HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20170927
AGENDA
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
September 27, 2017
4:30 PM City Council Meeting Room
130 S Galena Street, Aspen
I. SITE VISITS
A. Please visit the sites on your own.
II. 4:30 INTRODUCTION
A. Roll call
B. Draft minutes for August 23rd, 2017
C. Public Comments
D. Commissioner member comments
E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
F. Project Monitoring
G. Staff comments
H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
I. Submit public notice for agenda items
J. Call-up reports
K. HPC typical proceedings
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. None.
IV. 4:40 NEW BUSINESS
A. 4:40 432 E. Hyman Avenue- Minor Review, PUBLIC HEARING
B. 5:20 122 W. Main Street- Minor Review, Commercial Design Review, Growth
Management, PUBLIC HEARING
V. 7:00 ADJOURN
Next Resolution Number: 20
TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW
BUSINESS
Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
Staff presentation (5 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes)
Applicant presentation (20 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes)
Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes)
Applicant Rebuttal
Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed (5 minutes)
HPC discussion (15 minutes)
Motion (5 minutes)
*Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met.
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4)
members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct
any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require
the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of
the members of the commission then present and voting.
1
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
Chairperson Halferty called the meeting to order at 4:34 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Gretchen Greenwood, Willis Pember, Nora Berko, Bob
Blaich, Roger Moyer, Scott Kendrick. Absent was Richard Lai.
Staff present:
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney
Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk
Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 9th:
Mr. Blaich moved to approve, Mr. Kendrick seconded. Mr. Pember mentioned that one of his comments
on the bottom of page 7 in the last sentence, ended awkwardly. He asked to just leave it with he was “a
little nervous.” Ms. Greenwood seconded.
Mr. Blaich moved that they approve with the amendment, Mr. Kendrick seconded. All in favor, motion
carried.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
Public comment closed.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Mr. Pember attended the AIA annual design awards in downtown Denver
this week. They invited every architect in the state to come to the same place. There was one architect
from Virginia to review all submittals and it was quite extraordinary. One of the comments made, was
that the western slope, was the most active and aggressive in pursuing awards out of any other district.
There were only 2 or 3 Denver architects present and the western chapter overwhelmed the
proceedings. His office got an award, Studio B, Joseph Spears and a few others. On a state level, the
western slope ranked very highly on quality, interest and design. Ms. Simon mentioned that Charles
Cunniffe’s office won some awards as well. Congratulations were received from the board.
Mr. Halferty commended the staff and monitors. He has looked at everything currently under
construction and everything seems well organized and clean. The signage is appropriate and the historic
resources are well protected. It says a lot from staff, monitors and the building department about the
great job that is going on. He said he has been on his bike a lot and doing the west end shuffle.
DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: Ms. Berko is recusing herself for 211 E. Hallam St.
PROJECT MONITORING: 211. E Hallam
Ms. Berko stepped out. This building is under construction converting the Berko studio into a duplex and
we are here to talk about a window on the rear façade of the historic resource facing the alley. Ms.
Greenwood is the monitor. A new window on this façade was already approved through HPC and we
are here to discuss the repositioning of it. Ms. Simon has concern because repositioning, will place the
P1
II.B.
2
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
new window against the old window without giving identity and breathing room so we’ve given this to
the board for discussion of appropriateness.
Applicant Presentation:
Philp Jeffreys and Mirte Mallory
Ms. Mallory said that the front façade is coming to fruition and the Berko Studio has been completely
restored and will be untouched in terms of modifications to windows. The windows will be replaced
with new non-single paned windows. The rear is seen from the alley and the rear façade has very little
public view. The octagonal window is in the upper corner with no direct light onto anyone’s faces and no
ventilation. This area with the window is becoming a kitchen and the new window was introduced with
a very deliberate design. The purpose seemed appropriate, but once it was built, it had several
unintended consequences as the design didn’t work as well in real life. Mr. Jeffreys mentioned that
there are no floating windows and are on the periphery of the siding, but by creating this floating
element; an awkward visual has been made. From an angle, the siding looks unaligned and the inside is
not a whole lot better. The main issue with the inside, is that the band of wall is directly eye level and
looks very heavy. We are proposing to take the window up 6 inches to the base of the historic
windowsill and we would anchor the window, which would eliminate and make the façade come back to
its original design. This works from an aesthetic standpoint and in theory, and we would love to move
forward with this adjustment.
Mr. Halferty mentioned the description of the diagonal and asked for help understanding how, by
moving the window up 6 inches, does it change the notion of the diagonal. Mr. Jeffreys said there are
penetrations in the siding, historically and both are pulled to the extremity of the building. If you look at
this façade, it doesn’t connect visually. They were going to add a cedar trim to replicate the historic
window trim so the final product would have a trim from the historic window and a trim around the
non-historic window as well out of a cedar material as well. Mr. Halferty confirmed that these were the
same windows HPC approved previously and Ms. Simon answered yes and said this is the only new
opening on the building.
Mr. Blaich said it’s disturbing to have the sight visually unaligned and asked what the horizontal is and
Mr. Jeffreys explained that it’s a beam and said the header would just go away. Ms. Greenwood
confirmed that the sill would stay in the same place and the window would just get taller. Mr. Pember
clarified if they are proposing to use the exact same window that is onsite and just move it all the way
up and Ms. Mallory said no, it would be a new window and it would be six inches taller.
Mr. Moyer mentioned the historic window and asked Ms. Simon if it would be allowed to be an
operable window and she said they didn’t talk about that previously when the window was approved.
Mr. Jeffreys pointed out to Mr. Moyer that they thought they had a good solution originally and
wholeheartedly. Mr. Moyer noted that this is a major wall on the building and putting a window in is
kind of weird, but on the east end of that building, there is no opening and is hardly visible so he asked if
P2
II.B.
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
they could put the window there instead. Ms. Simon said the fact that there is nothing but siding on
those side walls, she thinks you would see it. Ms. Mallory said this window is already installed so the
fenestration has already occurred in the rear façade of this wall. Mr. Jeffreys said you do actually get a
fair amount of view from the side of this building. You do have to work harder to see the back of the
studio and we did a lot more than just add this window to make this photo studio livable. The back was
the only place we were willing to compromise.
Ms. Greenwood said she has looked at this on paper, but she would rather go to the site from now on.
She said it looks fantastic and is really going to be an asset to our program. When she saw the window, it
looked completely wrong from inside and out. She re-looked at the drawings and noted that it doesn’t
work from the outside or the inside as it doesn’t have the language of the windows. She became in favor
of the proposal just from going to the site and seeing it in person and thinks it’s a better solution for the
building, as well as making the proportions larger. They’ve done an excellent job and it’s really going to
be a statement for the AspenModern program. It’s uncomfortable to be on the inside and be in that
space and they won’t have to redo any siding. They need guidance on how it should be trimmed out.
She said she is in favor of it and they will see that the siding plays games on you and it’s one of those
odd optical illusions.
Mr. Blaich said he has looked inside out and feels it’s an improvement as well. He thinks the change
helps a lot with usability and livability. Things happen and we are all learning and overall, he agrees with
Ms. Greenwood.
Mr. Moyer said he also agrees with Ms. Greenwood.
Mr. Pember said he would tend to not copy the historic trim to distinguish a level of detail between the
two. He said they could put it flush with the historic window. Ms. Greenwood liked that idea too. Mr.
Pember said they should find a detail to separate the two treatments. Ms. Mallory said it’s a completely
new frame and glass.
Ms. Greenwood asked if it is it possible to be one solid piece of awning versus broken up into two and
Mr. Jeffreys said Colby is not excited about doing the wide awnings.
Mr. Halferty said he feels the project is looking great and they rarely have a historic window or a
postmodern window next to a new window so that part was troubling for him. He and Mr. Pember
agree that it does warrant different case detailing. It’s a shame they can’t just take the existing window
and bring it up for cost sake, but this is the most sensitive approach due to the siding issues.
Mr. Jeffreys said that this window is an 8-week order item and we can come back with a couple of trim
options and then review those Ms. Greenwood. Because of the timing for us, we can’t reuse that
window so we need to order a new window. We can come back for the detail of the trim or whatever
HPC wants, we just need to get to that point.
P3
II.B.
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
MOTION: Mr. Blaich motioned to approve as stated, with Ms. Simon and Ms. Greenwood working on
trim details, Mr. Kendrick seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes; Mr. Halferty,
yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Pember, yes. 6-0 all in favor, motion carried.
Ms. Berko re-entered the meeting.
PROJECT MONITORING: 540 E Main St.
Amy Simon
Ms. Simon mentioned that Mr. Halferty is the project monitor and this is for the affordable housing
behind the new police station being built on Main St. This is currently in for permit review and there is
one last minute changes to the project. There has been a request to instead of using a metal clad
window, they would like to use a vinyl window. This building is set back from Main St., but there are still
some design guidelines that need to be discussed and we have a sample of the window for everyone to
see.
Applicant Presentation:
Jack Wheeler, Capital Asset Manager for the City of Aspen
Mr. Wheeler mentioned that this was an oversight on their part when they did the specs, they originally
came from Burlingame, but they have upgraded the windows since then. This window will save energy
and money for the building overall. Ms. Greenwood asked what the original color was and Ms. Simon
said it was a painted grey. Ms. Simon said this is to be a vinyl Pella window and there will be some
material changes with cost being one of the issues. Decks were meant to be painted steel and are now
going to be wood.
Mr. Moyer asked for clarification on the desks as to whether they are painted or stained. Ms. Simon said
the deck structure will now be painted a heavy timber.
Ms. Greenwood asked about the railings and if they are wood or steel and Mr. Wheeler said they are all
painted steel. He said the building will look just like the rendering in front of them and he doesn’t think
they’ve changed the architectural feel of the building.
Mr. Kendrick asked if there is a difference in durability and Mr. Wheeler said it depends on who you ask
and that both are very durable. Aluminum would last longer, but vinyl would hold its color longer.
Mr. Moyer asked about durability at altitude and Mr. Wheeler said the altitude isn’t as much of a factor
as the sun exposure and they both perform well and meet the current energy codes.
Mr. Halferty asked if the rest of the police station fenestration is metal clad and Ms. Simon said yes. Mr.
Halferty asked where the approved metal starts and the vinyl begins and Mr. Wheeler said there is
sidewalk and greenspace between them.
Ms. Greenwood asked if white is the only color option and Mr. Wheeler said it had more to do with the
color palate of the building.
P4
II.B.
5
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
Ms. Berko asked what the other material changes are to the building. Ms. Simon said there were some
windows facing west and they were designed to be blind windows and have been restudied. The deck
structure is now wood and the railing style may have changed somewhat as well.
Mr. Pember asked what the colorfast rating is for vinyl windows and Mr. Wheeler said he is not sure, but
that might be his only concern with fiberglass going from white to yellow. Overall, he thinks white is
probably a good approach and had good luck with the Burlingame windows with no change and this is a
better window.
Mr. Halferty summarized by saying that the window is going from a metal clad to a proposed vinyl and
color is to be determined by staff and monitor.
Ms. Greenwood said that she has no issues or problems with it.
Mr. Kendrick said he has no problem and feels that it is aesthetically fine and will not be losing any
energy.
Mr. Moyer said he is ok with it.
Mr. Halferty said that staff and monitor should look at the color again now that we’ve had a change of
materials as well as a mock up. Mr. Wheeler said he has ordered one.
Ms. Greenwood moved to approve with recommendations as a mock up and looking at almond as an
alternative color, Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Ms. Berko, yes; Mr. Pember, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes;
Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes. 7-0 all in favor, motion
carried.
STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said 217 S. Galena has been pulled from the agenda. This is regarding
painting an already painted Victorian so we need to be more serious about this. There are six coats of
paint on it already so we need to figure out the condition of the building first and they will go ahead and
paint the woodwork. Kemosabe will be moving into this space.
Ms. Simon mentioned that they just hired another preservation planner. Her name is Sarah Yun and she
grew up in Denver. She has a master’s in architecture from Columbia. She is working at the Getty
currently and is coming to us mid-October. This will be her first job in local government and it will be a
big help being more responsive with all HPC requests.
CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Simon has issued one for the 629 W. Smuggler, the old
Marolt house that Derek Skalko did years ago. They are redoing the driveway and walkway, which takes
them to the side of the house. This is mostly a right of way issue with Engineering mostly, but she looked
at and said it was ok.
PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Simon mentioned that Mr. Halferty is the project monitor for 980 Gibson
Avenue, which is a project that was reviewed a year ago that had two historic resources hooked
together and is now a lot split. HPC approved a project to restore one of the miners cottages and build a
P5
II.B.
6
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
detached house. As they have prepared to move the historic house from where it’s currently sitting onto
it’s new foundation, they got some push back from Bill Bailey about the logistics. The house needs to be
spun around because it was placed backwards on the lot so they will be using a crane to lift it. It’s
something that has been done once before and is not the typical technique. The Building Dept. is all over
it and will be happening on Friday.
CALL UPS: None.
PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Simon left the notice for 406 S Mill St. upstairs so she will make sure to get this to
Ms. Bryan before noon the next day.
New Business: 406 S Mill St.
Amy Simon
This is request for exterior changes to the former location of McDonalds. This is a non-designated
building in the historic district. This was built 1956 by the Ski Co. and used to be the Aspen Country Store
until the property was sold to McDonalds in 1983. It now has a new owner and is being turned into O2
Yoga Studio. There is a significant interior remodel underway and Ms. Simon has already done a
certificate of no negative effect for the windows and roof replacement. The request tonight is to paint
the brick. The stucco on the upper floor is to be replaced with a painted metal siding. We have no
particular concerns about that issue, but is somewhat disappointing to lose some of the natural
characteristics and material that comes with the wood on the building, however, from the ground, you
won’t tell the difference. We recommend that HPC allow this change to happen. We do have an
objection to painting the natural brick and we do not want to encourage people to paint masonry
downtown. We think it diminishes the character of the architecture. There are a number of painted
buildings downtown, which are historic and non-historic and don’t think that should continue. We do
have a concern that this is terribly important decision because we have adopted new commercial design
guidelines. You’re finding tonight, might have implications for additional buildings later on, which are
not necessarily under HPC’s purview.
Applicant Presentation:
Bill Pollock & Jeff McCollum of Zone 4 Architects; Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC; Britney Van
Domelen, Owner.
O2 will have a spa on lower level, retail on the entry level and yoga/Pilates studio on the upper level. We
feel this is going to be a completely opposite energy. We are going from the heaviness of burgers to the
lightness of being. Maybe having classes in Wagner paired with the retail outside, it will bring a vitality
to that corner that has been missing. To change that and move that, we would like to make everything
on the exterior light including painting the brick. Changing the wood and stucco to metal, it will still be
seen as wood and harken back to wood. We would love to step out of the McDonalds aura and bring
this into a new realm and give a new personality for the building. There are a lot of buildings downtown,
speckled with white buildings. James Perse, Aether, Tesla are just a few, so this is not something
completely unique. We will not be painting, but just doing a white wash so the texture and the character
of the brick will still come through. We will white wash the brick on the first level and everything wood
P6
II.B.
7
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
will go to white, with the gray metal caps at the end of them, also going to white. On the upper level,
the stucco will all go to metal and the windows will be white and metal clad.
Mitch Haas
It is Important to recognize and keep in mind that the building is not historic and is not on the list for
being potentially historic so we are not talking about painting historic bricks. He pointed out the Red
Onion and that it’s painted red brick and there are two buildings on either side painted white. These are
painted solid white and this isn’t what we want to do, but again, would be a white wash. Going forward,
if someone comes in and wants to paint the brick on a historic structure, I will be in here along with
everyone else arguing against that, but this isn’t historic. With regard to the actual guidelines, I read
them and it states somewhere that paint color is variable and not subject to review. Nowhere does it say
to not paint brick. If this was recently adopted, we feel there is a fairness issue here and we can’t just
start this now for no reason. The existing alley façade doesn’t have any visual entrance at all so there is a
reason the homeless tend to gather in here because it’s so dark and not noticed. We need to lighten up
this alley and allow this to pop and deliver some light into it. By white washing, it helps to create that
pop to create visual interest. It’s not do or die, but it is felt like this property needs a clean and fresh
start.
