES AT THIS LEVEL 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 2 A-302 1 A-302 2 A-302(B) 1 A-301 1 A-301(B) 2 A-301 2 A-301(B) 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 3/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED BASEMENT LEVEL 3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING BASEMENT LEVEL N Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:02:41 PMA−110B 2018−001 06−07−2019 COMPARISON BASEMENT LEVEL414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO** NO WORK PROPOSED ON THIS LEVEL NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER34 UP DN UP DN DN FD UP UP 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 414 TENANT SPACE 113 416 TENANT SPACE 112 420 TENANT SPACE 111 300 SF TRASH AREA LOBBY 102 SEE SITE PLAN FOR TRANSORMER LOCATION STAIRS AND ELEVATOR HAVE BEEN RELOCATED OFF OF WEST WALL COMMON Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:28:16 PMA−111B 2018−001 06−07−2019 COMPARISON GROUND LEVEL414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING GROUND FLOOR 3/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR LEVEL N NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER35 DN DN DN DN OUTDOOR TERRACE OUTDOOR TERRACE ROOF OVER 1 STORY SPACE OUTDOOR TERRACE 210 FUTURE VENUE SPACE 208 FUTURE GREEN RM. 213 FUTURE CATERING KITCHEN 206 CORRIDOR 220 FUTURE WOMEN'S 204 FUTURE WINE LOCKER 218 FUTURE LOUNGE 207 FUTURE VESTIBULE 219 TERRACE 204 FUTURE LOBBY/ GALLERY 202 STAIR #1 205 ELEV. 203 MECH. CHASE 201 SHARED CORR. 205 STAIR #2 206 FUTURE J.C. 212 CORR. 211 FUTURE STORAGE 216 FUTURE STAGE SKYLIGHT ABOVE, TYP. NEW ROOF INFILL SKYLIGHT NEW RAILING NEW TERRACE FLOOR NEW LANDSCAPING NEW EXTERIOR WALL NEW FOLDING DOORS 180 PEOPLE EXIT CAPACITY INFILL FLOOR NEW WALL OPENING NEW WALL OPENING NEW WALL OPENING KITCHEN MECH. CHASE KITCHEN MECH. CHASE FIN. FLR. ELEV. OVER EXIST. KITCHEN 3 LAVS, 5 W.C.’S (RAISED FLOOR AREA) RAMP TO RESTROOMS, EXIT 3 LAVS, 5 W.C.’S (RAISED FLOOR AREA) FIN. FLR. ELEV. OF 414−420 BLDG. RAILING MECH. CHASE FOR LOBBY BELOW NEW FOLDING DOORS FRAMELESS DOORNEW WALL OPENING NEW WALL OPENING DONOR WALL ROLL−DOWN SECURITY GRILLE NEW FOLDING DOORS FUTURE COUNTER SEATING (RAISED FLOOR AREA) PROPOSED SKYLIGHT FUTURE MEN'S 203 FUTURE STORAGE 217 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:02:43 PMA−112B 2018−001 06−07−2019 COMPARISON SECOND FLOOR LEVEL414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING 2ND FLOOR 3/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN N NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER36 RD RD RD RDRDRD EXIST. MECH. EQ. ON ROOF STRUCTURE LEVEL TO BE REMOVED EXIST. EQ. TO BE RELOCATED EXIST. SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED EXIST. SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING MECH. EQ TO BE REMOVED DECK LEVEL TO BE REMOVED EXIST. STEP TO BE REMOVED EXIST.RAILING TO BE REMOVED EXISTING RAIL TO BE REMOVED 2 A-302 1 A-302 1 A-301 2 A-301 ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.TERRACE PROPERTY LINEEXIST. LIGHTING PROPOSED RECTANGULAR SKYLIGHT NEW ROOF CONSTRUCTION OVER 414-418 E. COOPER PROPOSED SKYLIGHT EXISTING ROOF TO REMAIN 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT NEW MECH. EQ TO REPLACE EXISTING NEW MECH. EQ. 26’ − 0"13’ − 4"15’ − 0"PROPOSED MECH. EQ. NEW LOCATION PROPOSED NEW MECH. EQ. NEW PARAPET CONSTRUCTION NEW MECH. EQ TO REPLACE EXISTING 422 E. COOPER (N.I.C.)32' - 7 9/32" 27' - 8 27/32" 31' - 9 1/32" 32' - 8" 31' - 10 9/16" 32' - 7 9/32" 32' - 7 9/32" 30' - 6 5/8" 31' - 4 23/32" NEW MECH. SCREEN3/8" / 1'-0"3/8" / 1'-0"3 /8 " / 1 '-0 "1/4" / 1'-0"3/8" / 1'-0"3 /8 " / 1 '-0 "1/4" / 1'-0"3/8" / 1'-0"1/2" / 1'-0"TERRACE WHOLE BLDG. ENERGY MODEL TO BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF BLDG. PERMIT SUBMITTAL Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:02:44 PMA−113A 2018−001 06−07−2019 COMPARISON ROOF PLAN LEVEL OPTION A414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING ROOF PLAN 3/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER37 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" RED ONION ROOF 29’ −0" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I. C.) 408 E. COOPER AVE. A B PROPOSED SKYLIGHT TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 1 A-302 1 A-302(B) 1 A-301 1 A-301(B) 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" RED ONION ROOF 29’ −0" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.) 408 E. COOPER AVE. LOWEST POINT AT ALLEY −2’ −3 19/32" AB TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED SKYLIGHT PROPOSED WINDOWS OPENING CAST STONE SILL MODULAR BRICK PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 1 A-302 1 A-302(B) 1 A-301 1 A-301(B) PROPOSED SKYLIGHT Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:02:49 PMA−200 2018−001 06−07−2019 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"2 NORTH ELEVATION NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER38 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" RED ONION ROOF 29’ −0" LOWEST POINT AT ALLEY −2’ −3 19/32" 2 A-300 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 2 A-302 EAST ELEVATION IS PART OF 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED SKYLIGHT 2 A-301 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" RED ONION ROOF 29’ −0" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" LOWEST POINT AT ALLEY −2’ −3 19/32" 1234567 TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 2 A-302 WEST ELEVATION EXIST. PARTY WALL WITH 408 E COOPER PROPOSED SKYLIGHT 2 A-301 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:02:56 PMA−201 2018−001 06−07−2019 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER39 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" BASEMENT LEVEL −8’ −11 7/8" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" RED ONION ROOF 29’ −0" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" LOWEST POINT AT ALLEY −2’ −3 19/32" 1234567 TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 2 A-302 FUTURE LOUNGE 207 FUTURE VENUE SPACE 208 FUTURE WOMEN'S 204 420 E. COOPER EXISTING BASEMENT 015 420 TENANT SPACE 111 416 TENANT SPACE 112 OUTDOOR TERRACE 210 V I E W P L A N E PORTION OF PROPOSED BUILDING WITHIN WHEELER VIEW PLANE 2 A-301 FUTURE VESTIBULE 219 PROPOSED SKYLIGHT 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" LOWEST POINT AT ALLEY −2’ −3 19/32" AB PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 1 A-301 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.) 408 E. COOPER AVE. 420 TENANT SPACE 111 416 TENANT SPACE 112 414 TENANT SPACE 113 420 E. COOPER EXISTING BASEMENT 015 FUTURE VENUE SPACE 208 VIEW PLANE PORTION OF PROPOSED BUILDING WITHIN WHEELER VIEW PLANE FUTURE VESTIBULE 219 PROPOSED SKYLIGHT PROPOSED SKYLIGHT Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:03:00 PMA−301 2018−001 06−07−2019 BUIDLING SECTION414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 BUILDING SECTION 3/16" = 1'-0"2 BUILDING SECTION NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER40 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" BASEMENT LEVEL −8’ −11 7/8" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" RED ONION ROOF 29’ −0" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" 2ND FLOOR STRUCT. 13’ −0 13/16" AB TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 420 E. COOPER EXISTING BASEMENT 015 420 TENANT SPACE 111 FUTURE VESTIBULE 219 416 TENANT SPACE 112 FUTURE VENUE SPACE 208 414 TENANT SPACE 113 PROPOSED SKYLIGHT PROPOSED SKYLIGHT OPEN, EXPOSED BUILDING STRUCTURE 1 A-302 1 A-301 MECH. SCREEN PORTION OF PROPOSED BUILDING WITHIN WHEELER VIEW PLANE ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.) 408 E. COOPER AVE.5’ − 6"3 Z-003 2 Z-004 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" BASEMENT LEVEL −8’ −11 7/8" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" 2ND FLOOR STRUCT. 