HomeMy WebLinkAbout0003.2007.ASLU
0003.2007.ASLU/Elevation - Existing.pdf 0648 EL.dgn
0003.2007.ASLU/Elevation - Single Tenant.pdf 0648 EL.dgn
0003.2007.ASLU/Elevation - Two Tenant.pdf 0648 EL.dgn
0003.2007.ASLU/Exhibits 1-6.pdf
0003.2007.ASLU/Isis Remodel Application.doc
201 N. Mill Street, Suite 108 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-7819 mhaas@sopris.net
To: The City of Aspen Thru: The Aspen Community Development Department Date: December 26, 2006 Subject: Isis Theater Remodel, 406/408 East Hopkins Avenue
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION
Aspen has a long-standing tradition in the arts and, more specifically, in film. It has long been a town that prides itself in its film festivals, Oscar screenings, shorts festivals
and comfortable venues in which to enjoy these events. However, the City of Aspen is at a crossroads with regard to the ability to maintain and operate a full time movie theater.
The Stage Three Theater has recently closed, and the difficulties in keeping the Isis operating as solely a movie theater have been well publicized. Although movies are sometimes shown
at the Wheeler Opera House, and Harris Concert Hall, there exists the real possibility that the City of Aspen could be without any true movie theaters in the foreseeable future.
A team of local residents and businessmen have come together with the City of Aspen in an effort to maintain and sustain theater operations at the Isis, resulting in a Memorandum Of
Understanding (MOU) executed pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 99, Series of 2006. This land use application for: “minor development,” commercial design review, and parking waivers
from the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC); and, growth management approvals from the City Council after receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z),
has been prepared in accordance with the terms, conditions and provisions of the MOU.
The Isis Property Group, LLC (the applicant) seeks the aforementioned approvals to allow conversion of the west theater (Theater #1) on the ground level of the Isis building into retail
space for either one or two tenants. A stadium-seating theater on street level and the three movie theaters below will be maintained, keeping four full-time movie theaters in operation
in downtown Aspen. The plan sets accompanying this application explain the proposal and its various options graphically and are organized as follows:
Existing South (Hopkins Avenue) Elevation;
Existing Floor Plan, Ground Floor;
Sheet 1: Proposed South Elevation for the Single Tenant Scenario;
Sheet 1A: Proposed Floor Plan, Single Tenant Scenario without a 2nd Level;
Sheet 1B: Proposed Floor Plan, Single Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Level;
Sheet 2: Proposed South Elevation for the Two Tenant Scenario;
Sheet 2A: Proposed Floor Plan, Two Tenant Scenario without a 2nd Level; and,
Sheet 2B: Proposed Floor Plan, Two Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Level.
This application is submitted pursuant to Chapters 26.415, 26.412, and 26.470 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the Code) by the Isis Property Group, LLC (the applicant). Since the City of
Aspen Community Development Director has determined the primary use and structure to be an “Essential Public Facility,” this application and any associated, subsequent building permit
applications are exempt from the current moratoria (see Exhibit 1, letter from Chris Bendon, Community Development Director). The Land Use Application Forms and Pre-Application Conference
Summary are attached hereto as Exhibits 2 and 3, respectively. Permission for Haas Land Planning, LLC, Planning Consultants, Charles Cunniffe Architects, and Klein Coté Edwards, LLC,
legal counsel, to represent the applicant is attached as Exhibit 4. A list of property owners located within three-hundred feet of the property and an executed application fee agreement
are attached as Exhibits 5 and 6, respectively.
The application is divided into five sections. Section I provides a brief introduction to the application, while Section II describes the existing conditions of the project site. Section
III delivers an overview of the previous approvals associated with the Isis property and the MOU pursuant to which this application has been prepared. Section IV outlines the applicant’s
proposed development, and Section V addresses the proposed development’s compliance with the applicable review criteria of the Code. For the reviewer’s convenience, all pertinent supporting
documents relating to the project are provided in the various exhibits attached at the end of the application.
While the applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Code and provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application, questions may
arise which require further information and/or clarification. Such additional information required in the course of the application’s review will be provided upon request.
SECTION II: EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Isis Theater resides one lot in from the northeast corner of East Hopkins Avenue and South Mill Street, next to the station of the Aspen Fire Protection District. The street address
is 408 East Hopkins Avenue although it is also referred to as 406 East Hopkins Avenue. The 9,027 square foot property is generally described as Lots L, M and N, Block 87, City and
Townsite of Aspen, and the Parcel Identification Number is 2737-073-30-006. The site is within the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District, and is a designated historic landmark within
a Historic Overlay District. The Vicinity Map below shows the property’s general location relative to the surrounding area.