Britney Van Domelen
I completely understand you have to draw the line with paint, but please don’t start the precedent with
a local business. If you let Tesla do it and not O2, that isn’t cohesive, in her opinion, for local businesses
so maybe not start it with someone whose been here for 15 years.
Ms. Berko asked what type of metal it will be and Mr. Pollock said it’s a representation of the siding.
There is not a lot of area where this is going to be and it is basically a lap siding, but since it’s a metal, it’s
going to be very tight without a huge shadow line.
Mr. Kendrick asked what is happening to the second-floor brick. Mr. Pollock said it is proposed to be
white also.
Mr. Moyer asked if they have done any white wash testing on the brick and Mr. Pollock said no. Mr.
Moyer said they are allowed to do that because it’s glazed brick and has a protective outer coating. Mr.
Pollock said that on the interior side of the stair well is where the testing will take place.
Mr. Kendrick pointed out that this isn’t a freestanding building, but connected so he asked what the plan
is for the transition and Mr. Pollock said they will repeat one of the columns that’s on the side. The
identical column right behind it against the brick and the paint would stop in a straight line behind the
column.
Ms. Simon wanted to point out a couple of code issues and said this isn’t a topic that has been in front
of HPC before. Work in the historic district that is exempt and we have always taken the position with an
already painted building, that they can continue that work. This is partially why this is in front of you
P7
II.B.
8
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
tonight, because once the building is painted; two weeks later, they would be able to paint it with four
coats of black paint if they wanted. Once the coating is applied, the board no longer has control.
Ms. Greenwood confirmed the code says that once any surface is painted, you can repaint it. That’s
where the decision comes from. Ms. Greenwood thinks it’s very odd.
Mr. Moyer said there is a huge difference between paint, wash and stain. A stain or wash is insignificant
because you can still basically wash it off. Once you paint, you have to put something underneath to
make it bond. He said he would never paint masonry, so the wash, to Mr. Moyer is pretty insignificant.
Ms. Berko asked Ms. Simon to reread the code. Ms. Simon pointed out that it is on page 42 of the packet
and read back the code.
Mr. Kendrick asked Mr. Moyer for clarification on the brick being sealed. Mr. Moyer said that when the
brick is fired, it creates a hard-outer surface and it’s sealed. So, if you were to white wash on the
outside, it’s not penetrating. If it’s hard, it’s easy to take off. Acrylic white wash is what they would use
and it’s basically a coat of stain. It would be ok and create the look that they want.
Mr. Kendrick asked how hard it would be to do a mock up. Mr. Haas said it wouldn’t be hard at all.
Mr. Pember asked if the interior will be white as well and Mr. Pollock said yes. Mr. Pember asked about
the ceiling structure and Mr. Pollock said there are purlins that go in twos and they would have metal
caps that are painted white metal. The concrete that you walk on, would stay the same and the stairs
will remain the same.
Mr. Halferty mentioned the memo (context 2.14, bullet point 3) and asked if that is referring to brick in
its natural state and Ms. Simon said yes, that putting any coating on it downplays the naturalness and
the characteristics.
Mr. Halferty asked if they have samples of the metal and Ms. Simon said that it could be a staff and
monitor item if HPC approves it. Mr. McCollum noted that the metal is in a 6in horizontal pattern.
Mr. Moyer said that as much as possible he wants to agree with staff, but the wash does not lose the
integrity of the brick and asked if they could agree to that. Ms. Simon said it puts us in a position down
the road between painting and white wash. Once coating is added, that’s the path we’re on.
Mr. Haas said they would be comfortable with adding a condition to require a review with HPC if they
want to change the paint moving forward.
Mr. Pember said he doesn’t remember any talk about painting brick in any prior reviews.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
Public comment closed.
Mr. Blaich said he is torn on this one, but is in agreement with Ms. Simon and staff on the intention. The
way the rules are written are not clear enough. He said he knows the purpose of this business going in is
P8
II.B.
9
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
positive and think it’s refreshing from an aesthetic point of view. He thinks it would be a positive thing
to create a different image that doesn’t relate it to a corporate image. We do need improvement in this
area and to lighten it up and be more friendly. He is on the fence, but feels this has to be the test case.
Ms. Berko said she concurs with staff recommendation. The metal will lighten up the whole building and
accomplish the look they want and she likes the play of the brick and metal together. If she thinks of it
as all white, it’s an intrusion on the block. Guidelines are guidelines and her interpretation of the
guidelines is not the same as the applicant on this one and the guidelines must be respected. The metal
and more glass would lighten it up and the transition to white would be disturbing to her. It would be a
shock to not have it marry with the rest of the block.
Mr. Kendrick agrees with staff as well, but also has concern with the partial building being painted. He
doesn’t think it relates well to the rest of the building.
Ms. Greenwood said she doesn’t agree with staff on this. It’s obviously just getting some paint and fixing
it up and it will eventually be completely redeveloped anyway. She cannot go along with guidelines that
won’t let the business project what they want to do. She thinks the guidelines are holding an unrealistic
longevity for our mall. This is the antithesis of what a new business needs to be successful. Empathy
with the fact that this is the first one to come along and it needs paint the most and needs to be uplifted
and brought into the 21st century. This board should support changing this building. None of the new
buildings that come in to us are white; they are all brick and natural stones. They are all that same kind
of genre. I don’t see that anything is getting away from us in terms of the mall. It meets the guidelines.
There are very few buildings that are going to ask for paint and this is a local business and it needs to
change. We’re here to add good honest discretion and help people get through the process and help
enhance the town. She said she would change the metal and go more toward a wood as she is not crazy
about the metal. Overall, this building goes along with the language of the commercial core and needs a
fresh coat of paint.
Mr. Moyer agreed that the building could be torn down tomorrow and asked why they are even talking
about this.
Ms. Greenwood agreed and said things do happen. This meets our guidelines and helps a local business
and revitalizes the corner.
Mr. Moyer agrees with Ms. Greenwood. It’s a wash.
Mr. Pember said this is a hodgepodge of things and was not built in one continuous sequence. If
someone would buy this, they would just tear it down.
Mr. Blaich said they can’t make a decision on what someone might do since it’s just conjecture.
Ms. Greenwood said that there is no integrity to this block. It was built for function and is in dire need of
redevelopment.
P9
II.B.
10
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
AUGUST 23, 2017
Mr. Halferty thinks this is a great project. It’s tough. He continued to give a summary of the project and
discussion. He said there are a lot of moving parts here and he is not steadfast in one direction or the
other. He said the applicant argument is strong and he feels they meet most guidelines. 2.14 is the only
guideline he feels they may not meet so it’s a challenge for him as well. He’s ok with the other
improvements, however.
Ms. Greenwood feels the project meets all of the guidelines 100%.
Mr. Pember asked if this is HOA compliant and asked if the HOA has seen the plans and Mr. Pollock
answered yes.
MOTION: Mr. Blaich motioned to approves resolution #19 and also recommended the white wash of the
brick as well as a condition to review any future requests for paint, Ms. Greenwood seconded. Staff and
monitor will report back on the mock up to confirm white wash. Roll call vote: Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr.
Pember, no; Ms. Berko, no; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes. 5-2,
motion carried.
Mr. Blaich motioned to adjourn at 6:56 p.m., Mr. Pember seconded.
_____________________________________
Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk
P10
II.B.
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 432 E. Hyman- Minor Development, Public Hearing
DATE: September 27, 2017
______________________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY: 432 E. Hyman Avenue was
originally built in 1887. The entire upper
floor of the building was destroyed by a fire
in 1919. Elements of the Victorian era
structure remain in place on the ground
floor, but significant additions have
occurred to the west and on top of the
historic resource. Older photographs of the
property, illustrating its progression, are on
the following page.
The long time owners of the building, the
Woods family, commissioned the additions
to the building, designed in the early 70s by
noted AspenModern architect Rob Roy.
The Woods’ are currently undertaking an
interior remodel of the free market apartment on the top floor of the structure. Alterations to
existing fenestration surrounding the apartment are proposed.
This is a very unique structure, with limited historic fabric remaining and a distinctly different
architecture on top of the resource. Staff determined that HPC review, rather than an
administrative approval, was appropriate in this case. The property falls within the midground of
the Main Street View Plane. Since the project does not increase building mass or height, it is
entitled to a determination of Exemption by HPC.
Staff recommends HPC particularly consider the appropriateness of the south facing fenestration
of the proposal. In general, we recommend approval as proposed.
APPLICANT: Woods Family, LP, represented by Dave Rybak, Rybak Architecture and
Development.
ADDRESS: 432 E. Hyman Avenue, the south 75’ of Lots R and S, Block 88, City and Townsite
of Aspen, Colorado, Parcel ID #2737-073-39-013.
ZONING: CC, Commercial Core.
P11
IV.A.
2
P12
IV.A.
3
MINOR DEVELOPMENT
The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal
materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project’s conformance with the design
guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC
with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve,
disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will
review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to
determine the project’s conformance with the 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. If the application is approved, the HPC shall
issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a
Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a
landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the
procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316.
Staff Response: The circumstances of this property are quite unique from a preservation
perspective. Staff and the applicant did not even identify the same design guidelines as being
applicable to the review.
The upper floor addition has not been identified as historically significant and there is no current
requirement to preserve any of the features as-is. Staff recommends that HPC seek to maintain
consistency throughout the 1970s addition. We find that the proposal achieves this, with the
possible exception of the wide band of sliding doors facing south. HPC should consider whether
this group of doors is inconsistent with guidelines 10.3 or 2.8, below, by departing from
fenestration patterns established on this building or surrounding buildings.
Regarding the view plane, City Council has recently adopted code amendments affecting how
development is regulated within view planes. There are seven designated view planes in the
City. The location and extent of the view planes have not changed at all, but now development
within the view planes is treated differently depending on whether the subject site falls within a
defined “foreground,” “midground,” or “background,” relative to where the view plane
originates. This project falls in the midground of the Main Street View Plane.
The amended Municipal Code states that “any addition or remodel of an existing structure that
does not change or decreases a building’s height at any point or visible mass from the view plane
reference point,” may proceed directly to zoning compliance check or building permit review.
______________________________________________________________________________
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
· approve the application,
· approve the application with conditions,
· disapprove the application, or
· continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
P13
IV.A.
4
______________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the application as proposed.
Exhibits:
Resolution #__, Series of 2017 (Draft to be provided at the hearing)
A. Design Guidelines
B. Application
Exhibit A, Design Guidelines
10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of
the primary building is maintained.
· A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building.
· An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to
the architectural character of the primary building.
· An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For
example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian
home.
· An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
· Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility.
10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
· An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually
compatible with historic features.
· A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in
material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction.
· Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen.
· Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An
addition 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.
· Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be
allowed.
P14
IV.A.
5
· There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a
development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be
the right instance for a contrasting addition.
· 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.
P15
IV.A.
6
P16
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: January 2017
ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application
PROJECT:
Name:
Location:
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________
Applicant:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
Historic Designation
Certificate of No Negative Effect
Certificate of Appropriateness
-Minor Historic Development
-Major Historic Development
-Conceptual Historic Development
-Final Historic Development
-Substantial Amendment
Relocation (temporary, on
or off-site)
Demolition (total demolition)
Historic Landmark Lot Split
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
General Information
Woods Building, Residential Apartment
432 E. Hyman Ave.
Lot R and Lot S: South 75' of Lots R&S, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen
2737 073 39 013
Woods Family LP
P O Box 11468
Dave Rybak, Rybak Architecture & Development, P.C.
600 E. Hopkins Ave., Suite 303, Aspen, CO 81611
925-1125 dave@daverybak.com
X
P17
IV.A.
P18IV.A.
P19IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: January 2017
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high
water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the
Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Proposed % of demolition: __________
DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
HHeight
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Front/Rear:
IIndicate N, S, E, W
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Distance between
buildings:
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Matrix of the City of Aspen’s Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements
432 E. Hyman Ave., 3rd Floor
Woods Family, LP
432 E. Hyman Ave., Unit
CC
4,500 SF
4,500 SF
1 1
0
38'-10"28'No Change
0 No Change
0 0 No Change
0 0 No Change
0 0 No Change
00 No Change
East Canopy was approved by City Council in 1976. Building Height approved in 1974.
None
2,000 1,1611,276(Net Livable)
P20
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: January 2017
Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This
information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that
may be involved.
YES NO
Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions,
new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?
Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling,
rehabilitation, or restoration?
Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?
In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative
Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places
Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?
If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in
Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed
on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential
properties are not.)
If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for
Historical Preservation?
Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:
Rehabilitation Loan Fund Conservation Easement Program Dimensional Variances
Increased Density Historic Landmark Lot Split Waiver of Park Dedication Fees
Conditional Uses Tax Credits
Exemption from Growth Management Quota System
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
x
x
x
x
P21
IV.A.
P22IV.A.
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION SUMMARY
PLANNER: Amy Simon, 429-2758 DATE: 08.01.17
PROJECT: 432 E. Hyman, Minor HPC Review
REPRESENTATIVE: Rybak Architecture and Development
DESCRIPTION: 432 E. Hyman is a historic property located in the Commercial Core Historic
District. The building has been significantly remodeled over the years, with the construction of
a two story addition on top of a portion of a Victorian era structure that survived a long ago fire.
The property owner proposes to install new fenestration on an existing upper floor residential
unit. The scope of work has been determined to be beyond what can be allowed through an
Administrative approval.
HPC must conduct Minor Development review and will consider whether the relevant review
criteria in Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code and the Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines and Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines
are met for the work to proceed. The property falls within the midground of the Main Street
View Plane. Since the project does not increase building mass or height, it is entitled to a
determination of Exemption by HPC.
Relevant Land Use Code Section(s):
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.415.070.C Minor Development
26.435.050.D Mountain View Plane, Exemptions
Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience:
Land Use Code:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-
Land-Use-Code/
Land Use Application:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/2011%20Historic%20
Land%20Use%20App%20Form.pdf
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/HPC/New%20Historic%20Preservation%20G
uidelines.pdf
Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines:
https://app.box.com/s/3a0vvpgpwtdzsomb9aa9rjsfq3qx2o1b
Review by: Staff for complete application and recommendation, HPC for decision
Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC (posting of notice only)
P23
IV.A.
2
Planning Fees: $1,300 for up to 4 billable hours. Lesser/additional hours will be refunded or
billed at a rate of $325 per hour.
Referral Fees: None
Total Deposit: $1,300
To apply, submit 1 copy of the following information:
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 (not 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.
A site improvement survey (not older than a year from submittal) including topography and
vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by
licensed in the State of Colorado. (This requirement will be waived given the scope of the
project.)
HOA Compliance form (Attached)
A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of
how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the
development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.
Written responses to all review criteria.
An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
Once the application is determined to be complete, submit:
A digital copy of the application emailed to amy.simon@cityofaspen.com. Please provide
text and graphics as separate files.
12 copies of the project graphics.
Total deposit for review of the application.
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.
P24
IV.A.
Assessor Property Search | Assessor Subset Query | Assessor Sales Search
Clerk & Recorder Reception Search | Treasurer Tax Search Search
GIS Map | GIS Help
Basic Building Characteristics | Value Summary
Parcel Detail | Value Detail | Sales Detail | Residential/Commercial Improvement Detail
Owner Detail | Land Detail | Photographs
Tax
Area
Account
Number
Parcel
Number
Property
Type
2016 Mill
Levy
001 R001475 273707339013 COMM/RES 32.473
Primary Owner Name and Address
WOODS FAMILY LP
PO BOX 11468
ASPEN, CO 81612
Additional Owner Detail
Legal Description
Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 88 Lot: R AND:-
Lot: S SOUTH 75' OF LOTS R & S
Location
Physical Address: 430 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN
Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
Land Acres: 0.000
Land Sq Ft: 4,500
2016 Property Value Summary
Parcel Detail http://www.pitkinassessor.org/assessor/Parcel.asp?AccountNumber=R0...