13’ −0 13/16" 1234567 TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 2 A-302 FUTURE CATERING KITCHEN 206 FUTURE VENUE SPACE 208 OUTDOOR TERRACE 210 416 TENANT SPACE 112 TRASH & UTILITY AREA 115 PROPOSED SKYLIGHT, TYP. 414 TENANT SPACE 113 2 A-301 MECH. SCREEN PORTION OF PROPOSED BUILDING WITHIN WHEELER VIEW PLANE 2 Z-002 4 Z-002 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:03:02 PMA−302 2018−001 06−07−2019 BUILDING SECTION414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"2 BUILDING SECTION 3/16" = 1'-0"1 BUILDING SECTION NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER41 RDRD RDRDRDRD D D Y H 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTALLEY COOPER AVE. PEDESTRIAN MALL TERRACE WHEELER OPERA HOUSE VIEW PLANE LIMIT 414 -420 E. COOPER AVE. 422−434 E. COOPER PROPOSED TWO STORY DEVELOPMENT N.I.C.SOUTH GALENA STREET1 **408 E. COOPER PARAPET Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 1" = 30’−0"7/31/2019 3:22:31 PMA−500 2018−001 06−07−2019 VIEW PLANE STUDY414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO1 SITE PLAN VIEW PLANE **408 E. COOPER PARAPET SEE IMAGE BELOW PHOTO ALONG VIEW PLANE LIMIT NEAR ORIGIN POINT PHOTO ALONG VIEW PLANE LIMIT NEAR ORIGIN POINT, ENLARGED PROPOSED ALLEY PARAPET * SEE A-501 FOR CAMERA VIEWS NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER42 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif.6/10/2019 3:16:41 PMA−501 2018−001 06−07−2019 VIEW PLANE STUDY414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION2 VIEW PLANE MASSING STUDY-2 1 VIEW PLANE MASSING STUDY 3 VIEW PLANE ENLARGED MASSING STUDY VIEW PLANE LIMIT401 E. HYMAN AVE. 408 E. COOPER (ASPEN SPORTS) E HYMAN AVE.SOUTH MILL AVE. ADDITION NOT VISIBLE FROM VIEW PLANE ORIGIN PROPOSED ALLEY PARAPET ADDITION NOT VISIBLE FROM VIEW PLANE ORIGIN VIEW PLANE LIMITVIEW PLANE LIMIT408 E. COOPER VIEW PLANE MASSING OUTLINE PROPOSED SKYLIGHTS PROPOSED MECH. EQ. 6’ MAX. HT. 414−422 E. COOPER BUILDING OUTLINE (BEHIND) ADDITION NOT VISIBLE FROM VIEW PLANE ORIGIN 43 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif.8/1/2019 2:03:04 PMA−502 2018−001 06−07−2019 INTERIOR PERSPECTIVE414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO1 OPTION A INTERIOR VIEW NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER44 THE RED ONION 414-420 EAST COOPER AVENUE VI EW PLANE LI MI T1 2 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 3" = 1’−0"6/7/2019 11:23:53 AMA−502 2018−001 06−07−2019 EXTERIOR VIGNETTES414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION4 3D VIEW OPTION A OR B 1 VIEW PLANE MAP 2 3D VIEW OPTION A OR B A−503 45 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif.106−06−19TDISSUE TO LAND PLANNER6/7/2019 10:57:25 AMA−503 2018−001 06−07−2019 EXTERIOR VIGNETTES414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO2 EXTERIOR VIGNETTE OPTION B NO.DATEBYREVISION1 EXTERIOR VIGNETTE OPTION A A−504 46 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" LOWEST POINT AT ALLEY −2’ −3 19/32" TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.) 408 E. COOPER AVE. PROPOSED SKYLIGHT PROPOSED INSULATED GLAZED WINDOWS OPENING PROPOSED CAST STONE SILL MODULAR BRICK TO MATCH RED ONION BRICK EXISTING BAND TO REMAIN EXISTING CMU REMAIN MOST RESTRICTIVE GRADE POINT (7922.8) PROPOSED PARAPET NOT TO EXCEED 28' FROM MOST RESTRICTIVE GRADE EXIST. CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN EXIST. CONSTRUCTIONNEW CONSTRUCTIONEXIST. PARTY WALL TO REMAIN PROPOSED SLOPED ROOF AREA D 2 B1 B2 S1 W1 D 1 BRICK TO MATCH RED ONION BRICK B2 TRASH AREA DOOR -D2 NANA WALL FOLDING DOOR -D3 FLUSH COMMERCIAL HOLLOW METAL DOOR D1 INSULATED GLAZED WINDOWS W1 & STONE SILL S1 MECH. SCREEN -S2 CMU -PAINTED TO MATCH EXT'G -B1 BUILDING MATERIALS LEGEND/IMAGES METAL AND GLASS RAILING -R1 EXTERIOR LIGHTING 2ND FLOOR F.F. 14’ −4 13/16" GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’ 7925.3’ 0’ −0" EXISTING SOUTH PARAPET 27’ −0" RED ONION PARAPET 32’ −6" HIGH POINT 36’ −5" TOP OF SKYLIGHT 31’ −6" PROPOSED NEW PARAPET 28’ −0" 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I. C.) 408 E. COOPER AVE. PROPOSED SKYLIGHT (BEYOND) MECH. SCREEN (BEYOND) REPLICATE EXIST. PARAPET DETAIL PROPOSED GLASS RAILING PROPOSED EXTERIOR LIGHTING PROPOSED FOLDING DOORS EXTENDED MASONRY TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN S2 R1 D2 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. As indicated 8/1/2019 2:03:08 PMA−600 2018−001 06−07−2019 BUILDING MATERIALS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO1 NORTH ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER47 ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.7/31/2019 2:30:55 PMFAR−12018−00106−07−2019CALCULATIONSUMMARY414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER48 UPUP−14’ − 0"COMMERCIAL AREA(EXEMPT)01STAIR #2014STAIR #1011COMMON AREA(EXEMPT)02COMMERCIAL AREA(EXEMPT)03COMMON AREA(EXEMPT)04420 E. COOPER EXISTINGBASEMENT015TENANT SPACE 'A' LOWERLEVEL010bELEV.012MECH. CHASE016LANDLORD MECH. RM.013MECH. RM.017SITE S.F.= 90.27X100 = 9,027 S.F.TOTAL AREA TOWARDS FAR =BASEMENT EXPOSED WALL TOWARDS FAR = 76 S.F.PROPOSED FAR = ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.As indicated8/1/2019 1:46:48 PMFAR−22018−00106−07−2019FARCALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CON 3/16" = 1'-0"1LOWER LEVEL PROPOSED FAR CALCULATIONSLOWER LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA (EXEMPT) 2,641.77 SF COMMERCIAL AREA (EXEMPT)COMMON AREA (EXEMPT) 1,056.54 SF COMMON AREA (EXEMPT)414-422 E. COOPER FAR CALCULATIONSAREA TOWARDS FAR : 0 SFSECOND LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA7,339 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMON AREA119 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA (EXEMPT) 309 SF COMMON AREA (EXEMPT)STAIR OPENING (EXEMPT) 188 SF STAIR OPENING (EXEMPT)TERRACE1,082 SF OUTDOOR (EXEMPT)AREA TOWARDS FAR 9,037 SF7,458 SFNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER16,337 S.F.1.81GROUND LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA 6,728 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMON AREA 569 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA 356 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA 200 SF COMMON AREANON-UNIT SPACE 950 SF NON-UNIT SPACEAREA TOWARDS FAR 8,803 SF 49 FDCOMMERCIAL AREA100NON-UNIT SPACE101COMMON AREA102EXISTINGRECESSED ENTRY420 TENANT SPACE111416 TENANT SPACE112414 TENANT SPACE113EXIST. KITCHEN114TRASH & UTILITY AREA115FUTURE MECH. CHASE111ELEV.104STAIR #2110EGRESS CORRIDOR109EGRESS CORRIDOR108TRASH & UTILITY RM.106LOBBY102COMMON AREA210STAIR #1105COMMERCIAL A212SITE S.F.= 90.27X100 = 9,027 S.F.TOTAL AREA TOWARDS FAR = 16,312 S.F.BASEMENT EXPOSED WALL TOWARDS FAR = 76 S.F.PROPOSED FAR = 1.82ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.As indicated8/1/2019 1:46:49 PMFAR−32018−00106−07−2019FARCALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CON 3/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED FAR CALCULATIONSNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNERLOWER LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA (EXEMPT) 2,641.77 SF COMMERCIAL AREA (EXEMPT)COMMON AREA (EXEMPT) 1,056.54 SF COMMON AREA (EXEMPT)414-422 E. COOPER FAR CALCULATIONSAREA TOWARDS FAR : 0 SFSECOND LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA7,339 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMON AREA119 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA (EXEMPT) 309 SF COMMON AREA (EXEMPT)STAIR OPENING (EXEMPT) 188 SF STAIR OPENING (EXEMPT)TERRACE1,082 SF OUTDOOR (EXEMPT)AREA TOWARDS FAR 9,037 SF7,458 SFSITE S.F.= 90.27X100 = 9,027 S.F.TOTAL AREA TOWARDS FAR =BASEMENT EXPOSED WALL TOWARDS FAR = 76 S.F.PROPOSED FAR = 16,337 S.F.1.81COMMONLOBBYSTAIR #1105COMMON AREA212GROUND LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA 6,728 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMON AREA 569 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA 356 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA 200 SF COMMON AREANON-UNIT SPACE 950 SF NON-UNIT SPACEAREA TOWARDS FAR 8,803 SF 50 COMMERCIAL AREA200TERRACE206COMMON AREA(EXEMPT)202FUTURE GREEN RM.213FUTURE CATERING KITCHEN206FUTURE VENUE SPACE208FUTURE LOUNGE207FUTURE RED ONION BAR209FUTURE LOBBY/ GALLERY202STAIR #1205STAIR #2206FUTURE MEN'S203FUTURE J.C.212CORRIDOR220FUTURE WOMEN'S204FUTURE WINE LOCKER218FUTURE STORAGE216FUTURE VESTIBULE219SHARED CORR.205ELEV.203MECH. CHASE201TERRACE207COMMERCIAL AREA20965 SFCOMMON AREA(EXEMPT)COMMON AREA205FUTURE STORAGE217188 SFSTAIR OPENING(EXEMPT)SITE S.F.= 90.27X100 = 9,027 S.F.TOTAL AREA TOWARDS FAR = 16,312 S.F.BASEMENT EXPOSED WALL TOWARDS FAR = 76 S.F.PROPOSED FAR = 1.82ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.As indicated8/1/2019 1:46:50 PMFAR−42018−00106−07−2019FARCALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CON 3/16" = 1'-0"12ND FLOOR FAR CALCULATIONSNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNERLOWER LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA (EXEMPT) 2,641.77 SF COMMERCIAL AREA (EXEMPT)COMMON AREA (EXEMPT) 1,056.54 SF COMMON AREA (EXEMPT)414-422 E. COOPER FAR CALCULATIONSAREA TOWARDS FAR : 0 SFSECOND LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA7,339 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMON AREA119 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA (EXEMPT) 309 SF COMMON AREA (EXEMPT)STAIR OPENING (EXEMPT) 188 SF STAIR OPENING (EXEMPT)TERRACE1,082 SF OUTDOOR (EXEMPT)AREA TOWARDS FAR 9,037 SF7,458 SFSITE S.F.