Vicinity Map – Isis Theater
The existing three story Isis Theater building (a/k/a the H. Webber building) includes roughly 770 seats among five movie theaters. The standing land use approvals (described in Section
III, below) allow for approximately 16,420 square feet of Floor Area, of which some 15,670 square feet can be net leasable area. As built, the main/ground level includes a two-story
volume housing two movie theaters with stadium seating as well as stairs to the level below, a lobby, a ticket sales area, a concession stand, fire exits, and an entryway with stairs
and an elevator providing access to all floors of the building. The lower level includes three movie theaters, fire exits, restrooms, a lobby, and a concession stand. In addition,
both levels have mezzanine spaces used as projection rooms at the south end and mechanical and storage rooms at the north end. The third floor includes one free market residence and
two deed restricted three-bedroom units.
The neighboring properties include the fire station (to the east), Le Chefs of Aspen and Wells Fargo Bank to the west; Fox Photo, Baccarat and other boutiques to the south (across Hopkins
Avenue); and, the Cantina to the north (across the alley).
SECTION III: PREVIOUS APPROVALS & THE MOU
The approvals for the Isis renovation/expansion were granted and memorialized over eight separate steps (numbers 1-8, below). Item number 9, below, is an approval that was granted but
never acted upon. Item number 10 is the MOU executed pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 99, Series of 2006. The highlights of each of these approvals is summarized and discussed
below.
1) Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 36-95;
2) City Council Ordinance Number 58-95;
3) City Council Ordinance Number 59-95;
4) A March 19, 1996 amendment to Resolution 36-95 was granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission without formal adoption of a resolution;
5) City Council authorized use of the Special Review process to consider the amortization of open space payments via adoption of Ordinance 45-96;
6) Final approval by the HPC on March 12, 1997;
7) Council adoption of Resolution 98-18 approving the deferral of payments in-lieu of open space for a ten year period;
8) A pair of HPC amendments to their final approval were approved on March 10, 1999 and September 8, 1999; and,
9) Growth Management Commission Resolution No. 2, Series of 2001, approving a re-evaluation and exemption from the scoring and competition procedures of the GMQS for the conversion of
the ground floor of the Isis building to retail use.
10) MOU executed pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 99, Series of 2006.
1. Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 36-95
This resolution granted a GMQS exemption for the expansion of the Isis Theatre building and Special Review approval to: a) exceed the property’s allowable floor area, b) reduce the minimum
required dimensions of the building’s trash and utility area, and c) reduce the minimum open space requirement. These approvals were granted subject to a list of ten (10) conditions.
The GMQS exemptions were for the enlargement of an historic landmark structure that added both floor area and net leasable space. In addition, GMQS exemptions were granted for the reconstruction
of one demolished free market dwelling unit and the addition of two deed restricted affordable housing units.
The allowable floor area ratio (floor area-to-lot area ratio, a/k/a FAR) of the underlying zone district at the time of the approval was 1.5:1, which could be increased up to 2:1 by
Special Review provided at least 60% of the additional floor area beyond that allowed as of right is used for residential purposes deed restricted in accordance with the affordable
housing guidelines (the current FAR limit is 3:1 overall, with a limit of 1:1 for free market residential use). The approval granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) allowed
for 16,303 square feet of floor area, or an FAR of 1.81:1. With this increase, at least 1,657 square feet of the total area was required to be included within deed restricted affordable
housing ([16,303 – 13,541] x 60%). The proposal provided 2,610 square feet of deed restricted affordable housing and, therefore, exceeded the requirement by 953 square feet.
Based on the amount of net leasable area (11,216 square feet) within the then proposed structure, a trash and utility area measuring 24’ x 10’ would have been required pursuant to the
dimensional requirements of the CC zone district. The Special Review approval allowed the trash and utility area to be reduced to 20’ x 10’, a four foot reduction in the otherwise
required length.
The Commercial Core zone district required that 25% of a site be maintained in a condition that complies with the City’s definition of “open space” then in effect. Thus, approximately
2,257 square feet (9,027 x 25%) of the property would have been required to be left more or less undeveloped. The approval allowed this requirement to be reduced to just 540 square
feet of open space, or just less than 6%. A $250,000 payment of cash-in-lieu of the open space was required and has since been paid.
The ten adopted conditions do not detail the terms of the approvals as done above but, instead, refer to the application as being approved as proposed. One specific condition (#8) is
of particular concern for the current proposal. Specifically, condition number 8 states, in relevant part, that:
…the approved employee calculation of five (5) employees is only applicable to the Isis project, and any future uses will require a re-evaluation for mitigation purposes.
In other words, the approvals for employee generation and the level of mitigation (affordable housing) required were limited to the Isis Theater project only. It was intended that any
expansion or change-in-use would require additional analysis to ensure that employee housing needs would be reassessed. City staff explained in their memo of January 8, 1995 to City
Council that, “due to the unusually low ratio of employees per square foot for theater uses, any change in use would require significant mitigation, either in the form of cash-in-lieu
or off-site buy-down of existing units. It is unlikely that HPC [Historic Preservation Commission] or staff would support additional units on the roof-top, which would effectively
restrict additional on-site housing to the interior of the structure.”