1 of 3 2/2/2017 2:24 PM
P25
IV.A.
Linda Williams
Title Officer
Stewart Title - Vail
P.O. Box 503
97 Main Street, Ste W-201
Edwards, CO 81632
(970) 926-0230 Phone
Fax
NOTICE
•If Stewart Title is recording documents for you, the following is required:
1.
2.
3.
A check must be attached to the documents, made payable to
Stewart Title.
The check fees must include:
- Title Insurance Fees & Applicable endorsements.
- Recording fees of $13.00 for the first page and $5.00 for each
additional page of the document. (Example: 2 page document is
$18.00)
- An additional $5.00 per document to electronically record the
documents.
Recording Instructions
•If your insurance amount changes, please contact the Title Examiner
for a new rate quote.
•Documentation evidencing satisfaction of ALL requirements must be
attached before final policy will be released.
Please send Title Package to:
Stewart Title
P.O. Box 503
97 Main Street, Ste W-201
Edwards, CO 81632
File Number: 01330-93961
Title Only Notice STCO
P26
IV.A.
Stewart Title - Vail
P.O. Box 503
97 Main Street, Ste W-201
Edwards, CO 81632
Date:March 08, 2017
File Number:01330-93961- Amendment No. -C2
Borrower:Woods Family Limited Partnership
Property:430 E Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81612
Please direct all Title inquiries to:
Linda Williams
Phone:(970) 766-0234
Email Address:lwilliam3@stewart.com
Lender:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
4101 Wiseman Blvd
Ste 108
San Antonio, TX 78251
Mortgage Broker:
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
119 S Mill St
Aspen, CO 81611
Attn: Elise Gardiner
Phone:(970) 544-2314
Email Address:elise.gardiner@wellsfargo.com
Delivery Method: Emailed
Kevin Lish
Email Address: kevin.a.lish@wellsfargo.comb
We Appreciate Your Business and Look Forward to Serving You in the Future.
P27
IV.A.
ALTA Commitment (6/17/06)
ALTA Commitment Form
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
Issued by
STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY
STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas Corporation (“Company”), for a valuable consideration, commits to issue
its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as
owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums
and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions
of this Commitment.
This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies
committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company.
All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six months after the Effective Date or when the
policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not
the fault of the Company.
The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request.
This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized signatory.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly
authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A.
Countersigned by:
Stewart Title - Vail
P.O. Box 503
97 Main Street, Ste W-201
Edwards, CO 81632
(970) 926-0230
Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form 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.
File No. 01330-93961
004-UN ALTA Commitment (6/17/06)
P28
IV.A.
CONDITIONS
1.The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument.
2.If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other
matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in
Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved
from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced
by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if
the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other
matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall
not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions.
3.Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties
included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in
reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions
shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy o r policies
committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and the Exclusions from Coverage
of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by
reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein.
4.This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of
the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against
the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mo rtgage thereon covered
by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment.
5.The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount o f Insurance is
$2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the
parties.You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at< http://www.alta.org/>.
All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be
addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252.
Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form 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.
File No. 01330-93961
004-UN ALTA Commitment (6/17/06)
P29
IV.A.
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
File No.: 01330-93961- Amendment No. -C2
1. Effective Date: January 27, 2017, at 8:00 A.M.
2. Policy or Policies to be issued:Amount of Insurance
(a) ALTA Owner's Policy
Proposed Insured:
(b) ALTA Loan Policy 2006 (Extended)$2,094,000.00
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., its successors and/or assigns
(c) A.L.T.A. Loan Policy 2006 (Standard)$300,000.00
Proposed Insured:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
Fee Simple
4. Title to the said estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in:
Woods Family Limited Partnership
5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
The South Seventy-Five (75) Feet of
Lots R and S,
In Block Eighty-Eight (88)
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
Purported Address:
430 E Hyman Avenue
Aspen, CO 81612
STATEMENT OF CHARGES
These charges are due and payable
before a policy can be issued
Reissue Commercial Rate
2006 Loan Policy:
Tax Certificate:
CO Form 100:
Lender's Extended Coverage:
ALTA Form 8.2-06:
2nd 2006 Loan Policy:
$2036.00
$25.00
$50.00
n/c
$50.00
$150.0
Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form 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.
File No. 01330-93961
CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch A STO
Page 1 of 1 STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COMPANY
P30
IV.A.
File No.: 01330-93961- Amendment No. -C2
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
1.
2.
Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the full consideration for the estate or
interest to be insured.
Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for
record.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company of payment of all outstanding taxes and assessments as
certified by the County Treasurer.
Execution of Affidavit as to Debts and Liens and its return to Stewart Title Guaranty Company.
NOTE: If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils
testing, foundation work, installation of materials), please notify the Company's escrow officer within 10 days of
receipt of this title commitment.
Execution of an acceptable survey affidavit certifying that there have been no new improvements constructed or
major structural changes made on the subject property.
NOTE: If improvements have been made on, or in connection with, the subject property, please notify the
Company's escrow officer within 10 days of receipt of this title commitment.
Release by the Public Trustee of the Deed of Trust from Woods Family LP for the use of Wells Fargo Bank NA to
secure $2,350,000.00, recorded February 3, 2012 as Reception No. 586448.
1st Deed of Trust from the Borrower to the Public Trustee for the use of the proposed lender to secure the loan to
secure $2,094,000.00
2nd Deed of Trust from the Borrower to the Public Trustee for the use of the proposed lender to secure the loan to
secure $300,000.00
NOTE: The vesting deed is shown as follows: Warranty Deed recorded March 5, 2001 as Reception No. 452072.
NOTE: Statement of Authority for Woods Family Partnership recorded February 3, 2012 as Reception No.
586447, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity:
Ransom B. Woods, III as the Trustee of the Ransom B. Woods, III Trust dated October 20, 2006, General
Partner.
If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting
the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required.
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B
PART I
Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form 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.
File No. 01330-93961
CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B I
Page 1 of 1 STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COMPANY
P31
IV.A.
File No.: 01330-93961- Amendment No. -C2
Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same
are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records.
Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
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.
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.
Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records
or attaching subsequent to the Effective Date but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of
record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.
(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;
(c) minerals of whatsoever kind, subsurface and surface substances, in, on, under and that may be produced from
the Land, together with all rights, privileges, and immunities relating thereto, whether or not the matters excepted
under (a), (b) or (c) are shown by the Public Records or listed in Schedule B.
Water rights, claims or title to water.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales.
The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other
district or homeowners association or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area.
Exceptions and reservations contained in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite
of Aspen recorded March 1, 1897 in Book 139 at Page 216.
Reservation in deed from City of Aspen providing: 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 contained in the Deed
recorded in Book 59 at Page 24.
Agreement recorded March 1, 1888 in Book 46 at page 229.
The right of ways contained in the Deed recorded in Book 3 at page 576 and also contained in Deed in Book 153
at page 288 and in Book 158 at Page 131.
Letter to Mr John L. Herron recorded June 1, 1946 in Book 171 at Page 132, regarding chimney.
All matters shown on the Building Permit survey recorded May 4, 1995 in Book S004 at Page 33.
Resolution Declaration of Intention to Establish Pedestrian Mall recorded December 15, 1975 in Book 306 at Page
668.
Notice of Declaration Intention to Establish pedestrian Mall recorded December 15, 1975 in Book 306 at Page
665.
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B
PART II
Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form 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.
File No. 01330-93961
CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B II STO
Page 1 of 2 STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COMPANY
P32
IV.A.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Notice of Historic Designation, Aspen Historic Preservation Committee recorded January 13, 1975 in Book 295 at
Page 515.
Rights or interests of the adjoining owners in and relating to a party wall located along or adjacent to the North and
East property lines of the land.
Memorandum of Lease recorded September 5, 2001 as Reception No. 458299.
Nondisturbance and Attornment Agreement recorded December 15, 2005 as Reception No. 518490.
Revocable Encroachment License with the City of Aspen recorded June 28, 2012 as Reception No. 590249.
Any and all existing leases and tenancies.
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B
PART II
Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form 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.
File No. 01330-93961
CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B II STO
Page 2 of 2 STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COMPANY
P33
IV.A.
DISCLOSURES
File No.: 01330-93961
Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11 -122, notice is hereby given that:
A.
B.
C.
THE SUBJECT REAL PROPERTY MAY BE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT;
A CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE LISTING EACH TAXING JURISDICTION SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE
COUNTY TREASURER OR THE COUNTY TREASURER’S AUTHORIZED AGENT;
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: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-2 -2, Section 5, Paragraph G 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 Stewart Title 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 Lender’s Title
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:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a
condominium or townhouse unit.
No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land
described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled Mechanic’s and
Materialmen’s Liens.
The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.
If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within
six months prior to the Date of the 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.
To comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 10-11-123, the Company makes the following disclosure:
a.
b.
That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the
surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other
minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and
That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s
permission.
NOTE: THIS DISCLOSURE APPLIES ONLY IF SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT HEREIN
INCLUDES AN EXCEPTION FOR SEVERED MINERALS.
Notice of Availability of a Closing Protection Letter:Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1 -3,
Section 5, Paragraph C (11)(f), a closing protection letter is available to the consumer.
x
NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE
COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN, UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED.
File No.: 01330-93961
CO Commitment Disclosure Revised 1/1/17 P34
IV.A.
STG Privacy Notice
Stewart Title Companies
WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?
Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable
state law regulations also require us to tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice
carefully to understand how we use your personal information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty
Company and its title affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA).
The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This
information can include social security numbers and driver's license number.
All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers' personal information to run their everyday
business—to process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we list the reasons that we can share
customers' personal information; the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing.
.
Reasons we can share your personal information.Do we share Can you limit this sharing?
For our everyday business purposes— to process your
transactions and maintain your account. This may include running the
business and managing customer accounts, such as processing
transactions, mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court
orders and legal investigations.
Yes No
For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to
you.
Yes No
For joint marketing with other financial companies No We don't share
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information
about your transactions and experiences. Affiliates are companies
related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and
non-financial companies. Our affiliates may include companies with a
Stewart name; financial companies, such as Stewart Title Company
Yes No
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information
about your creditworthiness.No We don't share
For our affiliates to market to you — For your convenience,
Stewart has developed a means for you to opt out from its affiliates
marketing even though such mechanism is not legally required.
Yes Yes, send your first and last name, the email
address used in your transaction, your
Stewart file number and the Stewart office
location that is handling your transaction by
email to optout@stewart.com or fax to
1-800-335-9591.
For non-affiliates to market to you. Non-affiliates are companies
not related by common ownership or control. They can be financial
and non-financial companies.
No We don't share
We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to non-affiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a
non-affiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that non-affiliate. [We do not control
their subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.]
SHARING PRACTICES
How often do the Stewart Title Companies notify me
about their practices?
We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a
transaction.
How do the Stewart Title Companies protect my
personal information?
To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we
use security measures that comply with federal law. These measures
include computer, file, and building safeguards.
How do the Stewart Title Companies collect my
personal information?
We collect your personal information, for example, when you
ß
ß
request insurance-related services
provide such information to us
We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real
estate agent or lender involved in your transaction, credit reporting agencies,
affiliates or other companies.
What sharing can I limit?Although federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (e.g., opt out)
in certain instances, we do not share your personal information in those
instances.
Contact us: If you have any questions about this privacy notice, please contact us at: Stewart Title Guaranty Company,
1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privacy Officer, Houston, Texas 77056
File No.: 01330-93961 Page 1
Revised 11-19-2013
P35
IV.A.
SURVEY AFFIDAVIT AND INDEMNITY
Date:____________________
Property:Subdivision
Lot Lot R S and Lots of South 75', Block 88, City And Townsite Of Aspen, Section 7, Book 264, Page 786,
Pitkin County, Colorado
PIN
R001475, R001475
Property Address
430 E Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81612
File No.: 01330-93961
BEFORE ME, this undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared ____________________________, (Affiant(s)),
personally known by me to be the person(s) whose names are subscribed hereto, who being by me first duly sworn, on
their oaths stated the following to be true and correct:
1. I/We are the owners of the following described property:
The South Seventy-Five (75) Feet of
Lots R and S,
In Block Eighty-Eight (88)
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
2. There have been no improvements added to the land or construction on the land since the date I/we acquired the
property.
3. The land is known as: 430 E Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81612 (address).
4. We are not aware, and have not been told, that improvements by our neighbors encroach over any buil ding or
setback lines, easements or property lines.
5. We are not aware, and have not been told, improvements made by the undersigned encroach over any building or
setback lines, easements or property lines.
6. Since the date the Affiants acquired the land, or since the date of existing survey, if any, provid ed by Affiants to
Stewart Title, there have been no:
a. Improvements added such as new structures, fences, storage sheds, additional rooms, garages, swimming pools,
decks, concrete or air conditioning units.
b. Changes in the location of boundary fences or boundary walls.
c.Construction projects on immediately adjoining property(ies) which construction occurred near the boundary of
the land; or
d. Conveyances, replatting, easement grants, or easement dedications by the Affiants.
7. The undersigned agree to indemnify Stewart Title Company and/or Stewart Title Guaranty Company for any loss, cost
or expense relating to, or arising from, any inaccuracy or omission as to the above statements and representations.
________________________________________
Woods Family Limited Partnership
State of Colorado
County of
The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn to before me this ________ day of _______________,
________by ______________________________ as ______________________________ of
_____________________________________________.
Witness my hand and official seal.
______________________________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires:
File No.: 01330-93961
Survey Affidavit and Indemnity Buyer STCO Page 1 of 1P36
IV.A.
INDEMNITY AND AFFIDAVIT
AS TO DEBTS, LIENS, POSSESSION
File Number: 01330-93961
Real property and improvements located in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and more particularly described as follows:
The South Seventy-Five (75) Feet of
Lots R and S,
In Block Eighty-Eight (88)
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared:
Woods Family Limited Partnership
Owner-Borrower
personally known to me to be the person(s) whose name is subscribed hereto and upon his/her oath deposes and says that no
proceedings in bankruptcy or receivership have been instituted by or against him/her and that the marital status of the Affiant has not
changed since the day of acquisition of said property and represents to the purchaser and/or Lender in this transaction that there are:
1. No unpaid debts for lighting and plumbing fixtures, water heaters, floor furnaces, heaters, air conditioners, built-in fireplace
screens, installed outdoor cooling equipment, swimming pool equipment, built-in cleaning equipment, built-in kitchen equipment,
satellite dish, radio or television antennae, garage door openers, carpeting, rugs, lawn sprinkling systems, venetian blinds, curtains
and rods, window shades, draperies and rods, valances, screens, shutters, awnings, mirrors, ceiling fans, attic fans, mail boxes,
security and fire alarm detection equipment, water softener, electric appliances, fences, street paving, or any personal property or
fixtures that are located on the subject property described above, and that no such items have been purchased on time payment
contracts, and there are no security interests on such property secured by financing statement, security agreement or otherwise
except the following:
Creditor Approximate Amount
(If NONE, write "NONE" on blank line)
2. No loans, unpaid judgments, or liens (including Federal or State Liens or Judgment Liens) and no unpaid governmental or
association taxes, charges or assessments of any kind on such property except the following:
Creditor Approximate Amount
(If NONE, write "NONE" on blank line)
3. All labor and material used in the construction of improvements on the above described property have been paid for and there
are now no unpaid labor or material claims against the improvements or the property upon which same are situated, and I hereby
declare that all sums of money due for the construction of improvements have been fully paid and satisfied, except the following:
(If NONE, write "NONE" on blank line)
4. No leases, contracts to sell the land, or parties in possession other than Affiant except as follows:
(If NONE, write NONE on blank line)
If any deed of trust recorded against my property secures an open line of credit or a revolving line of credit, I/we affirm that I/we have
not drawn additional funds from the line of credit since the date of the Payoff Statement from my/our lender to Stewart Title. I/we
further agree and affirm that I/we will not make any further draws on the line of credit after the date of this affidavit. I/we further affirm
that I/we have not taken out any loans against our property other than those shown on the above referenced commitment number.