= 90.27X100 = 9,027 S.F.TOTAL AREA TOWARDS FAR =BASEMENT EXPOSED WALL TOWARDS FAR = 76 S.F.PROPOSED FAR = 16,337 S.F.1.81GROUND LEVEL FARCOMMERCIAL AREA 6,728 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMON AREA 569 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA 356 SF COMMON AREACOMMON AREA 200 SF COMMON AREANON-UNIT SPACE 950 SF NON-UNIT SPACEAREA TOWARDS FAR 8,803 SF 51 2ND FLOOR F.F.14’ − 4 13/16"GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’7925.3’0’ − 0"EXISTING SOUTHPARAPET27’ − 0"RED ONION PARAPET32’ − 6"HIGH POINT36’ − 5"PROPOSED NEWPARAPET28’ − 0"422−434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.PROPOSED SKYLIGHTNO EXPOSED BASEMENTALONG THIS ELEVATION2ND FLOOR F.F.14’ − 4 13/16"GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’7925.3’0’ − 0"EXISTING SOUTHPARAPET27’ − 0"RED ONION PARAPET32’ − 6"HIGH POINT36’ − 5"LOWEST POINT ATALLEY−2’ − 3 19/32"PROPOSED NEWPARAPET28’ − 0"422−434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.PROPOSED SKYLIGHTPROPOSED WINDOWS OPENINGCAST STONE SILLMODULAR BRICK112 S.F. (NO BASEMENT ALONG THIS ELEVATION)76 S.F. TOWARDS F.A.R.81 S.F. (NO BASEMENT ALONG THIS ELEVATION)2ND FLOOR F.F.14’ − 4 13/16"GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’7925.3’0’ − 0"EXISTING SOUTHPARAPET27’ − 0"RED ONION PARAPET32’ − 6"LOWEST POINT ATALLEY−2’ − 3 19/32"PROPOSED NEWPARAPET28’ − 0"EAST ELEVATION IS PART OF 422−434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTPROPOSED SKYLIGHT116 S.F. (NO BASEMENT ALONG THIS ELEVATION)2ND FLOOR F.F.14’ − 4 13/16"GROUND FLOOR 0’ −0’’7925.3’0’ − 0"EXISTING SOUTHPARAPET27’ − 0"RED ONION PARAPET32’ − 6"HIGH POINT36’ − 5"LOWEST POINT ATALLEY−2’ − 3 19/32"PROPOSED NEWPARAPET28’ − 0" WEST ELEVATION PARTY WALL WITH 408 E COOPERPROPOSED SKYLIGHTS116 S.F. (NO BASEMENT ALONG THIS ELEVATION)ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif. 1/8" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 1:46:55 PMFAR−52018−00106−07−2019FARCALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO 1/8" = 1'-0"1SOUTH ELEVATION - FAR CALCULATION 1/8" = 1'-0"2NORTH ELEVATION - FAR CALCULATION 1/8" = 1'-0"3EAST ELEVATION - FAR CALCULATION 1/8" = 1'-0"4WEST ELEVATION - FAR CALCULATIONSNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER52 ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.8/1/2019 1:46:56 PMNL−22018−00106−07−2019EXIST. NETLEASABLECALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISIONNET LEASABLE AREA − 7,921 SFCOMMON AREA − 268 SFMAIN FLOOR GROSS FLOOR AREA − 8,189 SFGROUND FLOOR − EXT’G CONDITION CALCULATIONS418-422 E. COOPPER EXIST. LOWER LEVEL418-422 E. COOPPER EXIST. GROUND FLOOR418-422 E. COOPPER EXIST. SECOND FLOORNET LEASABLE AREA − 1,579 SFCOMMON AREA − 0 SFLOWER LEVELGROSS FLOOR AREA − 1,579 SFLOWER LEVEL − EXT’G CONDITION CALCULATIONSNET LEASABLE AREA − 3,578 SFCOMMON AREA − 998 SFSECOND FLOOR GROSS FLOOR AREA − 4,576 SFSECOND FLOOR − EXT’G CONDITION CALCULATIONS1,617 SF LEASABLE(422 E. COOPER SPACE) 3/32" = 1'-0"1EXISTING FLOOR PLANSN53 ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.8/1/2019 1:46:56 PMNL−32018−00106−07−2019NET LEASABLECOMPARISON414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER167 SFMECH. RM.209163 SFSTAIR #120847 SFELEV.207163 SFSTAIR #220675 SFMECH. RM.205CORRIDOR204EXISTINGAPPROVED AS PART OF 422-434 DEVELOPMENTPROPOSEDUPUPADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)422 − 434 E. COOPER AVE.420 E. COOPER BASEMENTNO WORK WITHIN TENANT SPACES1,711 SFEXISTINGBASEMENT020424 SFTENANT SPACE'A' LOWER LEVEL02175 SFMECH. RM.013224 SFSTAIR #2014184 SFSTAIR #1011180 SFMECH. RM.01743 SFCORR.01554 SFMECH. CHASE0854 SFELEV.01254 ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.8/1/2019 1:46:56 PMNL−42018−00106−07−2019NET LEASABLECOMPARISON414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER1,617 SF LEASABLE(422 E. COOPER SPACE)486 SFRETAIL TENANT 'E'105774 SFCOMMON CORRIDOR10651 SFELEV.107172 SFSTAIR #1108172 SFSTAIR #210922 SFELEC.11183 SFCORRIDOR110TRASHEXISTINGAPPROVED AS PART OF 422-434 DEVELOPMENTPROPOSEDFDDNDNDNUPDNOVER HANGABOVEFUTURE LOBBY1,946 SF414 TENANTSPACE1131,863 SF416 TENANTSPACE1121,918 SF420 TENANTSPACE111288 SFNON-UNITCOMMON AREA115263 SFEXIST. KITCHEN11496 SFTENANT SPACESTORAGE119189 SFSTAIR #2110184 SFSTAIR #110554 SFELEV.10454 SFMECH.CHASE11444 SFEGRESSCORRIDOR10922 SFTRASH & UTILITYRM.106a788 SFTENANT SPACE'C'10279 SFEGRESSCORRIDOR10846 SFNON-UNITCOMMON AREA120FDDNDNDNUPDNADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.OVER HANGABOVE1,946 SF414 TENANTSPACE1131,863 SF416 TENANTSPACE1121,918 SF420 TENANTSPACE111288 SFNON-UNITCOMMON AREA115263 SFEXIST. KITCHEN11496 SFTENANT SPACESTORAGE119189 SFSTAIR #2110184 SFSTAIR #110554 SFELEV.10454 SFMECH.CHASE11444 SFEGRESSCORRIDOR10922 SFTRASH & UTILITYRM.106a788 SFCOMMON LOBBY10279 SFEGRESSCORRIDOR10846 SFNON-UNITCOMMON AREA12055 ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.8/1/2019 1:46:57 PMNL−52018−00106−07−2019NET LEASABLECOMPARISON414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER172 SFSTAIR #1205172 SFSTAIR #2203108 SFMECH. RM.20251 SFELEV.204ROOFAREATENANT 'F'201LOBBY200(TOP LEVELEXEMPT)(TOP LEVELEXEMPT)(TOP LEVELEXEMPT)EXISTINGAPPROVED AS PART OF 422-434 DEVELOPMENTPROPOSEDDNDNDN422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTUPUPUPUP198 SFFUTURE GREENRM.213202 SFFUTURECATERINGKITCHEN20668 SFFUTRUESTORAGE1223,341 SFFUTURE VENUESPACE123634 SFOUTDOORTERRACE210712 SFFUTURE REDONION BAR209372 SFFUTUREVESTIBULE219298 SFFUTURE LOUNGE227184 SFFUTUREWOMEN'S128252 SFCORRIDOR22078 SFFUTURE WINELOCKER218524 SFFUTURE LOBBY/GALLERY202236 SFOUTDOORTERRACE21529 SFFUTURE J.C.21475 SFCORRIDOR221195 SFFUTURE MEN'S20361 SFSHARED ELEV.LOBBY20551 SFSHARED LOBBY201211 SFSTAIR#120573 SFMECH. CHASE203266 SFSTAIR #220846 SFFUTURESTORAGE22556 UPUPADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)422 − 434 E. COOPER AVE.ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT420 E. COOPER BASEMENTNO WORK WITHIN TENANT SPACES1,711 SFEXISTINGBASEMENT020424 SFTENANT SPACE'A' LOWER LEVEL02175 SFMECH. RM.013224 SFSTAIR #2014184 SFSTAIR #1011180 SFMECH. RM.01743 SFCORR.01554 SFMECH. CHASE0854 SFELEV.012ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/2/2019 12:53:36 PMNL−62018−00106−07−2019NET LEASABLECALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CON 3/16" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BASEMENT LEVEL414-422 E. COOPER NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSGROUND LEVEL N.L.NAMEAREA N.L. SPACE414 TENANT SPACE1,946 SF COMMERCIAL AREA416 TENANT SPACE1,863 SF COMMERCIAL AREATENANT SPACE STORAGE96 SF COMMERCIAL AREA420 TENANT SPACE1,918 SF COMMERCIAL AREAEXIST. KITCHEN263 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMERCIAL AREA:6,085 SFNON-UNIT COMMON AREA288 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2189 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #1184 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.54 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH.CHASE54 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAEGRESS CORRIDOR44 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREATRASH & UTILITY RM.22 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAEGRESS CORRIDOR79 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREACOMMON LOBBY788 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON-UNIT COMMON AREA46 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON UNIT COMMON AREA: 1,748 SFSECOND FLOOR N.L.NAMEAREA N.L. SPACEFUTURE GREEN RM.198 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE CATERING KITCHEN 202 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTRUE STORAGE68 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE VENUE SPACE3,341 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE RED ONION BAR712 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE VESTIBULE372 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE LOUNGE298 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE WOMEN'S184 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORRIDOR252 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE WINE LOCKER78 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE LOBBY/ GALLERY 524 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE J.C.29 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORRIDOR75 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE MEN'S195 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE STORAGE46 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMERCIAL AREA: 6,574 SFOUTDOOR TERRACE634 SF EXTERIOR EXEMPTOUTDOOR TERRACE236 SF EXTERIOR EXEMPTEXTERIOR EXEMPT:870 SFMECH. CHASE73 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR#1211 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.61 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASHARED LOBBY51 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2266 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON UNIT COMMON AREA: 661 SFLOWER LEVEL N.L.NameAreaN.L. SPACEEXISTING BASEMENT1,711 SF COMMERCIAL AREATENANT SPACE 'A' LOWER LEVEL 424 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORR.43 SFCOMMERCIAL AREA2,178 SFMECH. RM.75 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2224 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #1184 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH. RM.180 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH. CHASE54 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.54 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREA771 SFNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNERTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTAL6,086 SF TOTAL57 FDDNDNDNUPDNADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.OVER HANGABOVE1,946 SF414 TENANTSPACE1131,863 SF416 TENANTSPACE1121,918 SF420 TENANTSPACE111288 SFNON-UNITCOMMON AREA115263 SFEXIST. KITCHEN11496 SFTENANT SPACESTORAGE119189 SFSTAIR #2110184 SFSTAIR #110554 SFELEV.10454 SFMECH.CHASE11444 SFEGRESSCORRIDOR10922 SFTRASH & UTILITYRM.106a788 SFCOMMON LOBBY10279 SFEGRESSCORRIDOR10846 SFNON-UNITCOMMON AREA120ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/2/2019 12:53:39 PMNL−72018−00106−07−2019NET LEASABLECALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CON 3/16" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR LEVELNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER414-422 E. COOPER NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSGROUND LEVEL N.L.NAMEAREA N.L. SPACE414 TENANT SPACE1,946 SF COMMERCIAL AREA416 TENANT SPACE1,863 SF COMMERCIAL AREATENANT SPACE STORAGE96 SF COMMERCIAL AREA420 TENANT SPACE1,918 SF COMMERCIAL AREAEXIST. KITCHEN263 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMERCIAL AREA:6,085 SFNON-UNIT COMMON AREA288 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2189 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #1184 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.54 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH.CHASE54 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAEGRESS CORRIDOR44 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREATRASH & UTILITY RM.22 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAEGRESS CORRIDOR79 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREACOMMON LOBBY788 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON-UNIT COMMON AREA46 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON UNIT COMMON AREA: 1,748 SFSECOND FLOOR N.L.NAMEAREA N.L. SPACEFUTURE GREEN RM.198 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE CATERING KITCHEN 202 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTRUE STORAGE68 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE VENUE SPACE3,341 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE RED ONION BAR712 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE VESTIBULE372 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE LOUNGE298 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE WOMEN'S184 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORRIDOR252 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE WINE LOCKER78 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE LOBBY/ GALLERY 524 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE J.C.29 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORRIDOR75 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE MEN'S195 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE STORAGE46 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMERCIAL AREA: 6,574 SFOUTDOOR TERRACE634 SF EXTERIOR EXEMPTOUTDOOR TERRACE236 SF EXTERIOR EXEMPTEXTERIOR EXEMPT:870 SFMECH. CHASE73 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR#1211 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.61 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASHARED LOBBY51 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2266 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON UNIT COMMON AREA: 661 SFLOWER LEVEL N.L.NameAreaN.L. SPACEEXISTING BASEMENT1,711 SF COMMERCIAL AREATENANT SPACE 'A' LOWER LEVEL 424 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORR.43 SFCOMMERCIAL AREA2,178 SFMECH. RM.75 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2224 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #1184 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH. RM.180 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH. CHASE54 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.54 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREA771 SFTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTAL6,086 SF TOTAL58 DNDNDN422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENTADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.UPUPUPUP198 SFFUTURE GREENRM.213202 SFFUTURECATERINGKITCHEN20668 SFFUTRUESTORAGE1223,341 SFFUTURE VENUESPACE123634 SFOUTDOORTERRACE210712 SFFUTURE REDONION BAR209372 SFFUTUREVESTIBULE219298 SFFUTURE LOUNGE227184 SFFUTUREWOMEN'S128252 SFCORRIDOR22078 SFFUTURE WINELOCKER218524 SFFUTURE LOBBY/GALLERY202236 SFOUTDOORTERRACE21529 SFFUTURE J.C.21475 SFCORRIDOR221195 SFFUTURE MEN'S20361 SFELEV.20551 SFSHARED LOBBY201211 SFSTAIR#120573 SFMECH. CHASE203266 SFSTAIR #220846 SFFUTURESTORAGE225ScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif. 3/16" = 1’−0"8/2/2019 12:53:41 PMNL−82018−00106−07−2019NET LEASABLECALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO 3/16" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLANNNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER414-422 E. COOPER NET LEASABLE CALCULATIONSGROUND LEVEL N.L.NAMEAREA N.L. SPACE414 TENANT SPACE1,946 SF COMMERCIAL AREA416 TENANT SPACE1,863 SF COMMERCIAL AREATENANT SPACE STORAGE96 SF COMMERCIAL AREA420 TENANT SPACE1,918 SF COMMERCIAL AREAEXIST. KITCHEN263 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMERCIAL AREA:6,085 SFNON-UNIT COMMON AREA288 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2189 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #1184 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.54 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH.CHASE54 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAEGRESS CORRIDOR44 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREATRASH & UTILITY RM.22 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAEGRESS CORRIDOR79 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREACOMMON LOBBY788 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON-UNIT COMMON AREA46 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON UNIT COMMON AREA: 1,748 SFSECOND FLOOR N.L.NAMEAREA N.L. SPACEFUTURE GREEN RM.198 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE CATERING KITCHEN 202 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTRUE STORAGE68 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE VENUE SPACE3,341 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE RED ONION BAR712 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE VESTIBULE372 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE LOUNGE298 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE WOMEN'S184 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORRIDOR252 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE WINE LOCKER78 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE LOBBY/ GALLERY 524 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE J.C.29 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORRIDOR75 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE MEN'S195 SF COMMERCIAL AREAFUTURE STORAGE46 SF COMMERCIAL AREACOMMERCIAL AREA: 6,574 SFOUTDOOR TERRACE634 SF EXTERIOR EXEMPTOUTDOOR TERRACE236 SF EXTERIOR EXEMPTEXTERIOR EXEMPT:870 SFMECH. CHASE73 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR#1211 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.61 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASHARED LOBBY51 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2266 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREANON UNIT COMMON AREA: 661 SFLOWER LEVEL N.L.NameAreaN.L. SPACEEXISTING BASEMENT1,711 SF COMMERCIAL AREATENANT SPACE 'A' LOWER LEVEL 424 SF COMMERCIAL AREACORR.43 SFCOMMERCIAL AREA2,178 SFMECH. RM.75 