As part of the GMQS exemption requests, recommendations were required from the Growth Management Commission (GMC; a board no longer in existence but then consisting of the City of Aspen
and the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commissions, jointly). The GMC and the Aspen P&Z were both required to consider parking demands and mitigation of these demands as part of
their approval. However, the parking standard applicable to the particular GMQS exemption used stated that, “Parking shall be provided according to the standards of Article 5, Division
2 and Division 3 [since amended to Chapter 26.515], if HPC determines that it can be provided on the site’s surface and be consistent with the review standards of Article 7, Division
6 [since amended to Chapter 26.415]. Any parking which cannot be located on-site and which would therefore be required to be provided via cash-in-lieu payment shall be waived.” As
a result, no parking was provided on-site, and no payment-in-lieu was required.
2. City Council Ordinance Number 58-95
This ordinance granted historic landmark designation for the Isis property. The designation was required to provide eligibility for the GMQS exemptions used (as described above).
3. City Council Ordinance Number 59-95
This ordinance approved the on-site affordable housing units that have since been built.
4. Amendment of Resolution 36-95
As mentioned above, at their March 19, 1996 meeting, the P&Z approved a request to amend their previous approval, such that an additional theater (5 instead of the previously approved
4) could be included within the structure. The approved revisions effectively increased the allowable Floor Area (FAR) and net leasable space. The approved Floor Area was increased
from 16,303 square feet to 16,416 square feet (an increase of 113 square feet), bringing the allowable FAR from 1.81:1 to 1.82:1. The approved net leasable area was increased from
11,216 square feet to 15,671 square feet (an increase of 4,455 square feet). No changes to the employee housing requirements, open space approval, or trash and utility area were required
in connection with the approved revisions. In effect, the approvals allowed for the following:
FLOOR LEVEL ORIGINAL APPROVALS 1996 AMENDMENTS FAR N.L.A. SEATS FAR N.L.A. SEATS LOWER --- 4,133 320 --- 4,133 320 GROUND 10,623 7,083 560 10,736 11,538 560 SECOND 5,680 --- --- 5,680 --- --- T
OTAL 16,303 11,216 880 16,416 15,671 880 N.L.A. represents Net Leasable Area in square feet, and FAR represents Floor Area in square feet
5. City Council Ordinance 45-96
This ordinance provided for a code amendment permitting the P&Z, as part of the Special Review Process, to “allow the required payment-in-lieu [of open space] to be amortized in equal
payments over [sic] period of up to five years, without interest.”
6. Final HPC Approval
On March 12, 1997, the HPC granted final approval to the proposed redevelopment of the Isis Theater by a 4-1 vote. This included approval of the architecture and site plan.
7. City Council Resolution 98-18
In March of 1998 the Isis applicants came before City Council seeking an additional five-year deferral before the required payments-in-lieu of open space begin. Resolution 98-18 granted
the deferral with two conditions. The first condition established that the five $50,000 per year payments, without interest, will begin on the fifth anniversary after the date of issuance
of the building permit rather than in year one. The second condition stipulated that, if the property is not redeveloped according to the site specific development plan for the renovation
of the building as theaters, the payment schedule will be considered null and void. The $250,000 cash-in-lieu fee has since been paid in full.
8. HPC Amendments to Final Approval
On March 10, 1999 the HPC approved an amendment to the Isis Final Approval allowing modifications to the design and materials used on the exterior of the free market unit to be constructed
on top of the theater. On September 8, 1999, the HPC approved another amendment relating to the free market residential unit.
9. GMC Resolution No. 2, Series of 2001
On July 17, 2001 the GMC approved a re-evaluation and exemption from the scoring and competition procedures of the GMQS for the conversion of the ground floor of the Isis building to
retail use. At the time of the approval, the Code provided a range of employee generation per 1000 square feet of net leasable area (as opposed to the specifically established employee
generation rate in today’s Code). The applicant and the GMC did not know what type of commercial use would occupy the ground floor and, therefore, could not determine with enough confidence
where in the range of employee generation the actual use would fall. Consequently, it was required that the employee housing mitigation would need to be determined by the GMC in a
subsequent review to be carried out prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Isis retail conversion.
All previous approvals accepted an employee generation of five FTE for the five-screen theater operation and required housing mitigation for only 60%, or three (3), of those FTE. The
built project includes housing for six (6) FTE. Accordingly, GMC Resolution 2-01 states that, “A mitigation credit of three employees shall be applied to the new retail use.”
GMC Resolution 2-01 is consistent with the January 8, 1995 staff memo to City Council which stated that, “due to the unusually low ratio of employees per square foot for theater uses,
any change in use would require significant mitigation, either in the form of cash-in-lieu or off-site buy-down of existing units. It is unlikely that HPC [Historic Preservation Commission]
or staff would support additional units on the roof-top, which would effectively restrict additional on-site housing to the interior of the structure.” For instance, GMC Resolution
2-01 provides that new mitigation would be provided by off-site housing units, cash-in-lieu payment, or a combination thereof.