Indemnity: I agree to pay on demand to the lender and/or title companies (including Stewart Title Guaranty Company) in this
transaction, their successors and assigns, all amounts secured by any and all liens, claims or rights not shown above, together with
all costs, loss and attorney’s fees that said parties may incur in connection with such unmentioned liens, provided said liens, claims,
or rights either currently apply to such property, or a part thereof, or are subsequently established against said property and are
created by me, known by me, or have an inception or attachment date prior to the closing of this transaction and recording of the deed
and deed of trust.
I realize that the Purchaser and/or Lender and Title Companies in this transaction are relying on the representations contained herein
in purchasing same or lending money thereon and issuing title policies and would not purchase same or lend money or issue a title
policy thereon unless said representations were made. If Seller or Borrower is an entity, I have authority to sign on its behalf.
________________________________________
Woods Family Limited Partnership
State Colorado
County of
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of _______________, ________ by
______________________________ as ______________________________ of
_____________________________________________.
Witness my hand and official seal.
______________________________________________
Notary Public:
My commission expires: __________________________
NOTE TO BUYER: Buyer must retain until end of fifth taxable year of transfer and must file with the Internal Revenue Service if
required by regulation or otherwise.
NOTE: To be filled in personally by Borrower in his/her own handwriting.
File No.: 01330-93961 CO Affidavit of Debts and Liens Buyer Borrower
Page 1 of 1
P37
IV.A.
600 East Hopkins Avenue, Suite 303
Aspen, Colorado 81611
PH/FX 970 925 1125
daverybak.com
WOODS BUILDING – APARTMENT RENOVATION
HPC MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
AUGUST 18, 2017
PROPOSAL SUMMARY
The subject property is located within the Commercial Core, at the corner of E. Hyman
Avenue and Galena Street. The applicant proposes a renovation of the Third-Floor
apartment, requesting reorganization of the South Façade fenestration, replacement of
the window units on the East Façade and rearrangement of the window units on the
West Façade. No exterior lighting modifications are proposed in this application
The original structure was significantly damaged by a fire in 1919. The building was
redeveloped in the mid 1970’s creating the current Second Floor Office space and Third
Floor apartment. During the mid-1990’s the South Elevation of the apartment was
reconfigured into the current existing condition.
SOUTH ELEVATION (Sheet HP-201):
The existing arrangement of the Third-Floor windows has a two pair of 8’ long sliding
doors with adjacent 20” fixed sidelights placed around a central wood column. The
proposed reconfiguration will create 3 bays of window units defined by wood columns,
detailed to match the existing. The central bay will be 13’-6” wide, with a 4-bay sliding
door system. The bay width and column placement is based on alignment of the west
column on the existing stair partition, to align with an existing column on the Second
Floor. Full height fixed window units will be placed within the East and West bays. The
resulting arrangement creates smaller vertical proportion door and window panels which
are proportionally similar to the window bays of the First and Second Floors.
On the Second Floor, a solid wood door will be removed from the residential stair
opening, at the west side of the façade.
EAST ELEVATION (Sheet HP-202):
The existing East Façade has vertically proportioned casement windows within individual
openings of the brick wall. The 2 North windows are full height units, between the brick
band and a fascia board. The 3 South windows are smaller units with fixed wood panels
below, combining to generate the same vertical height as the North windows. The
proposal will replace the 40-year-old windows with similar units. The 2 North windows
will match the existing size and configuration. In the 3 South bays, the fixed panel will
be eliminated, installing full height casement units to match the North. The resulting
fenestration will create a unified look to the Third Floor, eliminating the mixture of
vertical proportions and low horizontal panels.
P38
IV.A.
Woods Building
HPC Minor Development Review
August 18, 2017
2
WEST ELEVATION (Sheet HP-203):
The West Elevation faces the interior courtyard space formed with the portion of the
building addressed 430 E. Hyman Ave. The majority of the façade is faced with stucco,
with the exception of a brick cornice and a brick band under the Third-Floor windows.
At the south end of the façade, a three-bay arrangement of fixed units and wood
columns wraps from the South Façade. The northern most of these bays is an
arrangement of fixed and operable units, breaking up the large opening. Further north
2 aluminum sliding window units puncture the stucco façade. The proposal will replace
the fixed units with new units to infill the openings. The renovation will remove the
two sliding window units, install a window further north into a new bath, eliminate the
northern unit; and introduce a new window at the northern end of the wall. The central
window will be a vertically proportioned casement window. The Northern unit will be
a vertically proportioned fixed unit. The existing openings will be closed and the stucco
repaired to blend with the existing. The proposed modifications simplifies the
fenestration at the visible, southern end of the façade; while the two new windows are
not prominent and mostly out of view from the public.
ROOF PLAN (Sheet HP-104):
There are 4 existing skylights on the roof which will be eliminated during the renovation.
A new fireplace flue will be added near the south end of the roof. The flue termination
should be at or near the top of the existing brick cornice, located back from the South
façade, so view from the mall or adjacent streets will be difficult if at all possible.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW STANDARDS
26.415.070.C MINOR DEVELOPMENT
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of
appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination
by the Community Development Director that the proposed project
constitutes a minor development. Minor development work includes:
a) Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor
area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less or
The proposed renovation does not increase the Floor Area of the building.
b) Alterations to a building façade, windows, doors, roof planes or material,
exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or
ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the
work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or
The proposed modifications are limited to:
1. Reorganization of the South Façade windows at the Third Floor
2. Replacement of all windows on the East Façade, with matching
units.
P39
IV.A.
Woods Building
HPC Minor Development Review
August 18, 2017
3
3. Reorganization of the West Facade.
d) Alterations that are made to non-historic portions of a designated historic
property that do not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or the
erection of street furniture, signs, public art and other visible
improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or in
numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance
of a certificate of no negative effect.
The proposed modifications include removal of existing skylights, not visible
from the street level.
26.435.050.D Mountain View Plane, Exemptions
6. Main Street view plane. There is hereby established a view plane
originating from Main Street above which plane no land use or building shall
project. The reference point bears N. 78° 22' 29" W. 92.35 feet from the
southeasterly property corner of Block 79 original Aspen Town site. The
reference base line bears N. 75° 09' 11" W. 51.40 feet from the reference
point. Elevation of the reference point and reference base line is 7,906.90
feet above mean sea level. The view plane is more particularly described as
follows: All that space which is within the projection of two (2) radial lines
which bear S. 29° 10' 06" E. from the reference point and S. 80° 29' 29"
W. from the westerly terminus of the reference base line and which is also
above a plane which passes through the reference base line at an angle of
inclination of 6° 29' 20" above horizontal.
B. Exemption. The Community Development Director may exempt the
addition of mechanical equipment to an existing development which
protrudes into the view plane only if such development has an insignificant
effect upon the designated view plane. The addition of a satellite dish,
elevator shaft or any other piece of equipment whose height and mass have a
significant effect upon the designated view plane shall be reviewed pursuant
to the standards of Subsection 26.435.050.C.
The existing building sits within the Main Street view plane, and the proposed
window replacements will have no significant impact upon the view plane. An
exemption to this development is requested.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE: REHABILITATION:
Neoclassical Influence
Chapter 2: Building Materials:
Replacement of Materials
2.3 Match the original material composition, scale and finish when
replacing materials
P40
IV.A.
Woods Building
HPC Minor Development Review
August 18, 2017
4
The existing Third Floor windows are a mixture of painted wood, aluminum
clad and natural aluminum frame units. The proposed renovation will replace
all of the existing units with new, thermally efficient windows. The frame
profiles will be similar to the existing.
Chapter 3: Windows
3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a
building wall.
The East façade will maintain the existing proportion and arrangement of
window units.
The South Façade will be reorganized utilizing vertically proportioned
windows, similar to the vertical proportions of the lower two floor openings.
The windows near the southern end of the West Façade will maintain the
existing proportions and openings. The new units introduced at the center
and north end of the façade will utilize a vertical proportion, typical of the
building.
Replacement of Windows that are beyond Repair, or Have Been Removed
3.3 Match a replacement window to the original design
3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as
the original.
3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible the profile of the sash and its components
to that of the original window.
The windows being replaced are of 1975 era, not the typical century old units
which these criteria were written for. The replacement units will utilize
frame and sash configurations similar to the existing. Proportions and sizing
work with the existing patterns.
Adding Windows
3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed.
The new windows proposed for the West Façade are in an interior courtyard,
on a non-contributing elevation.
Energy Conservation
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace
a historic window.
Replacement units can closely match the existing unit profiles, and provide
energy efficiencies far exceeding a storm window approach.
P41
IV.A.
Woods Building
HPC Minor Development Review
August 18, 2017
5
Chapter 4: Doors
Replacement Doors
4.4 When replacing a door or screen, use a design that has an appearance
similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the
building.
The new sliding door unit will generate a vertical proportion which is similar
to the vertical proportions utilized on the building facades.
COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
MATERIALS AND DETAILS
1.22 Complete and accurate identification of materials is required.
The new materials will be Wood Clad windows and doors, and wood columns
to match the existing. Repair of existing stucco, and wood trims will be
included as necessary for the installation of the window arrangements.
1.23 Building materials shall have these features:
Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block
context or seen historically in the Character Area.
Convey Pedestrian scale.
Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension.
Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a
primary material
Have proven durability
The building materials will match those of the existing building. No shiny or
glossy materials are proposed.
REMODEL
1.34 Consider updating windows, doors, and/or primary entrances to better
relate to the Character Area and pedestrian experience.
1.35 Design alterations to relate to the existing building style and form that
may remain.
COMMERCIAL CORE
2.3 Development should be inspired by traditional late 19th-century
commercial building to reinforce continuity in architectural language
within the Historic District. Consider the following design elements:
form, materials, and fenestration. Pick two areas to relate strongly to
the context.
When relating to fenestration, large vertical windows on the ground
level and punched vertical openings on upper levels, with a similar solid
to void ratio, are appropriate.
The proposed fenestrations modifications will reinforce the vertical
proportions of the building, reintroduce vertical proportions along the South
P42
IV.A.
Woods Building
HPC Minor Development Review
August 18, 2017
6
Façade and reduce units which are currently broken with horizontally
proportioned panels. (Addressing 1.34, 1.35 & 2.3)
2.8 Composition of the façade, including choices related to symmetry and
asymmetry, should reflect the close readings of patterns establish by
the 19th-century structures.
The proposed arrangement of the South Façade will reestablish a smaller,
vertically proportioned arrangement, similar to the pattern existing on the
Ground and Second Floors.
P43
IV.A.
(+\PDQSources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO,USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey,$XJXVW0 0.07 0.140.035PL00.0850.170.0425NP VICINITY MAPWOODS BLDG430 & 432 E. HYMAN
P44
IV.A.
DN
DN
DN
DN S. GALENA E. HYMAN AVE. MALL
432 E. HYMAN AVE.430 E. HYMAN AVE.
COURTYARD
OPEN BALCONY
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 11:13:29 AMHP-100
SITE PLAN
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC - SITE PLAN
NORTHP45
IV.A.
DNDWDN
WD
DN
DN
D W DWLIVING ROOM
01
KITCHEN
02
BEDROOM
07
BEDROOM
08
SAUNA
11
CLOSET
12
CLOSET
10
BATH
09
BATH
06
CLOSET
04
HALL
03
CLOSET
05
STAIR
14
STAIR
13
R/F
STAIR
00
ADD WINDOW TO
WEST ELEVATION
NEW WINDOW SIZE &
LOCATION, ENCLOSE
EXISING OPENING, MATCH
EXTERIOR STUCOO FINISH
REPLACE EXISTING WINDOW
UNITS W/ MATCHING SIZE &
OPERATION ON EAST FACADE
NEW WINDOW WALL,
ADDED COLUMNS,
ASSEMBLY NOW
SYMMETRICAL
NEW FIXED WINDOW UNIT -
SINGLE UNIT IN EXISTING
OPENING, MATCHES ADJACENT
UNITS TO THE SOUTH
NEW WINDOW UNITS-MATCH EXISTING
WIDTH, INCREASE HEIGHT TO MATCH
WINOWS TO NORTH, ELIMINATE SOLID
PANEL BELOW WINDOWS
REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW,
ENCLOSE OPENING, MATCH
EXTERIOR STUCCO FINISH
NORTH
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:27:37 AMHP-103
THIRD FLOOR
PLAN
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"1 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - EXISTING
1/4" = 1'-0"4 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - PROPOSED HPC MODIFICATIONS
EXISTING WINDOWS
TO BE REMOVED
WINDOW WALL
TO BE
REMODELLED
NET LIVABLE AREAS:
EXISTING THIRD FLOOR NET LIVABLE AREA 1,276 S.F.
PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR NET LIVABLE AREA 1,161 S.F.P46IV.A.
EXISTING SKYLIGHT
EXISTING SKYLIGHT TO REMAIN
EXISTING COMMERCIAL
EXHAUST VENT
EXISTING CMU
CHIMNEYS
REMOVE EXISTING
SKYLIGHT
REMOVE EXISTING SKYLIGHTS
EXISTING COMMERCIAL
EXHAUST VENT
NEW FIREPLACE FLUE
TERMINATION
EXISTING CMU
CHIMNEYS
1
HP-301
1
HP-301
REMOVE EXISTING
SKYLIGHT
NORTH
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:27:39 AMHP-104
ROOF PLAN
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"1 ROOF PLAN - EXISTING
1/4" = 1'-0"2 ROOF PLAN - PROPOSED
P47IV.A.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
NEW SYMMETRICAL
WALL CONFIGURATION
- ADDED COLUMNS,
FIXED SIDELIGHT,
OPERABLE CENTER
SLIDING UNITS
SOLID FLUSH
DOOR REMOVED
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
RENOVATE
EXITING
FENESTRATION
SOLID FLUSH DOOR
TO BE REMOVED
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:27:50 AMHP-201
ELEVATIONS
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION - 1975 DOCUMENTSP48 IV.A.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
NEW WINDOW UNITS,
MATCH EXISTING SIZE
NEW WINODW UNIT, MATCH
EXISTING WIDTH, INCREASE HEIGHT
TO MATCH WINDOWS TO NORTH
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:28:02 AMHP-202
ELEVATIONS
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING EAST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION - 1975 DOUCMENTSP49
IV.A.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
REMOVED
EXISTING
WINDOWS
REMOVE
EXISTING 3 UNIT
WINDOW GROUP
EXISTING STUCCO FNISH
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
NEW WINDOW UNIT
WITH OPAQUE GLAZING
NEW OPERABLE
WINDOW UNITS
NEW FIXED WINDOW
UNIT IN EXISTING
OPENING
REPAIR STUCCO FINISH AS
REQUIRED AT WINDOW
DEMOLITIN AND INSERTION
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:28:12 AMHP-203
ELEVATIONS
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING WEST ELEVATION - COURT
1/4" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION - COURT
WEST ELEVATION - 1975 DOCUMENTSP50 IV.A.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
100' - 0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
116' - 0"
BASEMENT
90' - 4"
ROOF
135' - 4"
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
125' - 8"
UPPER STORE
108' - 0"
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:
1/4" = 1'-0"C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:28:13 AMHP-301
BUILDING
SECTION
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC BUILDING SECTION - NORTH SOUTHP51 IV.A.