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #2224 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREASTAIR #1184 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH. RM.180 SF NON UNIT COMMON AREAMECH. CHASE54 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREAELEV.54 SFNON UNIT COMMON AREA771 SFTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTALTOTAL6,086 SF TOTAL59 EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE IS 0% OF LOT AREA Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 12" = 1’−0"8/1/2019 2:03:09 PMPA−1 2018−001 06−07−2019 EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO12" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER60 RD RD RDRD RDRDRDRD D 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1" 3 .9 37 0'1.9685'M INIM UMS P AC IN G 1"ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT ALLEY COOPER AVE. PEDESTRIAN MALL TERRACE WHEELER OPERA HOUSE VIEW PLANE LIMIT PROPOERTY LINE414 -420 E. COOPER AVE.422−434 E. COOPER PROPOSED TWO STORY DEVELOPMENT N.I.C.SOUTH GALENA STREETCOOPER AVE. PEDESTRIAN MALL ALLEY 300 SF INTERIOR TRASH AREA FDN. DRYWELL ENTRY/EGRESS DOORS420 E. COOPER KITCHEN PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE IS 0% OF LOT AREA Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif.106−06−19TDISSUE TO LAND PLANNER3/32" = 1’−0"6/7/2019 10:57:38 AMPA−2 2018−001 06−07−2019 PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/32" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY NO.DATEBYREVISION61 FD FD E E W V WV W V W V W V W V W V S 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3.9370'1.9685'MINIMUMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1" 3. 9370'1.9685'M INIM UMSPACING 1"ADJACENT BUILDING(N.I.C.)408 E. COOPER AVE.422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT REMODELED TWO STORY BUILDING INFORMATION KIOSK EXISTING LANDSCAPING ALLEY COOPER AVE. PEDESTRIAN MALL SOUTH GALENA STREETPROPERTY LINE PEDESTRIAN DISTANCE: 97'-9" 97'-9" ROUTE BETWEEN DOORS NEW PEDESTRIAN ENTRY DOOR 73’−8"PEDESTRIAN MALLPAVED WALK PEDESTRIAN DISTANCE: 59'-4" EXIST. PEDESTRIAN ENTRY DOOR EXIST. PEDESTRIAN ENTRY DOOR EXIST. PEDESTRIAN ENTRY DOOR EXIST. PEDESTRIAN ENTRY DOOR PEDESTRIAN DISTANCE: 97'-9" PEDESTRIAN DISTANCE: 116'-5" PEDESTRIAN DISTANCE: 125'-5" PEDESTRIAN DISTANCE: 145'-11" 122'-2" ROUTE BETWEEN DOORS 150'-0" ROUTE BETWEEN DOORS 170'-6" ROUTE BETWEEN DOORS 422-434 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif.106−06−19TDISSUE TO LAND PLANNER1/8" = 1’−0"6/7/2019 10:57:42 AMTIA 2018−001 06−07−2019 TIA SITE PLAN414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO1/8" = 1'-0"1 TIA SITE PLAN N NO.DATEBYREVISION62 PARAGON BUILDING WHEELER OPERA HOUSE RED ONION BUILDING 413 E. HYMAN NEARBY LANDMARK STRUCTURES PROPOSED BUILDING 305-307 MILL ST. CRYSTAL PALACE 314 E. HYMAN 428 E. HYMAN 432 E. HYMAN 414-418 E. COOPER AVE 422-434 E. COOPER AVE Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. 1" = 10’−0"8/1/2019 2:03:09 PMVP−1 2018−001 06−07−2019 VIEW PLANE MAP414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO1" = 10'-0"1 VIEW PLANE MAP N NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER63 Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif.7/31/2019 3:35:26 PMX − 100 2018−001 06−07−2019 DEMOLITION CALCULATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CONO.DATEBYREVISION64 UP DN UP DN DN A B C E D K L N M F 90.69 SF 246.61 SF 46.67 SF 183.05 SF 275.91 SF 23.77 SF 139.50 SF 1294.22 SF EXIST. WALL TO REMAIN EXIST. WALL TO BE DEMOLISHED EXIST. FENESTRATION TO BE DEMOLISHED EXPOSED WALL LEGEND EXIST. FENESTRATION TO REMAIN 1586.68 SF 58.75 SF 1348.06 SF 135.69 SF 133.00 SF 106.35 SF 59.18 SF 44.20 SF 92.86 SF 44.31 SF 50.79 SF 184.51 SF 564.08 SF 24.44 SF 10.67 SF 25.38 SF 23.77 SF Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. As indicated 8/1/2019 2:20:59 PMX − 101 2018−001 06−07−2019 PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR WALL DEMO PLAN AND ELEVATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING GROUND FLOOR DEMO CALCS 3/16" = 1'-0"A EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"B EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"C EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"E EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"D EXT. WALL ELEVATION N 3/16" = 1'-0"K EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"L EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"N EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"M EXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"F EXT. WALL ELEVATION NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER65 LOBBY202ELEV.203STAIR #1205STAIR #2206TERRACE204FUTURE MECH. CHASE208CORR.211STORAGE210EXIST. TENANT SPACE196EXIST. TENANT SPACE197EXIST. OUTDOOR TERRACE198EXIST. OUTDOOR TERRACE199EXIST. TENANT SPACE212GHIJOPQRST505.83 SF252.00 SF166.08SF20.71SF60.65SF468.32 SF253.30 SFEXIST. WALL TO REMAINEXIST. WALL TO BE DEMOLISHEDEXIST. FENESTRATION TO BE DEMOLISHEDEXPOSED WALL LEGENDEXIST. FENESTRATION TO REMAIN1420.45 SF48.12SF41.73SF244.14 SF394.87 SF22.29SF22.29SF22.29SF260.95 SF28.36 SF24.17 SF26.28 SF193.39 SF666.88 SF21.02SF21.02SFScalePROJECT NUMBERDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYmodif.modif.As indicated8/1/2019 2:46:12 PMX − 1022018−00106−07−2019PROPOSED 2NDFLOOR WALLDEMO PLAN ANDELEVATIONS414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO 3/16" = 1'-0"1EXISTING 2ND FLOOR 3/16" = 1'-0"GEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"HEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"IEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"JEXT. WALL ELEVATIONN 3/16" = 1'-0"OEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"PEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"QEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"REXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"SEXT. WALL ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"TEXT. WALL ELEVATIONNO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER66 A 3952.73 SF B 1460.91 SF C 2215.71 SF 564.17 SF D EXIST. ROOF TO REMAIN EXIST. ROOF TO BE DEMOLISHED ROOF DEMO LEGEND Scale PROJECT NUMBER DATE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY modif. modif. As indicated 8/1/2019 2:03:15 PMX − 103 2018−001 06−07−2019 PROPOSED ROOF DEMO PLAN414-422 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING ROOF PLAN N NO.DATEBYREVISION107.31.19ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER67 R.O. BASEMENT LEVEL−9’ −0"T/O DECK (EXIST. &PROPOSED)26’ −6"GROUND FLOOR 7925.38’0’ −0"RED ONION ROOF H.P.29’ −0"JAS FIN. FLR.14’ −6 1/8"LOW GRADE AT ALLEY−2’ −7"421EXIST. SOUTH PARAPET27’ −3"3P.L.2P.L.54.38’ − 0"PROPOSED OPENING(215 SF)PROPOSED OPENING(127 SF)PROPOSED OPENING(42 SF)PROPOSED FLOOR STRUCTUREPROPOSED STEEL COLUMNS, TYP.PROPOSED OPENINGPROPOSED OPENINGPROPOSED OPENING(REVISED LOCATION, 20 SF)-0' - 1"SLAB9'-9"4'-0"8'-6"8'-0"5'-9"9'-9"22'-0"4'-4"9'-9"2'-6"8'-0"WEST WALL (PROPOSED) 404 SF = OPENING AREA (26 %)1,527 SF = EXISTING WALL AREA (2ND FLOOR)JAS FIN. FLOORNSCALENORTHNo.PROJECT3/16" = 1'-0"A4.1AHPC EXHIBIT -REDONION WEST WALL414-420 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO2018-001NO. DATE DESCRIPTION12 5.23.2024 HPC EXHIBITSCCA APPROVAL DRAWING(3-16-23)MODIF. ARCHITECTURECURRENT DRAWING(5-21-24)ENTRY LEVEL0"MAIN LEVEL14'-3 1/2"5-J4.3-J4-J3-J2-J1-JPL 2PL 19' - 6 1/8"1,256.15 sf216.47 sf129.11 sf100'-5 3/4"4'-4"22'-0"25.25 sf41.85 sf9'-9"9'-9"9'-9"8'-6"3'-4"5'-5"8'-0"10'-0"10'-0"5'-5"7'-11"10'-0"WEST WALL (PROPOSED) 411 SF = OPENING AREA (26 %) 1,527 SF = EXISTING WALL AREA 152 SF = EXISTING OPENINGS8'-0"3'-0"8'-0"3'-7"39'-6"60.24 sf7'-1"8'-6"11'-2"10'-9"32 sf3'-9"8'-6"5'-10"16'-6"10'-1"20 sf2'-10"8'-6"PROPOSEDOPENINGS INBRICK (TYP.)20 sf2'-10"8'-6"20 sf2'-10"8'-6"EXISTINGOPENINGS INBRICK (TYP.)BRICK WALLExhibit 5Comparison of 2023 approval to 2024 request68 T/O EXIST. WD. JST. (HP)14’ −1 1/2"R.O. BASEMENT LEVEL−9’ −0"GROUND FLOOR 7925.38’0’ −0"JAS FIN. FLR.14’ −6 1/8"LOW GRADE AT ALLEY−2’ −7"421EXIST. SOUTH PARAPET27’ −3"3P.L.2P.L.54.3PROPOSED OPENING(42 SF)4'-4"9'-9"PROPOSED OPENING(27 SF)3'-4"8'-0"PROPOSED OPENING(72 SF)8'-6"8'-6"ELEVATOR C.L.EAST WALL (PROPOSED) 141 SF = OPENING AREA (8 %)1,681 SF = EXISTING WALL AREA 8'-6"1'-7 1/8"NSCALENORTHNo.PROJECT3/16" = 1'-0"A4.1BHPC EXHIBIT -REDONION EAST WALL414-420 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO2018-001NO. DATE DESCRIPTION12 5.23.2024 HPC EXHIBITSCCA APPROVAL DRAWING(3-16-23)MODIF. ARCHITECTURECURRENT DRAWING(5-21-24)ENTRY LEVEL0"MAIN LEVEL14'-3 1/2"5-J4.3-J4-J3-J2-J1-JPL 2PL 1100'-5 3/4"1,524.19 sf41.85 sf9'-9"4'-4"27.01 sf8'-0"3'-4"72.29 sf8'-6"8'-6"13'-0"7'-9"9'-11"7'-7"9'-11"14'-10 3/4"7'-9"7'-7"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"EXISTINGOPENINGS INBRICK (TYP.)PROPOSEDOPENINGS INBRICK (TYP.)BRICK WALL7'-7"20 sf3'-0"8'-6"EAST WALL (PROPOSED) 139 SF = OPENING AREA (8 %)1,681 SF = EXISTING WALL AREA 180 SF = EXISTING OPENINGS69 JAS FIN. FLR.14’ −6 1/8"42EXIST. SOUTH PARAPET27’ −3"3P.L.54.3LVL INSTALL FROM WEST OF RED ONION BUILDING18'-7"PROPOSED 18" LVLROOF SUPPORT, TYP.PROPOSED REMOVAL AND RESTORATION OF RED ONION BRICK FOR LVL INSTALL, TYP.