GMC Resolution 2-01 remains valid but is no longer vested. As such, the terms of the Resolution remain in full force and effect to the extent that subsequent Code amendments have not
altered or otherwise adversely affected said terms.
9. The MOU executed pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 99, Series of 2006
In its eleventh recital (note that Article 13 of the MOU states that, “the recitals at the beginning of this Agreement shall be deemed included as terms and conditions of this Agreement”),
the MOU provides that the “Commercial Unit” would be re-condominiumized so that the westerly theater on the main level (“West Main Theater”) would become a separate condominium unit.
Said recital further explains that the City will “approve and permit through its usual land use approval process the conversion of the West Main Theater to retail use, [and] the Lobby
reconfiguration…as set forth herein.”
As required by the MOU, the applicant has begun the process of re-condominiumizing the Isis property in the manner required by Article 3 and its sub-parts. The applicant hereby further
commits to completing the re-condominiumization in the manner required to create the West Main Theater and a portion of the existing Lobby space to become Commercial Unit 1. Also,
the applicant hereby further commits to the following requirements of the MOU relevant to the land use approvals:
Articles 4.1.5 and 5.1: Commercial Unit 1 will be deed restricted to retail uses, and to prohibit restaurant uses unless appropriate mitigation is paid to the City pursuant to the City
Land Use Code in effect at the time of the requested conversion to restaurant use; and, provided further, that the City Council, in its sole discretion approves such a change in use.
Article 4.1.8: The Isis Property Group, LLC shall use commercially reasonable efforts to sublease Commercial Unit 1 to one or more tenants that are deemed “mid-level” retail uses.
The City and the applicant shall include as part of the applicant’s sublease, a reasonable definition of “mid-level retail tenant” for this purpose.
Articles 4.2.7 and 4.2.8: Commercial Units 2 and 3 shall be used on a reasonably continuous basis and only for the purpose of operating movie theaters subject to the occasional uses
allowed in the MOU.
Article 5.2: Commercial Units 2 and 3 shall be deed restricted to those uses identified in Section 4.2.7; subject, however, to other uses which may be necessary or appropriate in the
event of technological, sociological or economic changes rendering theater use obsolete or impracticable.
Article 5.5: Any further development of the building’s roof (residential level) shall be prohibited through a recorded deed restriction, unless the consent of the City is obtained.
Article 6.1: The applicant shall pay to the City a monetary sum in full satisfaction of the City’s employee housing mitigation requirements, determined in accordance with the City’s
land use code, in connection with the conversion of the West Main Theater to retail uses. Such cost shall be paid in full when the applicant obtains its building permit for such conversion.
Article 7: The City agrees that all plans and submissions of the applicant shall be given first priority for consideration by the City’s Community Development Office and for approvals
and issuance of building permits, and that no such submissions shall be subject to the customary rule of “first in time”.
SECTION IV: THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The applicant is requesting approvals to renovate a historic landmark. All applications for approval to renovate a historic landmark must receive a determination of consistency with
the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (hereinafter “the Guidelines”) to be approved by the HPC. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval for Commercial
Design Review and a parking waiver from the HPC. Growth management approval pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(D)(3), Essential Public Facilities, is requested of the City
Council upon receipt of a recommendation from the P&Z.
The HPC is asked to grant commercial design review approval, a parking waiver, and minor development approval for the changes proposed for the exterior of the Isis structure. The historically
significant portions of the building will be left in their current and historic condition. The only exterior changes contemplated in this proposal involve non-historic portions of
the building, as follows: the windows on the first floor of the westernmost portion of the building, and the existing doors, will be removed, and replaced with new storefront windows,
and one or two sets of recessed doors. An additional door will be created to allow entry into the theaters’ ticket lobby. The building forms and masonry work around the existing fenestration
will not be altered. Originally, the H. Webber Building had three sets of doors. This proposed design will actually bring the look of the building closer to its historic, original
design.
The exterior changes contemplated herein are minimal, and consistent with the Guidelines. Please refer to the accompanying plan sets for clear details with respect to the design and
program of the proposed development. The plan sets are organized as follows:
Existing South (Hopkins Avenue) Elevation;
Existing Floor Plan, Ground Floor;
Sheet 1: Proposed South Elevation for the Single Tenant Scenario;
Sheet 1A: Proposed Floor Plan, Single Tenant Scenario without a 2nd Level;
Sheet 1B: Proposed Floor Plan, Single Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Level;
Sheet 2: Proposed South Elevation for the Two Tenant Scenario;
Sheet 2A: Proposed Floor Plan, Two Tenant Scenario without a 2nd Level; and,
Sheet 2B: Proposed Floor Plan, Two Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Level.