SHEET:
DESCRIPTION:
SCALE:
c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 2016
ISSUE:C:\Users\DAVE\Documents\RAD PROJECTS\Woods Bldg\Drawings\Model\Woods Bldg - Permit 080817.rvt8/18/2017 9:29:27 AMHP-401
BUILDING PHOTOS
432 EAST HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
WOODS
BLDG
APARTMENT
HPC MINOR REVIEW 08/18/17
WEST COURT FACADE SOUTH FACADE FROM WEST
SOUTH FACADE
SOUTH & EAST FACADES EAST FACADEP52 IV.A.
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 122 W. Main Street - Minor Development, Commercial Design and Growth
Management Review, Public Hearing
DATE: September 27, 2017
______________________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY: 122 W. Main was built as an office building in 1995. It was developed by the Ko
family, who at the time owned 4 ½ townsite lots, including the land beneath 122 W. Main and
property to the west, where they operated Asia Restaurant (formerly Arthur’s) in two Victorian
era homes linked together around 1980. Shortly after the construction of 122 W. Main, the Ko’s
condominiumized the property, identifying the restaurant at 132 W. Main and the commercial
structure at 122 W. Main as two separate units (Ajax View Commercial Building and Northstar
Office Building, respectively). The condominiums were sold and the restaurant use ceased.
132 W. Main is landmark designated. 122 W. Main is not landmarked but like 132, it is located
within the Main Street Historic District. The application before HPC is primarily related to 122
W. Main. Currently this building houses three floors of commercial space in a basement, main
floor and second floor. The applicant proposes an interior remodel to convert the existing second
floor and a new loft addition into two lodge units.
HPC is asked to conduct Minor Development/Commercial Design review concerning the exterior
changes to 122 W. Main and to grant Growth Management allocations for two new lodge units
from the pool of lodge allotments available for 2017. The lodge units trigger review of a
number of other topics including new regulations requiring the retention of Second Tier
Commercial Space, Pedestrian Amenity, Transportation Impact Analysis, and Trash and
Recycling area.
The proposal is one of the first to be reviewed under a number of land use provisions adopted at
the conclusion of the 2016/2017 moratorium, including new design guidelines. This
circumstance, and the fact that analysis of the dimensional limitations of the 122 W. Main project
require calculations of the building to the west, not owned by this applicant, have produced a
fairly complex discussion given the classification of the review as “Minor.” There are a number
of issues that staff finds require continuation and restudy to comply with the land use code.
APPLICANT: Timberline Bank, 633 24 Road, Grand Junction, CO 81505, represented by
BendonAdams.
ADDRESS: 122 W. Main, Northstar Office Building Units 118-120, 122-124, 126-128, and
common areas, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, PID # 2735-124-77-011 thru -013 and 2735-
124-77-800.
ZONING: MU, Mixed Use.
P53
IV.B.
2
MINOR DEVELOPMENT/COMMERCIAL DESIGN
122 W. Main is a non-historic property in the Main Street Historic District. HPC is the body
charged with historic preservation design review in the District, and since the use of the property
is commercial, Commercial Design Review is also needed. The guidelines for these processes
are one and the same and they are identified in Exhibit A. The scope of work involved in this
application is limited, so the process has been identified to be Minor, a one-step review. The
Criteria for Minor Review are identified in Exhibit B.
Staff Response: The existing building was approved by HPC in 1990 according to the design
guidelines in place at the time. The architecture evokes a traditional home, reflecting the form,
fenestration and materials characteristic of the neighborhood.
The impetus of the remodel is the creation of lodge units. Associated with that project, the
applicant proposes to convert the existing one story porch to a porch which is about two feet
deeper with a roof deck on top. Larger windows are proposed on the first and second floors of
the south façade of the building. A pair of dormers are to be added on the back half of the roof to
facilitate the new loft space, and a large roof deck is to extend over the parking area.
The proposal includes eliminating the existing steps to the front porch and creating a ramp that
runs directly from the sidewalk towards the entry, improving accessibility which is currently
oriented towards the alley.
As a remodel, the proposal is subject to the design guidelines chapters covering General
Guidelines, Pedestrian Amenity and Main Street Historic District.
Staff has a number of concerns with the work on the south façade of the building. First, the new
windows on this façade are rather contemporary, creating inconsistency with the fenestration on
the other three sides of the structure, which will be unaltered. Solid to void patterns are
significantly changed on the south, especially at the second floor deck. The existing south facing
doors appear to be a standard 6’8”, while the new doors appear to be approximately 9’ tall.
Below is a comparison of existing and proposed.
P54
IV.B.
3
Staff finds the fenestration changes to be in conflict with guidelines 1.35, 3.10 and 3.11 found in
Exhibit A, which call for remodels to be in keeping with remaining features of the subject
structure and call for relationship to context. A rendering in the packet (seen below) illustrates a
different concept, with a transom provided at the second floor doors. While this doesn’t resolve
all of the issues, the transom does relate to the header of the remaining doors and windows and
provides a better relationship to those windows by including divided lights. Staff recommends
restudy of the new doors and windows on the south façade.
Staff also finds the proposed extended
front porch and deck above it to be out
of alignment with the design guidelines,
namely 3.7, which calls for front
porches to be similar in size and shape
to those seen traditionally. While a
front porch is a very important feature
of the district, a depth of about 6’ is
typical. Extending the porch
approximately 2’ on both the ground
floor and the upper floor creates a
significant street-facing outdoor deck
which is not found on any other
property in the Main Street Historic
District. An important characteristic of
porches in this neighborhood is that
they are a one story element, reducing
the scale of structures. Introducing
activity and furnishings on the second
level is a significant character change to
P55
IV.B.
4
the building in staff’s opinion. Where second floor decks exist on Main Street’s historic
structures, they are much more limited in size, for example the upper floor balconies seen on the
Sardy House. Staff recommends the depth of the existing front porch be unaltered and that the
area of upper floor deck be more limited.
Reconsideration of extending the porch may be also be preferable because of impact on
Pedestrian Amenity. Currently, it appears that the site as a whole, including 132 W. Main, does
not provide 25% of the land dedicated to Pedestrian Amenity. Under the new code, a remodel on
the property does not require the applicant to come into compliance with the 25% minimum so
long as no existing Amenity is eliminated. By extending the front porch and providing the
cantilevered flat roof that projects out from the porch element, existing Pedestrian Amenity is
removed. This cannot happen without an HPC determination that removal is appropriate, and the
applicant would have to pay a substantial cash-in-lieu fee of approximately $90,000 to cover the
900 square foot shortfall between the required 3,375 square feet required and the 2,466 square
feet provided. There are other forms of Pedestrian Amenity that the applicant could propose, but
they are not contemplated in the application.
Looking at other proposed exterior work, the new dormers appear to violate the 28’ height limit.
Between 122 W. Main Street and 132 W. Main Street is a large lightwell that benefits the below
grade spaces. Building height within 15 lateral feet of this feature is measured from the bottom
of the lightwell, making the dormers potentially over today’s height limit. In order to exempt the
dormers from this calculation, they must be reduced in size to be no more than 50% of the area of
roof planes to which they are attached.
Review of this project involves mitigation for a number of community impacts identified in the
land use code.
Second Tier Commercial Space. Second Tier Commercial Space is a newly defined type of
commercial space which, by virtue of its location in areas of a building without direct access and
street presence, has typically provided opportunities for a variety of businesses. This type of
space has been determined to be declining through redevelopment and so a new requirement to
preserve a certain amount of Second Tier Spaces in any redevelopment was adopted. For this
project, the application identifies the existing Second Tier space in the basement and second
floor and proposes to retain half that amount of net leasable area in the basement, without a direct
connection into any other commercial space or lodge space in the building. No further review of
this topic is required by HPC. All calculations will be verified at building permit and the HPC
resolution will include conditions of approval stated in the land use code to allow future audit of
the use of the space by the Community Development Department. There are no restrictions on
who may occupy this space or what rent may be charged, but the physical characteristics of the
space will be monitored.
Parking and Transportation Impact Analysis. The property has 14 on-site parking spaces that
were required mitigation for the 1990 commercial expansion at 122 and 132 W. Main Street,
including the two required affordable housing units located in 132 W. Main. The proposal being
considered now by HPC is only required to mitigate for any increased parking generation. This
means that today’s requirements for Transportation and Parking that would generated by the
existing development of the site must be compared to the Transportation and Parking need
P56
IV.B.
5
generated by the existing development and proposed changes. The applicant has provided net
leasable and net livable calculations for both of the condominium units. The result is that the
work entailed in this proposal actually reduces the parking requirement by 1.5 spaces (or 1.5
parking “units,” since the new Parking requirements allow for options other than on-site parking
spaces.) The lodge use, vs. the commercial space it is replacing, generates fewer daily vehicle
trips to the site according to the models the City has developed. This provides the applicant with
the opportunity to address their currently inadequate Trash and Recycling Area by converting
one of the surplus parking spaces to this use. The applicant has completed a Transportation
Impact Assessment form for the project and plans to contribute to transportation efficiency by
supplying all employees of the commercial tenant with bus passes. A new bike rack is proposed
in front of 122 W. Main as well.
Trash and Recycling. The Environmental Health Department oversees compliance with the
Space Allotment for Trash and Recycling Storage stated in the Municipal Code. The 1990
approval for development of 122 and 132 W. Main appears to have identified a very minimal
area (approximately 50 square feet) for trash and recycling at the far west end of the site. At
some point 122 W. Main appears to have started using a required parking space behind their
building for their own trash needs. This review offers the opportunity to create a more formal
arrangement that meets Environmental Health’s requirements. The property as a whole needs a
minimum of 200 square feet for Trash and Recycling. The dedicated area is to be 20’ long
against the alley, 10’ deep and with 10’ of clearance from the ground. It appears that the existing
50 square feet waste area being used by 132 W. Main will remain as-is. This applicant is
proposing a space behind 122 W. Main which is 10’ wide at the alley and 17’ deep. This is not
only below the 200 square feet that the code requires for a lodge, but the longest dimension is
perpendicular to the alley rather than parallel to it. Environmental Health has preliminarily
indicated that they are prepared to allow the unique space through their administrative Special
Review process, however the applicant suggests the area will be enclosed and no drawings of the
enclosure have been provided. Also, staff has noted that the 10’ height clearance is not being
met due to the fact that some of the trash is below a large new rear deck being provided for the
lodge. A post supporting the deck lands in the designated Trash and Recycling area and the area
also appears to encroach into a walkway which is identified as a General Common Element.
This pathway must provide a sufficient accessible route from all tenant spaces to the trash
enclosure. Clarification is needed before this plan can proceed.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT, CHANGE IN USE
The proposal being considered by HPC is only required to mitigate for any increased Full-Time
Employee generation directly associated with the new work. This means that today’s
requirements for affordable housing mitigation of the existing development on the site must be
compared to the affordable housing mitigation generated by the existing development and
proposed changes. The applicant has provided net leasable and net livable calculations for both
of the condominium units. The result is that about 0.5 fewer FTEs are associated with the
proposed use of the site than with the existing use of the site. No mitigation is required. The
applicant does not receive any credit for “over-mitigation,” nor can the two existing deed
restricted affordable housing units in 132 W. Main be altered.
In addition to calculating mitigation, Growth Management review includes tracking annual
development to ensure compliance with the adopted limits on annual growth of the City. Each
P57
IV.B.
6
year, 112 “lodge pillows” may be granted. Each bedroom in a lodge development is assumed to
amount to two pillows. This proposal includes three bedrooms, or 6 pillows. Much of the 2017
allotment is currently earmarked for Gorsuch House and Crystal Palace, who’s applications
preceded this one. There are adequate pillows remaining to be awarded to this lodge.
It should be noted that this lodge contains only two units, one of which can be, but doesn’t have
to be, locked off and accessed separately from the other unit. Staff is sensitive to the possibility
of future use of this space as a free market apartment, which is not permitted. A lodge must offer
overnight accommodations to the general public on a short-term basis. Exhibit F lists the
existing lodges participating in the City’s Small Lodge program. Snow Queen and Chalet Lisl,
lodges of 8 and 9 units respectively, have been actively used to accommodate overnight guests
for decades. Both have characteristics which will be required conditions of approval for this
lodge, including on-site guest registration and management services. The City has the authority
to periodically audit this lodge to inspect occupancy records.
______________________________________________________________________________
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
· approve the application,
· approve the application with conditions,
· disapprove the application, or
· continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
______________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC continue the hearing to restudy the
fenestration on the south façade, to eliminate the porch extension and reduce the upper floor
deck, to maintain the existing Pedestrian Amenity, to restudy the dormers relative to height, and
to better resolve the Trash and Recycle area.
A preliminary list of proposed conditions of approval, once the issues above are resolved is as
follows:
1. 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.
2. Per Section 26.412.080.B.3, Second Tier Commercial Space, Requirement, of the Aspen
Municipal Code, issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Letter of Completion for
ground floor commercial space is contingent upon the issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy or Letter of Completion for all second tier space located within the
development. An agreement, acceptable to the City Attorney, outlining the process for
completion and occupancy of ground floor and second tier commercial space, to be
signed by the Community Development Director, shall be required as part of the
Development Documents, and shall be required prior to issuance of a core and shell or
tenant finish building permit.
P58
IV.B.
7
3. Per Section 26.412.080.D of the Aspen Municipal Code, Second Tier Commercial Space
Auditing, the Community Development Director may require periodic operational audits
of Second Tier Commercial Space to ensure compliance with the Land Use Code.
4. The two lodge units approved through this land use application are expected to remain in
compliance with the definition of a Hotel (Lodge) Use, as defined in the Aspen Municipal
Code and amended from time to time, until a Change in Use or equivalent approval may
be granted by the City in the future.
5. The two lodge units approved through this land use application may not be used in a
manner consistent with the definition of a Residential Use, as defined in the Aspen
Municipal Code and amended from time to time, until a Change in Use or equivalent
approval may be granted by the City in the future.
6. Per Section 26.575.210 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Lodge Occupancy Auditing, the
Community Development Director shall be authorized to require periodic operational
audits of lodge developments to ensure compliance with the Land Use Code and
requirements for lodge operations.
7. All calculations will be verified at the time of Building Permit review.
8. The applicant must secure a Special Review approval for the Trash and Recycling area
from Environmental Health.
9. 6 lodge pillows from the 2017 Growth Management allocations are granted for the
project.
Exhibits:
Resolution #__, Series of 2017
A. Design Guidelines
B. HPC Minor Review Criteria
C. Commercial Design Review Criteria
D. GMQS Criteria
E. Transportation Criteria
F. List of Lodges participating in Small Lodge program
G. Application
P59
IV.B.
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
APPROVING MINOR DEVELOPMENT, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR 122 W. MAIN, NORTHSTAR OFFICE BUILDING
UNITS 118-120, 122-124, 126-128, AND COMMON AREAS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF
ASPEN, COLORADO
RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2017
PARCEL ID: # 2735-124-77-011 thru -013 and 2735-124-77-800
WHEREAS, the applicant, Timberline Bank, represented by BendonAdams, submitted an
application requesting Minor Development, Commercial Design Review and Growth
Management Review for the property located at 122 W. Main, Northstar Office Building Units
118-120, 122-124, 126-128, and common areas, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for
compliance with the applicable review standards and recommended approval with conditions;
and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and considered the
development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, reviewed and
considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and invited public
comment at a duly noticed public hearing on September 27, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission approved the proposal, with conditions, by a
vote of __ to __.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC grants Minor Development, Commercial Design Review and Growth Management
Review with the following conditions:
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 27th day of September,
2017.
Approved as to form: Approved as to content:
_________________________________ ____________________________________
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Jeffrey Halferty, Chair
Attest:
_________________________________
Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk
P60
IV.B.
Aspen Historical Society 1
The purpose of Commercial Design Review
is to preserve and to encourage appropriate
architecture that creates walkable
neighborhoods and supports the heritage
of Aspen.
The Standards and Guidelines below apply
to all projects subject to Commercial Design
Review.
Site Planning and Streetscape
The original townsite was platted in 1880
based on an orthogonal pattern, regardless
of topography. Orienting buildings parallel to
the street reinforces the traditional network of
streets and alleys and enhances the pedestrian
experience.