(DASHED OUTLINE)EXIST. METAL COPINGTO BE REMOVED AND REINSTALLEDPROPOSED 18" LVLROOF SUPPORT, TYP.APPROVED OPENINGAPPROVED OPENINGUNSTABLE EXTERIOR MASONRY AREA TO BE REMOVED AND RESTORED AFTER NEW LINTEL INSTALLATION. (120 SF)LINE OF NEW ROOF FLASHINGINTERIOR MASONRY13'-6 1/4"EXT. MASONRY1'-7 1/8"EXT. MASONRY3'-11 3/8"UNSTABLE INTERIOR MASONRY AREA TO BE REMOVED AND RESTORED AFTER NEW LINTEL INSTALLATION. (211 SF)W18 LINTELW18 LINTELCOLUMN WITHIN RED ONION WALL SUPPORTINGLINTELCOLUMN WITHIN RED ONION WALL SUPPORTINGLINTELMASONRY BEARINGEND OF LINTELEXIST. INTERIOR MASONRY TO BE TUCKPOINTED AND RESTORED WITH COMPATIBLE TYPE 'N' MORTAR ABOVE CEILING LINE TO TOP OF WALLREFER TO NORTH DIAGRAM FOR WORK NORTH OF COLUMN LINE 2EXIST. ROOF DECK TO REMAIN9'-0"DEMOLISHED CEILING LINELVL'S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETELVL'S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETET/O EXIST. WD. JST. (HP)14’ −1 1/2"JAS FIN. FLR.14’ −6 1/8"21P.L.2APPROVED OPENINGPROPOSED 18" LVLROOF SUPPORT, TYP.PROPOSED REMOVAL AND RESTORATION OF EAST RED ONION BRICK FOR LVL INSTALL, TYP.(DASHED OUTLINE)REFER TO SOUTH DIAGRAM FOR WORK SOUTH OF COLUMN LINE 2EXIST. INTERIOR MASONRY TO BE TUCKPOINTED AND RESTORED WITH COMPATIBLE TYPE 'N' MORTAR ABOVE CEILING LINE TO TOP OF WALLEXIST. ROOF DECK TO REMAINLVL INSTALL FROM EAST SIDE OF RED ONION BUILDING36'-9"9'-0"DEMOLISHED CEILING LINELVL'S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETENSCALENORTHNo.PROJECT3/8" = 1'-0"A4.1CLVL AND LINTELINSTALL AT REDONION414-420 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO2018-001NO. DATE DESCRIPTION12 5.23.2024 HPC EXHIBITS3/8" = 1'-0"1SOUTH PORTION OF RED ONION BUILDING3/8" = 1'-0"2NORTH PORTION OF RED ONION BUILDINGVIEW LOOKING EASTVIEW LOOKING EAST3/8" = 1'-0"3EXIST. CONDITIONS REQUIRING REPAIRS70 43P.L.54.3APPROVED OPENINGAPPROVED OPENINGEXT. MASONRY3'-11 3/8"20'-0"5'-6"COOPER MALLJAS PARAPETVIEW RANGE FROM COOPER MALLEXIST. METAL COPINGTO BE REMOVED AND REINSTALLEDUNSTABLE EXTERIOR MASONRY AREA TO BE REMOVED AND RESTORED AFTER NEW LINTEL INSTALLATION. (120 SF)LINE OF NEW ROOF FLASHINGEXIST. ROOF DECK TO REMAINMASONRY BEARINGEND OF LINTELCOLUMN WITHIN RED ONION WALL SUPPORTINGLINTELW18 LINTELW18 LINTELVISIBLE AREA FROM COOPER MALL19'-10 3/4"+/-RESTORED WALL AREA NOT VISIBLE FROM COOPER MALLSEE PHOTO BELOWLVL'S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETELVL'S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO EXERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETESETBACK 2ND FLOOR PARAPET (JAS)GROUND FLOOR PARAPET (RETAIL)LVL'S TO BE CUT BACK AND MASONRY PATCHED TO MATCH EXISTINGLVL'S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETENSCALENORTHNo.PROJECTAs indicatedA4.1DHPC EXHIBIT414-420 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO2018-001NO. DATE DESCRIPTION12 5.23.2024 HPC EXHIBITS3/8" = 1'-0"1COOPER MALL VIEW EXHIBIT3/32" = 1'-0"2PHOTO OF EXISTING CONDITIONS71 NSCALENORTHNo.PROJECTA4.1E3D VIEWS OF REDONION414-420 E. COOPER AVE.REMODELASPEN, CO2018-001NO. DATE DESCRIPTION1VIEW FROM GROUND LOOKING NORTHEAST2VIEW FROM GROUND LOOKING NORTHWESTLVL’S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO THE EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETELVL’S WILL NOT BE VISIBLE TO THE EXTERIOR ONCE MASONRY REPAIR IS COMPLETE72 May 23rd, 2024 Attention: Denis Murray, Plans Examination Manager City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Plaza Aspen CO 81611 RE: Red Onion existing brick and roof framing Dear Mr. Murray, With construction on hold, I would like to take this opportunity to explain the reasons behind some of the structural design decisions. During this remodel project, it is a great opportunity for us to extend the life of the Red Onion building and ensure it stands for generations to come. Unfortunately due to the age of the building, and construction methods that were used over time, the building needs repairs to be brought up to code and for it to be properly utilized for the long-term tenants of the building. Red Onion Roof: The building consists of load-bearing walls. Three wythes of brick on the ground floor and two wythes on the second floor. The original roof joists, at some point in the building's history, were supplemented by new framing. The original structure plus the supplemental framing that was added over time is not adequate to support the current dead load and snow load imposed on the building. The supplemental framing that was added over time does not appear to be professionally engineered and is not of the quality required for commercial construction. The inadequate roof structure was discovered upon demolition of the second-floor ceiling. In addition to the suspect roof framing, it was also discovered that the two-wythe masonry wall requires repair and tuckpointing. Much of the wall is missing mortar joints between the brick and needs to be stabilized to restore it to a load-bearing condition. The masonry is run in a common bond with patchwork repairs throughout it's history. The inadequate roof structure is addressed in drawing SSK-13R2, where we indicate the installation of new 18" lvl roof joist members to correct the inadequacy of the roof structure. The 18" lvl's also address the tenant's need (JAS) to support mechanical equipment placed upon the Red Onion roof. Alternate roof structure design: SP Engineers Consulting Structural Engineers 134 N. LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60602 P: 312.332.2800 F: 312.332.2820 May 23rd, 2024 Attention: Denis Murray, Plans Examination Manager City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Plaza Aspen CO 81611 RE: Red Onion existing brick and roof framing Dear Mr. Murray, With construction on hold, I would like to take this opportunity to explain the reasons behind some of the structural design decisions. During this remodel project, it is a great opportunity for us to extend the life of the Red Onion building and ensure it stands for generations to come. Unfortunately due to the age of the building, and construction methods that were used over time, the building needs repairs to be brought up to code and for it to be properly utilized for the long-term tenants of the building. Red Onion Roof: The building consists of load-bearing walls. Three wythes of brick on the ground floor and two wythes on the second floor. The original roof joists, at some point in the building's history, were supplemented by new framing. The original structure plus the supplemental framing that was added over time is not adequate to support the current dead load and snow load imposed on the building. The supplemental framing that was added over time does not appear to be professionally engineered and is not of the quality required for commercial construction. The inadequate roof structure was discovered upon demolition of the second-floor ceiling. In addition to the suspect roof framing, it was also discovered that the two-wythe masonry wall requires repair and tuckpointing. Much of the wall is missing mortar joints between the brick and needs to be stabilized to restore it to a load-bearing condition. The masonry is run in a common bond with patchwork repairs throughout it's history. The inadequate roof structure is addressed in drawing SSK-13R2, where we indicate the installation of new 18" lvl roof joist members to correct the inadequacy of the roof structure. The 18" lvl's also address the tenant's need (JAS) to support mechanical equipment placed upon the Red Onion roof. Alternate roof structure design: Exhibit 6 73 We produced an alternate design for the new roof members that relied on wood-framed bearing walls.Due to the layout of the space required by JAS and HPC's request to expose as much brick as possible,we were directed by JAS to solve the inadequate roof in another manner. New lintel installation: Two new lintels are required for the approved wide openings based on the JAS plan along column line C.The two W18x50's require the installation of two steel columns in line with the two wythe wall.This required vertical sections