SECTION V: REVIEW REQUIREMENTS
HPC Reviews:
Minor Development. Since the Isis is a Historic Landmark, the applicant must first receive conceptual approval of the proposed development from HPC, pursuant to Chapter 26.415 of the
City of Aspen Land Use Code. The Guidelines state the HPC must find that a “sufficient number of the relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal.”
Chapters 3, 4, and 13 of the Guidelines provide the “relevant” guidelines, and the following demonstrates that a sufficient number of these have been adequately met. Individual guidelines
are provided in italicized print, followed by a narrative about applicability and/or demonstrating consistency therewith.
Treatment of Windows
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
None of the windows that are being replaced are historic windows. The new windows will be storefront display windows in keeping with the traditional design.
Replacement Windows
3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade.
3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original.
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window.
As noted above, none of the windows that are being replaced are historic.
Energy Conservation
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation, rather than to replace a historic window.
Again, no historic windows are being replaced.
Treatment of Existing Doors
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance.
4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door.
None of the doors that are being replaced are historic.
Replacement Door
4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house.
The new doors will have recessed entries, providing a shaded area that helps to define the doorway, and give pedestrians shelter. These doorways will be more similar in form to the original
building.
Energy Conservation
4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, consider using a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door.
As noted above, no historic doors are being replaced
Relationship to the Town Grid
13.1 Respect the established town grid in all projects.
13.2 Orient a new building parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations.
13.3 Orient a primary entrance toward the street.
The exterior of the building will retain its current form, with only the ground floor windows and doors being altered. Therefore, the established town grid will continue to be respected.
All of the primary entrances will be oriented toward the street.
Alleys
13.4 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
13.5 Retain the character of the alley as a part of the original town grid.
The proposal does not change anything with regard to the alley.
Building Setbacks
13.8 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge.
As noted above, the only changes to the exterior of the building will be to the ground floor windows and doors. The current façade’s alignment will be maintained.
Mass and Scale
13.9 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at the sidewalk.
13.10 True three-story buildings will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
13.11 Consider dividing larger buildings into "modules" that are similar in width to buildings seen historically.
The proposed changes with additional display windows and one or two additional sets of doors will not alter the perceived scale of the building.
Building Form
13.12 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core facades.
13.13 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof form.
13.14 Along a rear facade, using building forms that step down in scale toward the alley is encouraged.
There are no changes proposed to the building form, the roof, or the rear facade.
Storefront Character
13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged.
13.16 Develop the ground floor level of all projects to encourage pedestrian activity.
13.17 Maintain the distinction between the street level and the upper floor.
The new ground floor windows and doors will encourage more pedestrian activity and interest. There will be storefront display windows, and new, inviting recessed entries. The primary
building entrances are all at street level. The current distinction between the street level and the upper floors will be maintained.
Repetition of Façade Elements
13.18 Maintain the repetition of similar shapes and details along the block.
13.19 Maintain the pattern created by recessed entry ways that are repeated along a block.
The new ground floor doors and windows will help to revive a pattern of recessed entryways that the subject building historically provided along the street.
Detail Alignment
13.20 The general alignment of horizontal features on building fronts should be maintained.
13.21 Special features that highlight buildings on corner lots may be considered.
Section 13.21 does not apply. With regard to Section 13.20, the existing and historic alignment of horizontal features on the building front will be maintained.
The guidelines of Chapter 14 will be addressed in detail during Final HPC review.
Parking Waiver. According to Section 26.415.110 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, “The City of Aspen is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts
to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special
procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts.”
One of the special programs available to historic properties is the ability to obtain parking waivers from the HPC. That is, Section 26.415.110(C), Parking, provides that “Parking
reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated
historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions.”
Accordingly, the applicant requests that HPC grant a parking waiver for the Historic Isis Building. With the proposed change of one of the theaters to retail usage, additional parking
would be required. Of all the potential conversion scenarios, the greatest amount of “new” net leasable area (NLA) that would be created is approximately 4,870 square feet. Pursuant
to Section 26.515.030 of the Code, the increase in NLA would generate a requirement for 4.87 off-street parking spaces. The subject property is unable to contain any, let alone five,
on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning.
Commercial Design Review. The applicant is seeking Commercial Design Review approvals from the HPC. According to Section 26.412.020 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, an application
for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the HPC based on conformance with Section 26.412.050, Review Criteria. Said Section, at sub-section
1, explains that the HPC may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal so long as, “The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design
Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a more-appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular
standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the Standards.”
In the current case, the existing landmark building is merely being renovated. The renovations are consistent with the Commercial Design Standards (hereinafter “CDS”), but those existing
features that are already inconsistent with any elements of the CDS will not be altered to be brought into compliance. The HPC is empowered to allow such deviations from the CDS given
the fact that the building is a landmark designated structure and its existing features provide a “more-appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development
is proposed,” its status provides a “unique site constraint” that justifies deviation from the Standards.