Today, given the increased height and density
of development, site planning and the
relationship to streets and adjacent properties
have a particularly important role in shaping
neighborhood character.
Original Townsite of Aspen - 1896 Willits Map
Special care should be taken when placing a
building within the River Approach and Mountain
Base character areas. The majority of parcels
in these areas are not located on the traditional
townsite grid and topography of the site should be
given additional consideration.
1.1 All projects shall provide a context study.
•The study should include the relationship to adjacent
structures and streets through photographs,
streetscape elevations, historic maps, etc.
1.2 All projects shall respond to the traditional
street grid.
•A building shall be oriented parallel to the street
unless uncharacteristic of the area. Refer to specific
chapters for more information.
•Buildings on corners shall be parallel to both streets.
General
General Guidelines Page 11P61
IV.B.
1.3 Landscape elements (both hardscape and
softscape) should complement the surrounding
context, support the street scene, and enhance
the architecture of the building.
•This applies to landscape located both on-site and in
the public right-of-way.
•High quality and durable materials should be used.
•Early in the design process, consider stormwater
best management practices as an integral part of the
landscape design process.
1.4 Where there is open space on a site, reinforce
the traditional transition from public space, to
semi-public space to private space.
•This may be achieved through a fence, a defined
walkway, a front porch element, covered walkway, or
landscape.
1.5 Maintain alignment of building facades where
appropriate.
•Consider the entire block of a neighborhood to
determine appropriate building placement. Carefully
examine and respond to the variety of building
alignments that are present.
•Consider all four corners of an intersection and
architectural context to determine appropriate
placement for buildings located on corners.
•Consider the appropriate location of street level
Pedestrian Amenity when siting a new building.
1.6 When a building facade is set back, define the
property line. Review the context of the block
when selecting an appropriate technique.
Examples include:
•A fence which is low in height and mostly transparent
so as to maintain openness along the street.
•Landscaping, though it may not block views of
the architecture or a Pedestrian Amenity space.
Hedgerows over 42 inches are prohibited.
•Benches or other street furniture.
Landscape design can enhance relationships between
pedestrian access and architecture.
The iconic Elks Building sits on its property lines.
Hardscape can enhance the street scene.
Page 12 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P62
IV.B.
Alleyways
Alleys are an important feature of most of the
Character Areas. Traditionally, Aspen alleyways
were unpaved, supported a range of building
materials, and often had small buildings located
along them. They continue to function as a utilitarian
location for back of house operations, deliveries,
required utilities, and mechanical areas.
Staying true to traditional development, alleys are
an appropriate area for simple building forms and
materials. It is important to design an alley facade
with special attention to reduce perceived building
mass. Wherever possible, pedestrian access and
appealing alleyscapes should be achieved in the
design. Improved access to alleyways creates
opportunities for small commercial space.
The following guidelines only apply to properties
that are adjacent to an alley.
1.7 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
•Use varied building setbacks and/or changes in
material to reduce perceived scale.
1.8 Consider small alley commercial spaces,
especially on corner lots or lots with midblock
access from the street (See Pedestrian Amenity
Section PA4).
•Maximize visibility and access to alley commercial
spaces with large windows and setbacks.
•Minimize adverse impacts of adjacent service and
parking areas through materials, setbacks, and/or
landscaping.
Alleys are often used for utilities, back of house access, and
parking.
Develop alley facades with special attention to material
selection and building form.
Alleys can be developed to help reduce perceived building mass
and provide pedestrian scale.
General Guidelines Page 13P63
IV.B.
Parking
The Aspen community values a positive pedestrian
experience and encourages walking and biking to
get around town. Designs for on-site parking should
minimize conflicts between pedestrians and cars.
The original Aspen townsite includes alleyways,
which are an appropriate location to access parking.
Neighborhoods without alleys require additional
measures to accomodate cars successfully.
Because parking areas can detract from other
desirable qualities of a neighborhood, the visibility
of on-site parking should be reduced in all locations.
The following standard only applies to properties
that are providing on-site parking.
1.9 Minimize the visual impacts of parking.
•All on-site parking shall be accessed off an alley
where one is available.
•Break up the massing of the alley facade, especially
when garage doors are present.
•Consider the potential for future retail use accessed
from alleys and the desire to create a safe and
attractive environment for cars and people.
•If no alley access exists, access should be from the
shortest block length.
•Screen surface parking and avoid locating it at the
front of a building. Landscaping and fences are
recommended.
•Consider a paving material change to define surface
parking areas and to create visual interest.
•Design any street-facing entry to underground
parking to reduce visibility. Use high quality materials
for doors and ramps and integrate the parking area
into the architecture.
Integrate parking into the architecture as a garage enclosure by
matching the color to adjacent materials.
Architectural details break up the massing of an alley and the
garage doors blend into the facade.
Screen surface parking.
Page 14 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P64
IV.B.
Building Mass, Height, and Scale
Designing a new building to fit within the context
of the neighborhood requires careful thought.
Researching historic maps, identifying nearby
historic landmarks, and defining key character
features of a neighborhood are critical steps before
designing a new building. Special care is required
for development adjacent to a designated landmark.
New development has the opportunity to positively
impact the cohesion of a neighborhood. Specific
context descriptions are provided in each Character
Area Chapter to define these features.
1.10 A new building should appear similar in scale
and proportion with buildings on the block.
1.11 A minimum building height difference of 2
feet from immediately adjacent buildings is
required.
•The height difference shall be a minimum of 15 feet
wide.
•The height difference should reflect the range and
variation in building height in the block.
•This may be achieved through the use of a cornice,
parapet or other architectural articulation.
1.12 On lots larger than 6,000 square feet, break up
building mass into smaller modules.
•A street level front setback to accommodate
Pedestrian Amenity in accordance with the Pedestrian
Amenity Guidelines may be an appropriate method to
break up building mass.
•Building setbacks, height variation, changes
of material, and architectural details may be
appropriate techniques to vertically divide a building
into modules.
Aspen contains many historic landmarks including the
Independence Square building.
Varied building heights are important for larger developments.
New construction must appear similar in scale and proportion
with buildings on its block.
General Guidelines Page 15P65
IV.B.
1.13 Development adjacent to a historic landmark
should respond to the historic resource.
•A new building should not obscure historic features
of the landmark.
•A new large building should avoid negative impacts
on historic resources by stepping down in scale
toward a smaller landmark.
•Consider these three aspects of a new building
adjacent to a landmark: form, materials and
fenestration.
•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 pedestrian scale.
•When choosing to relate to fenestration, use
windows and doors that are similar in size, shape,
and proportion to those of the historic resource.
Maps showing locations of historic landmarks
are available online, at the Aspen Historical
Society and at the Planning Office.
Stepping down to historic resources is important for
development adjacent to historic buildings.
Small scale additions to small historic resources are most
appropriate.
Relating to a historic resource through a variety of methods is appropriate.
Page 16 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P66
IV.B.
Street Level Design
Street level design directly contributes to the vitality,
walkability, and overall success of a commercial,
lodge, or mixed use area. The relationship of
entrances and storefronts to the street is critical.
Carefully considered pedestrian-scaled elements
can enhance the experience along Aspen’s streets
and reinforce neighborhood character.
1.14 Commercial entrances shall be at the
sidewalk level and oriented to the street.
•Finished floor and sidewalk level shall align for at
least 1/2 the depth of the ground floor where possible.
If significant grade changes exist on property, then
the project will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
•All buildings shall have at least one clearly defined
primary entrance facing the front lot line, as defined
in the Land Use Code. An entrance located within a
chamfered corner is an alternative. (See Commercial
Core Historic District).
•If a building is located on a corner lot, two entrances
shall be provided; a primary entrance facing the
longest block length and a secondary entrance
facing the shortest block length.
1.15 Incorporate an internal airlock or air curtain
into first floor commercial space.
•An airlock or air curtain shall be integrated into the
architecture.
•Adding a temporary exterior airlock of any material
to an existing building not allowed.
Street level entries are important pedestrian features.
Varied scaling and rhythm devices create an interesting and
inviting streetscape.
Pedestrian-scaled elements, materials and rhythms should be
incorporated.
General Guidelines Page 17P67
IV.B.
1.16 Entries that are significantly taller or
shorter than those seen historically or that
conflict with the established scale are highly
discouraged.
•Transom windows above an entry are a
traditional element that may be appropriate in
neighborhoods with 19th century commercial
buildings.
•Entries should reflect the established range of
sizes within the context of the block. Analyze
surrounding buildings to determine appropriate
height for entry doors.
1.17 ATMs and vending machines visible from
the street are prohibited.
Refer to Chapter 11 of the Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines for more information on
appropriate new construction, remodels, or
additions adjacent to landmarks.
Transom windows may be appropriate.
Entries should reflect the established range and not be over- or undersized.
OVERSIZED DOORS PREFERRED DOORS
NOTE: BUILDING CODE REQUIRES
THAT AT LEAST ONE THESE ENTRY
DOORS BE AT LEAST 3’-0” IN WIDTH.
UNDERSIZED DOORS
Historic proportions of a two-story commercial building in
Aspen.
Page 18 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P68
IV.B.
Roofscape
The roofscape of a building is considered the fifth
facade given its visibility from nearby buildings
and mountains. As such, careful attention should
be paid to creating a thoughtful, organized,
and varied roofscape. Rooftop design can be a
challenge considering the need to place mechanical
equipment, venting, and elevator shafts on the roof.
A successful roofscape can minimize the visual
impacts of these elements and also incorporate
City goals such as storm water treatment through
a green roof system or streetscape vibrancy with
an activated roof deck. Consider a birds-eye view
when creating a roof plan.
1.18 The roofscape should be designed with the same
attention as the elevations of the building.
•Consolidate mechanical equipment, including solar
panels, and screen from view.
•Locate mechanical equipment toward the alley, or
rear of a building if there is no alley access.
•Use varied roof forms or parapet heights to break up
the roof plane mass and add visual interest.
1.19 Use materials that complement the design of
the building facade.
•Minimize the visual impact of elevator shafts and
stairway corridors through material selection and
placement of elements.
1.20 Incorporate green roofs and low landscape
elements into rooftop design where feasible.
1.21 Minimize visibility of rooftops railings.
•Mostly transparent railings are preferred.
•Integrating the rooftop railing into the architecture
as a parapet or other feature, may be appropriate
considering the neighborhood context and proposed
building style.
•Set back the railing a distance that equals or exceeds
the height of the railing.
Screen rooftop features from view.
Varied roof forms enhances the neighborhood character.
The Land Use Code establishes minimum setabacks for various
rooftop features.
General Guidelines Page 19P69
IV.B.
Materials and Details
In the 19th Century, Aspen had a limited range of
architectural materials: red brick, painted wood,
glass, and locally sourced sandstone. In the mid-
century the palette expanded to include natural
wood, stucco, river rock and moss rock, metal,
concrete block, and bricks of other tones. It is
important to maintain a relationship to the existing
material palette evident in the general vicinity
while allowing some new materials and material
technology to be used.
The color palette of natural materials throughout
the commercial and lodging neighborhoods
represents Aspen’s environment, with browns
and reds being the predominant colors. High
quality materials that relate to the context of the
neighborhood and the building type are important.
Carefully consider existing color schemes and
textures within a neighborhood before selecting
materials. Paint color is variable and is not subject
to review.
Introducing a new material may require other
aspects of the architecture to show restraint.
Materials must have a proven performance in
Aspen’s extreme climate.
1.22 Complete and accurate identification of
materials is required.
•Provide drawings that identify the palette of materials,
specifications for the materials, and location on the
proposed building as part of the application.
•Physical material samples shall be presented to the
review body. An onsite mock-up prior to installation
may be required.
1.23 Building materials shall have these features:
•Convey the quality and range of materials found in
the current block context or seen historically in the
Character Area.
•Convey pedestrian scale.
•Enhance visual interest through texture, application,
and/or dimension.
•Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not
appropriate as a primary material.
•Have proven durability and weathering characteristics
within Aspen’s climate.
•A material with an integral color shall be a neutral
color. Some variation is allowed for secondary
materials.
1.24 Introducing a new material, material application,
or material finish to the existing streetscape
may be approved by HPC or P&Z if the following
criteria are met:
•Innovative building design.
•Creative material application that positively
contributes to the streetscape.
•Environmentally sustainable building practice.
•Proven durability.
1.25 Architecture that reflects corporate branding
of the tenant is not permitted.
Materials are required to convey the range and quality found in
the Character Area.
Sustainable design is encouraged through
materials, energy efficiency, fenestration, site
planning, and thoughtful open space. AACP
Policy I.1 Achieve sustainable growth practices to
ensure the long term viability and stability of our
community and diverse visitor based economy.
Page 20 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P70
IV.B.
Lighting, Service and Mechanical Areas
The character and intensity of outdoor lighting
can greatly impact neighborhood character. The
City of Aspen has comprehensive exterior lighting
standards, defined in the Land Use Code. These
standards balance the needs of the building with
the desire to enjoy the dark night skies.
When the service and mechanical areas of a
commercial building are well designed, the building
can better contribute to the overall success of the
neighborhood. Poor logistics of one building can
detract from the quality of surrounding properties.
Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to
the function of alleyways.
1.26 The design of light fixtures should be appropriate
to the form, materials, scale, and style of the
building.
1.27 Trash and recycle service areas shall be co-
located along an alleyway where one exists,
and screened from view with a fence or door.
•Screening fences shall be 6 feet high from grade
(unless prohibited by the Land Use Code), shall be
of sound construction, and shall be no less than
90% opaque, unless otherwise varied based on a
recommendation from the Environmental Health
Department.
1.28 Design trash and recycle areas thoughtfully and
within the style of the building, with the goal of
enhancing pedestrian and commercial uses
along alleys.
1.29 Delivery areas shall be located along an
alleyway where one exists.
•Shared facilities are highly encouraged.
1.30 Mechanical equipment, ducts, and vents
shall be accommodated internally within
the building and/or co-located on the roof.
•Screen rooftop mechanical equipment and venting
with a low fence or recess behind a parapet wall to
minimize visual impacts.
Reference City Municipal Code for trash size and
location requirements.
1.31 Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections
and service boxes.
•Group and discreetly locate these features.
•Use screening and materials that compliment the
architecture.
1.32 Transformer location and size are dictated
by City and utility company standards and
codes.
•Place a transformer on an alley where possible.
•Provide screening for any non-alley location.
Efficient service areas are important to the function of
alleyways.
Screen mechanical equipment and trash and recycle areas from
view.
General Guidelines Page 21P71
IV.B.
Remodel
Upgrading an existing building through a remodel
can improve energy efficiency, building function and
appearance, and meet community goals to reduce
construction waste. Altering specific features of a
building, such as replacing exterior materials or
constructing an addition to an existing building,
is considered a remodel project. A project that
reaches the demolition threshold as defined in the
Land Use Code is not considered a remodel. It
is important to carefully plan a remodel to meet
the design guidelines and neighborhood character
where feasible. Gradually bringing remodel projects
into conformance with design guidelines reinforces
neighborhood character.
These guidelines apply to projects that are
proposing changes to an existing building but do
not reach the demolition threshold.
1.33 All remodel projects shall meet Standards
1.22 and 1.23.
1.34 Consider updating windows, doors, and/
or primary entrances to better relate to the
Character Area and pedestrian experience.
1.35 Design alterations to relate to the existing
building style and form that may remain.
1.36 Incorporate elements that define the property
line in accordance with Guideline 1.6.
1.37 Creative solutions that incorporate ADA
compliance into the architecture are encouraged.
•Minimize the appearance of ramps by exploring other
on-site options such as altering interior floor levels
or exterior grade.
Replacing features such as balconies is considered a remodel.
Alterations should relate to the existing building style.
Exterior grade altered for an accessible entrance.
Page 22 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P72
IV.B.
Examples of Architectural Lighting
General Guidelines Page 23P73
IV.B.