of the wall to be removed for the steel column installation.These two columns have already been installed.The vertical removed sections make the wall discontinuous,affect it's in-plane stability,and prevent the wall along column line C from being shored for the horizontal lintel installation connected to these columns.In addition, the poor condition of the masonry is insufficient to install shoring.The loose,weak masonry above the ceiling line is a safety hazard and must be rebuilt above the lintels to the roof line. Restoring this masonry work should employ similar methods to those at 201 E.Main St.working with historic brick. JAS roof tie-in: We have a structural requirement to tie in the Red Onion building via a perimeter roof line angle as depicted in detail 6/S404.In the final condition,the Red Onion building is stablized by the new JAS structure directly to the west.As it currently stands,this angle can not be anchored properly to the Red Onion building.The restoration of the walls above the lintel will provide the building with a stable area of adequate length and support to complete the tie-in between the two buildings. For reference,I have attached photos of the existing condition of the masonry and the structural angle detail mentioned above. If there are any questions on the above items,please contact us to discuss. Sincerely, Jeff Pribyl,PE SP Engineers,Ltd. EXPIRES 10-31-2024 74 6 SECTION PERMITTED STRUCTURAL DETAIL SHOWING RED ONION AND JAS TIE-IN (SHEET S404) RED ONION BUILDING JAS VENUE SPACE 75 PHOTOS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 76 PHOTOS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 77 Atkinson-Noland & Associates 2619 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.3620 32 Old Slip, 10th Floor New York, NY 10005 917.647.9530 ana-usa.com MEMORANDUM May 4, 2024 Brad Hribar Director of Construction M Development 516 E. Hyman Ave., 2nd Floor Aspen, CO 81622 City, State Zip (312) 714-8519 Re: 420 E. Cooper St., Aspen ANA Job No. 22-163 At your request we tested the five (5) clay brick units previously sent to Atkinson-Noland & Associates (ANA) by Heritage Masonry on April 13, 2024. We tested the Initial Rate of Absorption (IRA), 24 hour cold water absorption, 5 hour boiling water absorption and compressive strength. The ratio of cold water to boiling water absorption provides a value termed the Saturation Coefficient which is an indicator of the resistance of the brick unit to freeze/thaw damage. Property Original 420 E Cooper Units Heritage Masonry Units IRA (g/min. 30 sq. in.) 58 54 24 h Cold Water Absorption (%) 15.6 11.1 5 h Boiling Water Absorption (%) 20.1 21.7 Saturation Coefficient 0.78 0.51 Compressive Strength 2200 1220 The measured properties of the Heritage Masonry units are similar (or slightly better) than those of the original 420 E Cooper units except for compressive strength. It is our opinion that the compressive strength of the Heritage Masonry units are adequate given the loads on the two-story building. The clay brick sampled from Heritage Masonry’s yard and supplied to ANA for testing, are suitable for use in rebuilding areas of deteriorated masonry where the brick will not be visible in the end product. Exhibit 7 78 day of : Determination: : 79 7 3/4"V.I.F.EXISTING ROOF JOIST REMAINS EXISTING BOTTOM CORD REMAINS V.I.F. BRICK TO BE CAREFULLY REMOVED FOR LVL INSTALLATION & SALVAGED 7 3/4"VARIESV.I.F.EXISTING ROOF JOIST REMAINS NEW LVLs (SISTERED TO EXISTING JOISTS) EXISTING BOTTOM CORD REMAINS JOISTREINSTALLED BRICK EXISTING BRICK WALL NEW LVL (SISTERED TO EXISTING JOISTS) EXISTING ROOF TRUSSES EXISTING BRICK WALL EXTENT OF BRICK TO BE CAREFULLY REMOVED FOR LVL INSTALLATION EXISTING ROOF TRUSSES EXISTING METAL COPING TO BE REMOVED & REINSTALLED EXISTING BRICK WALL BRICK REPLACED TO CONCEAL LVL ROOF SUPPORTS FOR SEAMLESS MASONRY EXISTING ROOF TRUSSES EXISTING METAL COPING TO BE REMOVED & REINSTALLED NEW LVL (SISTERED TO EXISTING JOISTS)7 3/4"VARIESV.I.F.EXISTING ROOF JOIST REMAINS NEW LVLs (BEING SLID IN THROUGH BRICK OPENING) EXISTING BOTTOM CORD REMAINS REPOINT MORTAR WITH APPROPRIATE MATERIAL FOR BRICK AGE. - EXAMPLE: IF 50 YRS OR MORE THEN LIME PUTTY AND SAND MORTAR JOISTCHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.6/24/2024 5:56:15 PMSKA9.3 1825 RED ONION ROOF SUPPORT PROCESSJAS CENTER418 E COOPER AVEASPEN, CO 81611ISSUE: DATE: 1" = 1'-0" 1 RED ONION ROOF SECTION - EXISTING 1" = 1'-0" 5 RED ONION ROOF SECTION - COMPLETE 1" = 1'-0" 4 ENLARGED ELEV - IN PROGRESS 1" = 1'-0" 2 ENLARGED ELEV - EXISTING 1" = 1'-0" 6 ENLARGED RED ONION - COMPLETE 1" = 1'-0" 3 RED ONION ROOF SECTION - IN PROGRESS 80 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 81 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. 82 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 83 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. 84 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 85 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 86 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 87 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. 88 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. 89 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. 90 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 91 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 92 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, 93 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 94 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 95 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 96 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. 97 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 98 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. 99 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 100 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. 101 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. 102 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 103 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 104 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 105 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 106 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. 107 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. 108 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 109 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. 110 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. 111 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 112 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. . 113 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. 114 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. 115 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. 116 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 1,840 117 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 118 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. 119 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 120 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 121 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 122 120 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 123 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 124 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 125 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 126 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 127 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 128 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 129 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 130 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 131 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 132 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 133 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 134 12 Exhibit G | Application 135 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 136 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 137 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 138 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 139 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 140 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 141 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 142 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 143 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 144 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 145 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 146 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 147 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 148 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 149 