The first section of the CDS, regarding the building’s relationship to the primary street, does not apply to this design review, since the only parts of the building that are being
renovated are the windows and doors. Nevertheless, the building façade is parallel to Hopkins Avenue, and the setback is consistent with the requirements of the CC zone district as
well as those found elsewhere on the block. The first and second floors maintain a consistent building setback from the primary street, and the first floor is at the level of the adjoining
sidewalk without any grade changes or “moats.”
The second section of the CDS relates to pedestrian amenity space. Pedestrian Amenity Space requirements are associated with redevelopments, not renovations that have no affect on site
plans or existing pedestrian amenity spaces. This renovation is exempt from the creation of additional pedestrian amenity space pursuant to Section 26.575.030 of the Code, as there
will be no change to the building’s footprint.
The third and most relevant portion of the CDS for the proposed development is that which addresses the street-level building elements. In the current proposal, there will be no blank
walls created, and all walls at the street level will maintain fenestration and façade articulations. The street level wall facing Hopkins Avenue will exceed the requirement for a
60% fenestration ratio. The building entrances are well-defined and apparent, and temporary seasonal airlocks on the exterior of the building will be unnecessary.
Section D of the CDS addresses the accommodation of parking. As previously requested of the HPC, the applicant seeks a parking waiver for the historic Isis Building. There is no on-site
parking currently and the building covers virtually the entire property. Accommodation of parking on the subject site would result in a less-appealing pattern of development considering
the context in which the renovation is proposed. The property’s existing conditions and landmark status provide a “unique site constraint” that justifies deviation from the parking
standards.
The currently existing utility, trash, recycle service area and delivery area will be maintained on the alley, and was specifically approved via Special Review when the building was
converted into a multiplex with roof-top residences. No changes to the existing utility, trash, recycle service area and delivery area are contemplated.
City Council / P&Z Review:
Growth management approval pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(D)(3), Essential Public Facilities, is requested. Pursuant to said Section, the development of an Essential
Public Facility, upon a recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria:
a) The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an Essential Public Facility. (See definition.) Accessory uses may also be part of an Essential
Public Facility project.
Please refer to Exhibit 1, a letter from Chris Bendon, Community Development Director, determining the primary use and structure to be an “Essential Public Facility.”
b) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the uses, pursuant to Section 26.470.030.C, Development Ceiling Levels and Section 26.470.030.D, Annual Development
Allotments.
Of the proposed development scenarios, the one with the greatest amount of Net Leasable Area (NLA), is the Single Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Floor. While the eventual development may
involve one of the other, lesser scenarios, the Single Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Floor is used in response to this and all other growth management related standards so as to ensure
that mitigation and allotment requirements will not exceed those contemplated herein.
In order to determine the amount of net leasable area (NLA) needed to be allotted, it is necessary to first determine the existing NLA for the portion of the building that will be converted
to retail use. The existing theater space to be converted does not maintain any “back-of-house” functions such as private office, common circulations areas, bathrooms, etc. uses solely
by tenants on the site. As such, on the ground level, the entire area to be remodeled is currently occupied by the theater use and concessions, all of which is NLA. Therefore, the
existing NLA on the ground level for the area in question is 3,325 square feet. Of the existing mezzanine level, only the space occupied by the projection room for theater number one
counts as NLA. Some portion of the projection room will be maintained to serve the remaining ground level movie theater, making this a more difficult calculation than meets the eye.
Nevertheless, it has been conservatively estimated that 340 square feet of existing theater number one NLA in the projection room will be converted to retail use with the remodel.
Therefore, the total existing NLA for the portion of the building that will be converted to retail use is 3,665 square feet (3,325 + 340).
It is conservatively assumed that 85% of the total area between the interior walls on the ground level will end up as NLA since tenant finishes will use at least 15% of their total
space for circulation, storage, bathrooms and other uses not included in the City’s measurement of “net leasable area.” On the second level, in an effort to be highly conservative
and make up for any potential shortfall on the ground level, the entire second level is being considered NLA. Accordingly, under the single tenant scenario with a second level, the
applicant proposes the creation of 5,226 square feet of NLA ([3,325sf x 85%] + 2,400sf).
Given the existing NLA of 3,365 square feet, and the proposed creation of 5,226 square feet of NLA, the total net increase equates to 1,861 square feet of NLA (5,226 minus 3,365).