Examples of Entries
Page 24 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P74
IV.B.
Examples of Storefront Design
General Guidelines Page 25P75
IV.B.
Examples of Architectural Details
Page 26 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P76
IV.B.
Pedestrian Amenity
Pedestrian Amenity Page 27P77
IV.B.
Well-designed open spaces should enhance
the streetscape, creatively reinforce property
boundaries, and support a variety of uses. The
goal of the Pedestrian Amenity requirement is to
create intentionally designed and meaningful open
space that conveys human scale, provides relief
from the built environment, and improves the
experience in commercial, mixed-use, and lodging
neighborhoods. Successful Pedestrian Amenity
space allows for nature to blend into the built
environment.
Most Pedestrian Amenity spaces should be open
to view from the street, open to the sky, and not
permanently enclosed with walls. Visibility adds
to vitality at the street level. These spaces should
be versatile and easily adaptable for different
uses. Restaurant seating and outdoor food vending
are particularly appropriate uses of Pedestrian
The Aspen community considers open space
to be a pedestrian amenity and a top priority.
Maintaining the feel of a natural environment
with frequent opportunities to dwell outdoors
is of utmost importance.
Pedestrian Amenity
Amenity space. Where on-site Pedestrian Amenity
is required, it should be usable and accessible
space. Pedestrian Amenity need not be available to
the public at all times, but needs to contribute to
an active streetscape and promote interaction and
engagement.
There are many different options to meet the
required Pedestrian Amenity for a property, such
as physical or operational improvements to private
property, improvements to the public right-of-way,
or cash-in-lieu payment, to be used by the City for
the creation of related amenities.
Each type of Pedestrian Amenity space and
applicable Character Areas are described in the
following standards and guidelines.
Successful amenity space provides a varied pedestrian experience.
Page 28 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P78
IV.B.
Questions to Consider
1.Is there a successful Pedestrian Amenity space
on an adjacent or nearby property already?
2.Is there good solar access?
3.How have the historic development patterns
been maintained or eroded?
4.Can the proposed Pedestrian Amenity utilize
innovative design to connect to the proposed
architecture?
5.How does the proposed Pedestrian Amenity
enhance the intersection and overall context?
6.How can the architecture create a Public
Amenity that provides the highest quality for a
variety of potential uses?Galena StreetHopkins Avenue
Pedestrian Amenity space provides relief from the built environment and an active streetscape.
A figure-ground study is helpful in identifying Pedestrian
Amenity space opportunities.
Consult the Land Use Code for
elements allowed within setbacks.
Pedestrian Amenity Page 29P79
IV.B.
Street Level Pedestrian Amenity
PA1 - (All Character Areas)
Historic maps of 19th century Aspen illustrate a
densely developed downtown core with minimal
building setbacks. This pattern generally remains
in place today. Setbacks are varied as development
moves out from the downtown core. The Design
Standards and Guidelines recognize and encourage
this historic pattern of development by providing
more Pedestrian Amenity options for properties
located outside of the Historic Districts. Properties
within the Historic Districts need to maintain historic
integrity and continuity. Street level Pedestrian
Amenity must be carefully planned to highlight, not
erode, these important development patterns.
PA1.1 Maximize solar access to Pedestrian
Amenity space on the subject property.
•At grade Pedestrian Amenity on the north side of
the street is discouraged, except when providing
a front yard along Main Street.
PA1.2 Consider all four corners of an intersection
when designing street level amenity space
on a corner lot.
•If one or more lots on the intersection already
includes a large corner Pedestrian Amenity, a new
corner amenity space may not be appropriate.
Seating can create areas to relax and interact.
Street level seating for restaurants on the property can be
considered Pedestrian Amenity.
Setbacks for street level amenity vary as development moves out from the core.
Page 30 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P80
IV.B.
Planters can define a property line.
Storefronts can line an amenity space.
Successful amenity space allows for future retail and restaurant
use.
PA1.3 Street level Pedestrian Amenity spaces
should be equal to a minimum of 1/3 of the
total Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
•For example, a requirement of 300 square feet of
Pedestrian Amenity can be comprised of three
100 square feet spaces; but cannot be comprised
of one 275 square feet space and one 25 square
feet space.
PA1.4 Street level Pedestrian Amenity shall
be within 18 inches above or below the
existing grade of the street or sidewalk
which abuts the space.
PA1.5 Street level Pedestrian Amenity areas
shall be open to the sky.
•Direct access to the Pedestrian Amenity from the
street is required.
•A street level Pedestrian Amenity space may be
covered, subject to HPC or P&Z approval. If the
space is covered, the street-facing portion shall
be entirely open.
PA1.6 Design meaningful street level space that
is useful, versatile, and accessible.
•Small unusable spaces are inappropriate.
•Consider providing space for future outdoor
merchandising or restaurant seating
opportunities when designing the space.
•Providing good solar access, capturing mountain
views, and providing seating is recommended.
•Do not duplicate existing nearby open space.
•Storage areas, delivery areas, parking areas,
or trash areas are not allowed uses within
Pedestrian Amenity space.
PA1.7 Design amenity space that enhances the
pedestrian experience and faces the street.
•On corner lots, Pedestrian Amenity space may be
considered on side streets or adjacent to the alley
rather than facing primary streets.
Pedestrian Amenity Page 31P81
IV.B.
PA1.8 Street level Pedestrian Amenity space
should reinforce the property line. Consider
the context of the block when selecting an
appropriate technique. Examples include:
•Overhangs: A cantilevered roof or retractable
awning that stretches to the property line.
•Fences: A low fence, mostly transparent, that
allows views into the Pedestrian Amenity space.
•Landscape: Low planter boxes. If including trees,
the mature tree canopy size should not prohibit
views into the amenity space. Hedgerows over 42
inches are prohibited.
•Street Furniture: Permanent, fixed benches
or other pedestrian-related elements may be
considered to establish property lines.
•Surface Material: A change in hardscape material
to differientiate between Pedestrian Amenity and
right-of-way.
PA1.9 Street level Pedestrian Amenity may be
appropriate on a case-by-case basis within
the Commercial Core Historic District.
•Consider the existing context of the block .
•Clearly define the property line as defined in
PA1.8.
•In this District, street level Pedestrian Amenity
should be subordinate to the line of building
fronts.
PA1.10 Street level Pedestrian Amenity may
include providing public access to the
mountain or river in the Mountain Base and
River Approach Character Areas through
a trail easement, subject to Parks and
Engineering approval.
PA1.11 Within the Main Street Historic District,
required building setbacks may be used
toward a Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
Changes to hardscape material is a way to reinforce the
property line.
Low planters and softscape adds to a successful amenity space.
Using a variety of techniques is appropriate.
Page 32 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P82
IV.B.
Second Floor Pedestrian Amenity
PA2 - (CC, CA, NMU, MB, SL, RA)
Second floor or rooftop amenity can bring vitality to
upper floors, provide outstanding mountain views,
create meaningful upper floor setbacks, and still
allow a building to define the property line at ground
level, which reinforces traditional commercial
development patterns.
PA2.1 A second floor Pedestrian Amenity shall
be in the form of a deck that is visible from,
and adjacent to the street.
•Railing height shall not be increased above the
minimum IBC requirement.
•Historic landmark parapets may be exempt,
subject to HPC approval.
•Railings shall be a minimum of 50% transparent
unless located in the Commercial Core Historic
District where transparent railings may not
be appropriate, given the pattern of decorative
cornices capping buildings.
PA2.2 Pedestrian Amenity is highly discouraged
on the roof of the second floor.
PA2.3 Second floor amenity shall be accessed
directly from the street.
•Remodels and historic landmarks may be
exempted from this requirement, subject to P&Z
or HPC approval.
•A separate exterior entrance is preferred.
•A public access easement may be requested by
the City as part of an approval.
PA2.4 Second floor Pedestrian Amenity should
be equal to a minimum of 50% of the total
Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
PA2.5 All second floor Pedestrian Amenity shall
be open to the sky.
•Small seasonal umbrellas or retractable canopies
may be allowed, subject to Planning Staff, HPC or
P&Z approval, as long as these features do not
cover the entire space and do not obstruct views
in from the street.
PA2.6 Design meaningful space that is useful,
versatile and accessible.
•Small unusable spaces are inappropriate.
•Consider providing space for future outdoor
merchandising or restaurant seating
opportunities.
•Providing good solar access, mountain views,
and seating is recommended.
•Storage area or trash area are not allowed uses
within pedestrian amenity space.
PA2.7 The Pedestrian Amenity shall be directly
connected to a publicly accessible area.
•A second floor Pedestrian Amenity in a lodge may
be accessible from a restaurant, lobby, or other
adjacent public space.
•Access to second floor Pedestrian Amenity shall
be integrated into the architecture, either through
an interior or exterior space.
PA2.8 Design way finding to the second floor
amenity into the architecture.
Restaurants can utilize second floor spaces successfully with outdoor seating.
Pedestrian Amenity Page 33P83
IV.B.
Pedestrian Malls Pedestrian Amenity
PA3 - (CC)
On the Pedestrian Malls, on-site amenity space may
duplicate the experiences offered by the Malls and
Wagner Park. Replicating open space can erode the
streetscape and can dilute the success of on-site
Pedestrian Amenity spaces.
PA3.1 Off-site Pedestrian Amenity or cash-in-
lieu payment for Mall improvements and
maintenance is strongly recommended. See
Section PA6 or Chapter 26.412 Commercial
Design Review of the Land Use Code for
cash-in-lieu payment calculation.
PA3.2 The design of on-site amenity on the
Pedestrian Malls requires consideration of
the following:
•The presence of other street-facing, street level
amenities in the block means that additional street
facing Pedestrian Amenity may be inappropriate.
•On corner lots, if the intersection already contains
street level amenity on the Mall, additional street
level Pedestrian Amenity should not be created.
•Spaces designed to highlight adjacent historic
landmarks may allow for a new Pedestrian
Amenity on the Mall.
•A project’s success in defining the property line
based on Standard PA1.8 may allow for a new
Pedestrian Amenity on the Mall.
•Other restrictions on the property such as
designated viewplanes may justify a new
Pedestrian Amenity on the Mall.
The Pedestrian Malls are a significant urban park in downtown
Aspen.
Proposed development along the Pedestrian Malls should
strongly consider the existing amenities.
Cash-in-lieu payment for Pedestrian Mall properties is strongly recommended.
Page 34 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P84
IV.B.
Midblock Pedestrian Amenity
PA4 - (CA, NMU, MB, RA)
Midblock walkways create open space between
buildings, activate alleyways, and provide alternative
locations for commercial space and outdoor dining.
This type of Pedestrian Amenity should be used
sparingly throughout town to preserve historic
development patterns.
PA4.1 New midblock Pedestrian Amenity
walkways shall not be located in a block
face that already has a midblock walkway.
PA4.2 Midblock Pedestrian Amenity shall provide
access to additional commercial space.
•The amount of Pedestrian Amenity of the feature
counts as double. For example, a midblock
walkway that is 500 square feet in size is equal to
1,000 square feet for the purposes of Pedestrian
Amenity calculation.
•Commercial space shall be accessed directly
from the walkway and at least 40 feet back from
the street edge.
•Midblock Pedestrian Amenity shall extend the
length of the lot to the alley and be a minimum
width of 10 feet.
PA4.3 Midblock Pedestrian Amenity walkways
shall be open to the sky.
•A midblock Pedestrian Amenity space may be
covered subject to HPC or P&Z approval. If the
space is covered, the street-facing portion shall
be entirely open.
PA4.4 Design the space to be surrounded with
high quality materials and architectural
details.
PA4.5 A midblock Pedestrian Amenity should
include lighting and landscape elements.
PA4.6 Design way finding to the midblock walkway
into the architecture.
Alternate space for commercial use is a benefit of a midblock
Pedestrian Amenity.
Midblock Pedestrian Amenity can integrate with street facing
Pedestrian Amenity.
A covered midblock amenity space is subject to HPC or P&Z
approval.
Pedestrian Amenity Page 35P85
IV.B.
Subgrade Courtyard Pedestrian Amenity
PA5 - (CA, NMU, RA)
Lower level walk-out patios, also referred to as
subgrade courtyards, may provide additional
opportunities for commercial uses. When carefully
designed, these spaces have the potential to provide
natural light and open space for commercial
tenants. The design, placement, and neighborhood
context of subgrade courtyards are critical to their
success as a positive addition to the streetscape.
PA5.1 A subgrade courtyard shall be visible
from, and adjacent to the street.
•Access shall be provided from the street.
•The measurement of a subgrade courtyard shall
not exceed 30% of the lot width.
•Railings shall allow views into the Pedestrian
Amenity space and be a minimum of 50%
transparent.
PA5.2 New subgrade courtyards are not
permitted on corner lots, unless located
along the side lot line, towards the rear of
the lot.
PA5.3 Subgrade courtyard Pedestrian Amenity
should be equal to a minimum of 30% of the
total Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
•Access and circulation are included in the
calculation of Pedestrian Amenity.
PA5.4 A subgrade courtyard shall be no more
than 10 feet below the existing grade of the
street or sidewalk which abuts the space.
PA5.5 Design of the subgrade courtyard at grade
should reinforce the property line.
•Consider the context of the block when selecting
an appropriate technique to the property line.
PA5.6 Design meaningful space that is useful,
versatile, and accessible.
•Small unusable spaces are inappropriate.
•Consider future outdoor merchandising or
restaurant seating when designing the space.
•Providing good solar access and seating is
recommended. North facing courtyards are
prohibited.
•Storage area or trash area are not allowed uses
within Pedestrian Amenity space.
PA5.7 All subgrade courtyard spaces shall be
open to the sky.
•Small seasonal umbrellas or canopies that do not
cover the entire space prohibiting views in from
the street may be allowed, subject to Planning
Staff, HPC or P&Z approval.
PA5.8 A subgrade courtyard shall be accessible
from the interior of commercial use(s)
abutting the Pedestrian Amenity space.
•Integrate clear access to this space into the
architecture through interior or exterior
corridors.
•Limit ramps, stairs and elevators leading to the
courtyard.
PA5.9 Design way finding to the subgrade
courtyard space into the architecture.
Views into a subgrade courtyard are important.
Page 36 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P86
IV.B.
Off-site Pedestrian Amenity
PA6 - (All Character Areas)
Off-site pedestrian amenity is an option when
on-site amenity is not feasible or not appropriate
as determined by HPC or P&Z. Off-site amenity
must be constructed by the applicant and include
improvements equal to or exceeding the cash-in-
lieu amount calculated according to the Land Use
Code. A permit is required for modifications within
the publicly owned right-of-way, including planting
strips, street trees, and sidewalks. In general,
the right-of-way within a given neighborhood
should have a consistent design character.
Covered walkways are found throughout Aspen’s
commercial neighborhoods. Covered walkways
introduce a one-story pedestrian scaled element to
a building and may be appropriate in specific areas.
Coordination with the Engineering Department and
Parks Department is required.
PA6.1 Off-site improvements shall be located
within the block of the subject property.
•The proposed design shall not detract from
nearby historic resources.
•The proposed design shall provide or enhance the
streetscape or historic district.
•A right-of-way may be altered to reflect the design
of an adjacent building.
•Only off-site improvements that are completed
beyond minimum Engineering requirements
shall qualify as Pedestrian Amenity.
PA6.2 Covered walkways are prohibited in blocks
that already have a similar feature.
•The final design of these features shall be
subject to Engineering Department and Parks
Department approval.
PA6.3 At least 50% of the block shall meet
standard City of Aspen right-of-way
design.
PA6.4 Additions to the streetscape should
enhance the pedestrian experience.
Off-site amenity such as benches and tables can enhance the
pedestrian experience.
Covered walkways can be appropriate in limited locations.
Pedestrian Amenity Page 37P87
IV.B.