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 150 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 151 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 152 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 153 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 154 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 155 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 156 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 157 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 158 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 159 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 160 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 161 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 162 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 163 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 164 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 165 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 166 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 167 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 168 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 169 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 170 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 171 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 172 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 173 Exhibit G | Application 174 Exhibit G | Application 175 Exhibit G | Application 176 Exhibit G | Application 177 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 178 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 179 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 180 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 181 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 182 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 183 • 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 184 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 185 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 186 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 187 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 188 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 189 100 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 190 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 191 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 192 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 193 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 194 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 195 120 E MAIN STREET | VICINITY MAP E Main Stre e t N Aspen StreetN Garmisch StreetPaepcke Pa r kProject LocationExhibit G | Application 196 Exhibit G | Application197 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 | Application198 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 199 Exhibit G | Application 200 120 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 201 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 202 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 203 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 204 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 205 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 206 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 207 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 208 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 209 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 210 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 211 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 212 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 213 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 214 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 215 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 216 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 217 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 218 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 219 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 220 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 221 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 222 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 223 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 224 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 | Application225 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 | Application226 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 | Application227 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 | Application228 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 | Application229 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 230 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 231 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 232 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 233 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 234 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 235 APPENDIX A Project Location, Classification & Hazards Exhibit G | Application 236 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 237 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 238 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 239 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 240 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 241 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 242 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 243 Exhibit G | Application244 Exhibit G | Application245 Exhibit G | Application246 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 247 APPENDIX B Stormwater Estimates, Rainfall Data, & Web Soil Survey Exhibit G | Application 248 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 | Application249 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 250 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 251 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 252 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 253 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 254 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 255 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 256 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 257 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 258 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 259 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 260 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 261 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 262 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 263 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 264 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 265 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 266 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 267 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 268 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 269 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 270 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 271 = 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 272 = 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 273 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 274 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 275 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 276 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 277 Exhibit G | Application 278 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 279 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 280 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 281 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 282 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 283 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 284 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 285 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 286 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 287 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 288 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 289 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 290 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 291 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 292 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 293 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 294 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 295 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 296 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 297 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 298 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 299 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 300