Therefore, the applicant is requesting an allotment of 1,861 square feet of NLA, which is believed to fall within the established applicable development ceiling levels and the available
annual development allotments.
c) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
The proposal contained herein has been prepared in a manner consistent with the terms, provisions and conditions of the MOU executed pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 99, Series
of 2006. Article 13 of the MOU, states that, “the recitals at the beginning of this Agreement shall be deemed included as terms and conditions of this Agreement”). The recitals of
the MOU, in turn, provide that:
AspenFilm is a nonprofit organization which has operated in Aspen for nearly thirty (30) years and which brings artistic, educational and performance programs to the Roaring Fork Valley;
and
AspenFilm, the applicant, and the City of Aspen believe that the theaters, which are the sole remaining commercial theaters in the City of Aspen, are a vital public amenity, and AspenFilm,
the applicant, and the City of Aspen are interested in assuring the continued operation of at least some of the theaters; and
In addition to its educational seminars and programs in area schools, AspenFilm presents four main film programs each year, including Aspen Filmfest, Aspen Shortsfest, Academy Screenings
and Summerfilms; and
AspenFilm is in need for a permanent home for its presentations; and,
The City Council of the City of Aspen has determined that it is in the best interests of the citizens and guests of Aspen to participate in the public/private collaboration set forth
in the MOU.
Given the commitments being made herein and pursuant to the MOU (see pages 7-8 above), the public interest and needs of the community expressed in the MOU recitals will be preserved
and forwarded. For instance: the property will be publicly owned (though a non-profit corporation); ownership of the theaters will eventually be transferred to Independent Films Inc.
(a/k/a Aspen Film Fest), which is recognized as a non-profit corporation serving a public interest; there will be a perpetual deed restriction assuring theater or public use of the
four remaining theater units within the building; an undivided ownership interest in the affordable housing units within the project will be conveyed to the City of Aspen or the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority (APCHA); a perpetual deed restriction will be filed prohibiting additional development on the residential level of the building; and, affordable housing cash-in-lieu
fees will be paid to the APCHA.
Accordingly, it is with the utmost confidence that the applicant states, the proposal is fully consistent with all elements of the AACP, including its community vision, and growth,
transportation, hosing, economic sustainability, historic preservation, design quality, and arts, culture and education philosophies. Indeed, it may very well be the first project
to come through the land use approval process since adoption of the 2000 AACP update to forward the goals of the Arts, Culture and Education section of the AACP.
d) A sufficient percentage of the employees expected to be generated by the project are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash-in-lieu thereof in a manner acceptable
to the City Council. The Employee Generation Rates may be used as a guideline but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs. The City Council may waive, or partially
waive, affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals.
As suggested by staff in the attached Pre-Application Conference Summary (see Exhibit 3), the provisions for expanding a historic landmark structure – Section 26.470.040(C)(1) of the
Code – should be used as a guide in determining employee generation and mitigation requirements. Further, staff suggests that, due to the unique operating characteristics of the project,
the applicant rely on Section 26.470.050(A)(1) of the Code, which allows for specific operating conditions to be factored into the calculation of employee generation. As such, the
following calculation of employee generation and mitigation requirements is based directly on the suggested Code provisions.
Based on the use of existing Code provisions, the following calculations are believed to be fair and conservative with respect to the employee generation and mitigation requirements.
Further, and as explained earlier, of the various proposed development scenarios, the one with the greatest amount of Net Leasable Area (NLA) is the Single Tenant Scenario with a 2nd
Floor (Sheet 1B in the accompanying plan set). While the eventual development may involve one of the other, lesser scenarios, the Single Tenant Scenario with a 2nd Floor is used in
response to this and all other growth management related standards so as to ensure that mitigation requirements will not prove to exceed those contemplated herein.
Before getting to the numbers, some notes should be made about the assumptions implicit to the calculations. First, all previous approvals associated with the Isis Theater accepted
an employee generation of five FTE for the five-screen theater operation and required housing mitigation for only 60%, or three (3), of those FTE. The built project includes housing
for six (6) FTE. Accordingly, Growth Management Commission (GMC) Resolution 2-01 states that, “A mitigation credit of three employees shall be applied to the new retail use.” A credit
for housing of three employees is, therefore, factored into the mitigation calculations below.
Next, GMC Resolution 2-01 is consistent with the January 8, 1995 staff memo to City Council which stated that, “due to the unusually low ratio of employees per square foot for theater
uses, any change in use would require significant mitigation, either in the form of cash-in-lieu or off-site buy-down of existing units. It is unlikely that HPC [Historic Preservation
Commission] or staff would support additional units on the roof-top, which would effectively restrict additional on-site housing to the interior of the structure.” For instance, GMC
Resolution 2-01 provides that new mitigation would be provided by off-site housing units, cash-in-lieu payment, or a combination thereof. Over the years, therefore, it has been repeatedly
accepted that additional on-site employee housing is undesirable. Consistent with this history, Article 6.1 of the MOU provides that, “The Isis Group shall pay to the City…a monetary
sum in full satisfaction of the City’s employee housing mitigation requirements, determined in accordance with the City’s land use code, in connection with the conversion of the West
Main Theater to retail uses. Such cost shall be paid in full when Isis Group obtains its building permit for such conversion.”
Additionally, in an effort to provide a conservative approach to the calculations, it has been assumed that the same five (5) FTE needed to operate the five-screen theater will continue
to be needed to operate the four-screen theater. This application does not contemplate lowering the employee generation of the theater operation even though the number of screens will
decrease by 20%. As such, all employee mitigation will be attributable only to the new retail space.
Finally, Section 26.470.050(A)(1) of the Code allows applicants to request an employee generation review with the P&Z in an effort to establish actual employee generation for a business
as opposed to simply relying on the prescribed generation rates of the Code. The applicant is willing to restrict the converted commercial space to exclude restaurant uses, which generate
far more employees per square foot of NLA than all other types of commercial uses (office use is already precluded on ground floors by zoning). The 2002 City of Aspen Employment Generation
Study found that, when restaurants are excluded, all retail uses generate an average of 2.6 Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) per 1,000 square feet of NLA, whereas when restaurants are allowed
the Code prescribes a generation factor of 4.1 FTE per one-thousand square feet of NLA. Rather that an outright prohibition against restaurant use in the remodeled building, the applicant
simply asks that any approvals granted for the current conversion state that, should a restaurant use ever be proposed in the future, additional review for employee generation and mitigation
needs would be required.
In an effort to be conservative and since this application uses a lower employment generation factor than prescribed by the Code, the applicant has NOT taken the 25% reduction granted
by the Code for employee generation on upper floors. Rather, the calculations provided below continue to use a generation factor of 2.6FTE/1,000sf of NLA on all building levels (not
1.95 FTE/1,000sf of NLA for second level space). Also, it is conservatively assumed that 85% of the total area between the ground level interior walls will end up as NLA since tenant
finishes will use at least 15% of the space for circulation, storage, bathrooms and other uses not included in the City’s measurement of “net leasable area.” On the second level, in
an effort to be highly conservative and make up for any potential shortfall on the ground level, the entire second level is being considered NLA.
Given the explanations and assumptions provided both immediately above and in response to standard “b” above, and based on the recommendations of staff, the following calculations represent
the employee generation and mitigation requirements associated with this application.
TOTAL EMPLOYEE GENERATION =
1st Floor Retail Conversion of 3,325sf will result in 2,826sf of Net Leasable Area (NLA) (it’s conservatively estimated that 85% of the commercial space will be NLA after netting out
areas for storage, circulation, bathrooms, etc. that will result from tenant finishes); @ 2.6 FTE per 1,000sf of NLA = 2.6 x 2.826 = 7.348 FTE
2,400sf of Second Level NLA @ 2.6 FTE/1000sf of NLA = 2.6 x 2.4 = 6.24 FTE
Total Generation = 7.348 + 6.24 = 13.588 FTE
TOTAL MITIGATION REQUIREMENT, PER SECTION 26.470.040(C)(1) =
First 4 FTE = 0 employee mitigation;
Next 4 FTE mitigated at 30% = (4 x .3) = 1.2 FTE to be mitigated;
Remaining 5.588 FTE mitigated at 60% = 3.353 FTE to be mitigated;
Total FTE to be mitigated = 1.2 + 3.35 = 4.55 FTE to be mitigated;
Apply credit for 3 extra FTE already provided with housing = 4.55 – 3 = 1.55 FTE to be mitigated…
Category 4 housing in-lieu fee = $124,307/FTE = 1.55 x $124,307 = $192,675.85
Accordingly, the applicant shall pay the cash-in-lieu of housing mitigation fee of $192,675.85 to the City of Aspen/APCHA at the time of building permit issuance for the conversion.
If the actual development proves to be either of the two tenant scenarios or scenario of a single tenant without second floor space, the calculations and fee provided for above will
be in excess of the requirement.
e) Free-Market residential floor area on the parcel is accompanied by affordable housing units or mitigation pursuant to 26.470.040.C.6, unless otherwise restricted in the zone district.
The City Council may waive, partially waive, or establish a different limitation as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration
of broader community goals.
The proposed contemplated herein does not result in any new free market residential floor area on the parcel. Therefore, this standard is not applicable.
f) The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvements proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure
includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and
road and transit services.
The proposed development represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure. The existing uses on the property are adequately served with public water, sewage treatment,
energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, and road and transit services. The proposal will not significantly increase
the demand on any such services or improvements. To the extent that any additional demands on public infrastructure require mitigation, the applicant will provide for such needs.
With respect to parking, the applicant has requested a parking waiver from the HPC in accordance with the provisions of the Land Use Code. It is believed that such parking waiver is
necessitated merely as a technicality of the Code but that theater use actually generates a greater need for parking than does retail use. The parking needs of the project will effectively
decrease.
2
HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC
0003.2007.ASLU/Resolution 99 Series 2006 - Final Isis MOU.pdf
0003.2007.ASLU/Single Tenant Option - Floor 1.pdf 0648 P2.DGN
0003.2007.ASLU/Single Tenant Option - Floor 2.pdf 0648 P2.DGN
0003.2007.ASLU/Two Tenant Option - Floor 1.pdf 0648 P2.DGN
0003.2007.ASLU/Two Tenant Option - Floor 2.pdf 0648 P2.DGN