Interior Courtyard Pedestrian Amenity
PA7 - (CC, CA, NMU)
Interior courtyards offer areas for the public to get
out of the weather and enjoy a communal space. Well
designed and successful interior courtyards are
easy to find, versatile, large, and include communal
seating. Interior Pedestrian Amenity activates and
increases presence of smaller commercial spaces
that front the courtyard.
PA7.1 Design interior courtyards to be versatile.
PA7.2 Interior courtyards shall provide primary
access to commercial uses to count as
Pedestrian Amenity.
PA7.3 Commercial spaces adjacent to an interior
courtyard shall have large storefront
windows open to the interior courtyard.
PA7.4 Interior courtyards should include
communal seating and tables.
PA7.5 Incorporate wayfinding to the interior
courtyard into the architecture.
PA7.6 Interior corridors or hallways leading
to the interior courtyard do not count as
Pedestrian Amenity space.
Interior courtyards provide opportunity for additional
commercial access.
Communal seating can help activate an interior courtyard.
Interior courtyards can provide protection from the weather
Page 38 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P88
IV.B.
Main Street Historic District
Main Street Historic District Page 53P89
IV.B.
Main Street Historic District
Preserve the residential scale of the
neighborhood and the character of the
landscaping including generous front yards,
low fences, mature trees and irrigation ditches.
A typical miner’s cottage at 208 E. Main Street.1
A Victorian brick structure, at 201 E. Main Street, covered in
stucco in the 1940s.1
128 E. Main Street, built in 1890 by Jack Atkinson, an early
prospector who made his fortune after locating the Little
Annie and Midnight Mines. The Atkinson family also owned the
brickyard that supplied the material for this home.2
History
Initially, development in Aspen was located in
close proximity to the core of town and the mines.
Development along Main Street was sparse until
the mid 1880s. The creation of a horse drawn
street-car line in 1889 contributed to the spread of
construction along Main Street and into the West
End. Some of the largest Victorian-era homes in
Aspen were built here between 1888 and 1893.
These highly visible and ornate buildings were
home to several of the families who prospered the
most from silver mining.
Page 54 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P90
IV.B.
The 300s block of Main Street in 1890.1
Alleys feature small scale historic sheds.
Looking east on Main Street in 1925.1
From its beginnings, Main Street from 7th Street to
Monarch Street was almost entirely residential. The
majority of the buildings were one story “miner’s
cottages”, with only a handful of other uses mixed
in, such as churches and a grocery store. Buildings
were primarily wood frame with gable roofs, on
open lots. A few examples of false front buildings
and flat-roofed brick structures were built as well.
One of the most beloved characteristics of Main
Street is its design as a wide boulevard lined with
cottonwoods. Ditch companies began to be formed
in the City in the early 1880s to bring water into
the townsite. Small trees were relocated from the
banks of local streams, and planted in orderly rows.
Though these trees did not reach maturity during
the mining era, Main Street, for much of its history,
has had a soft edge, grand trees, and a clearly
residential character, with landscaped front yards
and low fences surrounding many properties.
Another reflection of Main Street’s early development
can be seen in the alleys, some of which feature
small scale historic sheds, carriage houses, and
garages. Many of the alleys in this area are still
unpaved. No roads in Aspen were paved until the
early 1960s.
Main Street Historic District Page 55P91
IV.B.
Lodging at 435 W. Main Street, c. 1930s.
The original Aspen Public Library at 120 E. Main Street.
Winterskol parade, 1991.1
More than 50% of the lots in this Character Area
contain Victorian-era structures, which was the
justification for naming Main Street a historic district
in 1976. There are other important structures in this
neighborhood. For instance, starting in the 1930s,
lodging development occurred along Main Street,
first as small scale cabins and then as larger
motels. Most of those that remain are are identified
as “Small Lodges” and reviewed as an additional
Character Area.
Modernism is found on Main Street, for instance the
original public library designed by Fritz Benedict
and built at 120 E. Main Street in 1960. Though these
buildings tell Aspen’s story, they are generally
one of a kind and do not form a pattern for the
neighborhood.
Main Street is Aspen’s front porch and the first
impression as one enters town. It is the setting
for races, parades, and banners announcing
community events. Though the area is affected by
vehicular traffic more so today than in the past,
the historic scale and architectural character still
reinforce that Aspen is a small city.
Car racing on Main Street, 1953.9
Page 56 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P92
IV.B.
320 W. Main Street.
430 W. Main Street.
Existing Character
For many, Main Street is the first impression of
Aspen. It is a snapshot of Aspen’s history. The
rhythm of mature cottonwoods, ditches and
sidewalks, and generous yards with one- and two-
story Victorian buildings strongly convey Aspen’s
mining heritage. Small lodges are mixed within the
District along with modernist architecture. More
than half of the buildings in the Main Street Historic
District are designated landmarks. Preservation
of the context of historic Main Street is vital to the
designated landmarks and to Aspen’s small town
character. The majority of Main Street is 19th-
century residential buildings with gable roof forms.
Painted wood siding, simple picket fences, and
perpendicular walkways to porches are character
defining features among the Victorians. As Main
Street approaches downtown, the residential feel
gradually transitions into commercial character
with smaller yards and a greater intensity of uses.
New buildings and remodels should reflect these
characteristics. Because most properties in the
district are landmarked or fall into the Small Lodge
Character Area, there are few opportunities for new
buildings in the Main Street Character Area.
Main Street Historic District is defined by Victorian-style
architecture.
In addition to the following guidelines, historic
landmark properties are also subject to the
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
Main Street Historic District Page 57P93
IV.B.
Building Placement
Aspen’s Victorian-era buildings are parallel to the
lot lines, with the primary entrance facing the street.
This helps establish the pedestrian friendly quality
associated with the Main Street Historic District.
For many blocks within the Main Street Historic
District, front yards are similar in depth, resulting
in a relatively uniform alignment of building fronts
which contributes to the sense of visual continuity.
Maintaining the established range of setbacks,
including side yards, is important to maintaining
that continuity.
3.1 Orient a new building or addition to the street.
•All buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot
lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern.
•Generally, do not set a structure forward of any
historic resources within the block. Alignment of
front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be
made on a corner lot.
Primary entrances should face the street.
WEST M
A
I
N
S
T
WEST BL
E
E
K
E
R
S
T
SOUTH 7th STSOUTH 6th STSOUTH 5th STSOUTH 4th STSOUTH 3rd STSOUTH 2nd STSOUTH 1st STSOUTH GRAMISCH STSOUTH ASPEN STSOUTH MONARCH STSOUTH MILL STSOUTH GALENA STSOUTH HUNTER STSOUTH SPRING STSOUTH ORIGINAL STSOUTH WEST END STSOUTH CLEVELAND STSOUTH ASPEN STSOUTH MONARCH STSOUTH MILL STSOUTH GALENA STNORTH MILL STNORTH 3rd STNORTH 4th STNORTH 6th STNORTH 6th STNORTH 2nd STNORTH 1st STWEST BL
E
E
K
E
R
S
T
WEST H
O
P
K
I
N
S
A
V
E
WEST H
O
P
K
I
N
S
A
V
E
WEST H
A
L
L
A
M
S
T
EAST BL
E
E
K
E
R
S
T
EAST HO
P
K
I
N
S
A
V
E
EAST HY
M
A
N
A
V
E
EAST CO
O
P
E
R
A
V
E
EAST DU
R
A
N
T
A
V
E
EAST HO
P
K
I
N
S
A
V
E NEAL AVEGIBSON AVE LONE P
INE
RD
RI
O
G
R
A
N
D
E
P
LPUPPY SM
ITH
ST
EAST HY
M
A
N
A
V
E
EAST CO
O
P
E
R
A
V
E
EAST D
U
R
A
N
T
A
V
E
ASPEN MTN RDEAST CO
O
P
E
R
A
V
E
EAST DU
R
A
N
T
A
V
E
WATERS
A
V
E
U
T
E
A
V
E
DEAN ST
DEAN S
T
EAST GI
L
B
E
R
T
S
T
EAST SU
M
M
I
T
S
T
EAST JU
A
N
S
T
EAST HA
L
L
A
M
S
T
WEST FR
A
N
C
I
S
S
T
WEST M
A
I
N
S
T
EAST M
A
I
N
S
T
EAST M
A
I
N
S
T
MAIN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT
NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE EAST
COMMERCIAL AREA
NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE WEST
COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT
MOUNTAIN BASE
RIVER APPROACH
COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT
CHARACTER AREA MAP
MAIN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT
COMMERCIAL AREA
NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE
MOUNTAIN BASE
not to scale
RIVER APPROACH
SMALL LODGE
N
Building placement varies from one end of Main Street to
another.
Page 58 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P94
IV.B.
Architecture
Imitation faux-Victorian architecture and unrelated
contemporary architecture are inappropriate in
the Main Street Historic District. New buildings or
additions that utilize differentiation but emphasize
compatibility are most appropriate. Creating
differentiation by introducing contrasting styles
or statement buildings within the historic district
leads to the gradual erosion of character and sense
of place.
New construction should do more than relate to
context with a gable roof. Buildings that focus on the
fundamentals of architecture: spatial relationships,
hierarchy, proportion, details, materials, texture,
rhythm, and character will contribute value to the
built environment. The focus should be more on
supporting a sense of place rather than creating
a stylistic statement. The goal is not boring new
architecture: development which is creative,
responsible, simple, elegant, communicative, and
familiar is desired.
Most historic buildings in Aspen are composed of
simple forms – a simple rectangular solid with a
gable is typical. In some cases, a building consists
of a combination of simple forms. A new building
within the Main Street Historic District should
respect these traditions.
3.2 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 should
relate strongly to the historic district in at least two
of these elements. Departing from 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 district.
•When choosing to relate to materials, use
materials that appear similar in scale and finish
to those used historically in the district 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 in the historic district.
3.3 The imitation of older historic styles blurs
the distinction between old and new buildings
and is discouraged.
•Overall, details should be modest in character.
Front yards and gardens are prevalent along Main Street.
Front porches are a traditional way to create a transition from
public to private.
Building materials are typically painted wood or brick.
Main Street Historic District Page 59P95
IV.B.
Building Proportion, Scale, Height and
Width
More than half of the properties within the Main
Street Historic District are designated 19th-century
landmarks that are one to two stories and 1,000 to
2,200 square feet in size. The maximum perceived
mass of new buildings or remodels within the Main
Street Historic District should reflect this character
by creating detached buildings on a property or
through one building that is clearly broken up
into distinguishable modules using connecting
elements, material changes, or roof forms, for
example.
3.4 Construct a new building to appear similar
in scale and proportion with the historic
buildings in the district.
•Subdivide larger masses into smaller modules that
are similar in size to the historic buildings in the
historic district.
•Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize
the historic district.
•Use secondary structures to break up mass of
buildings. These are most appropriately located
along alleyways.
Roof forms shall be in character with surrounding historic
buildings.
The perception of mass can change with the material used.
Maintain relationships of scale and setbacks.
Page 60 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P96
IV.B.
3.5 Roof forms should be in character with
surrounding historic buildings.
•Roof forms should be simple.
•If applicable, gable ends should be oriented toward
the street.
•Carefully consider roof eaves, orientation of
ridgelines, roof pitch, dormers, and other features
as a way to either create compatibility or differentiate
a new building or addition.
3.6 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale
to historic buildings in the district.
•The primary plane of the front elevation should not
appear taller than historic structures.
3.7 Clearly define the primary entrance to a new
building with a front porch or similar feature.
•The front porch should be functional, and used as the
means of access to the front door.
•A new porch should be similar in size and shape to
those seen traditionally.
3.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size
and scale with the main building.
•An addition that is lower, or similar in height to the
existing building, is preferred.
3.9 When planning an addition to a building in a
historic district, preserve historic alignments
on the street.
•Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings
may align at approximately the same height.
•An addition should not be placed in a location where
these relationships would be altered or obscured.
•Detach building mass along alleyways, similar to the
pattern of traditional shed development.
New buildings should appear similar in scale to historic
buildings in the district.
The Mesa Store building is an example of a false storefront.
Front elevations are typically residential in form and
articulation.
Main Street Historic District Page 61P97
IV.B.
Details and Materials
Wood and brick are the primary building materials
found on Victorian-era buildings within the Main
Street Historic District. It is important to maintain
consistency in material palette throughout the Main
Street Historic District. Carefully consider existing
material colors, finishes, and textures within the
block before selecting materials. Study the typical
placement and character of architectural details.
3.10 Use building components that are similar in
size and shape to those of the Victorian-era
residences seen traditionally on Main Street.
•These include windows, doors, and porches.
•Overall, details should be modest in character.
3.11 Architectural details should reinforce the
historic context of the block.
•Consider how detailing can be used to create
relationships between new and old buildings while
still allowing for current architectural expression.
•Consider scale, location, and purpose of historic
detailing to inform new designs.
•It is inappropriate to imitate historic details.
3.12 Primary materials should be wood or brick.
•Alternate primary materials may be considered on a
case-by-case basis depending on the historic context
of the block.
3.13 Secondary materials should relate to the
historic context.
•More variety is acceptable for secondary materials
if a relationship to the historic palette can be
demonstrated.
•Stone should be limited to the foundation.
3.14 Use roofing materials that are similar in
appearance to those seen historically.
New construction can be referential without copying historic
details.
Painted wood mixed with natural wood is appropriate.
Page 62 Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines P98
IV.B.
EXHIBIT C
HPC MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CRITERIA
26.415.070.C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development.
3. The procedures for the review of minor development projects are as follows:
a) The Community Development Director will review the application materials and if
they are determined to be complete, schedule a public hearing before the HPC. The
subject property shall be posted pursuant to Paragraph 26.304.060.E.3.b.
b) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the
project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code
sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the
proposed project and a recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with
conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the
application, the report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the
project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
c) The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the
application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve
or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of
appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development
order.
d) The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner
within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the
procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316.
STAFF RESPONSE: Staff finds that some aspects of the proposal, identified in the memo,
require restudy to comply with the design guidelines.
P99
IV.B.
EXHIBIT B
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA
26.412.020.C Commercial Design Review, Applicability, Remodels
C. Remodels. Where work is proposed on any element of an existing building that is
addressed by the Commercial Design Review and that is not in compliance with the
Commercial, Lodging or Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines or Section
26.412.070, Pedestrian Amenity, the applicant shall make a reasonable effort to bring that
element into compliance. The Community Development Director may grant exceptions for
remodels that would require significant additional work above and beyond the scope of the
remodel in order to ensure that all features are brought into compliance.
For example, consider an existing commercial building that is entirely stucco. A project to
replace the ground level stucco material with high quality stone is proposed. The new
proposed material is required to comply with the Commercial, Lodging or Historic District
Design Standards and Guidelines. The upper level material that is not proposed to be
replaced, and is not part of the limited scope of work of the project, is not required to
comply. If the upper level stucco is disturbed during the application of the new ground level
material (through enlargement of existing windows for example) then it must be brought into
compliance with the Commercial, Lodging or Historic District Design Standards and
Guidelines.
26.412.060. Review Criteria.
An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or
denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
A. Guidelines and Standards
1. The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines are
met as determined by the appropriate Commission. The Standards and Guidelines
include design review criteria that are to be used to determine whether the application is
appropriate.
2. All applicable standards in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design
Standards and Guidelines shall be met unless granted a Variation pursuant to Section
26.412.040.D, Variations.
3. Not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines
must occur on a case-by-case basis. The applicable Commission must:
a. determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines are adequately met in
order to approve a project proposal;
b. weigh the applicable guidelines with the practicality of the measure.
STAFF RESPONSE: Staff finds that some aspects of the proposal, identified in the memo,
require restudy to comply with the design guidelines.
P100
IV.B.
Pedestrian Amenity
The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.070, Pedestrian Amenity.
26.412.070. Pedestrian Amenity.
Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, vital, human-scale
downtown commercial district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere.
Pedestrian amenity space can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public
rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas.
A. Applicability and Requirement. The requirements of this Section shall apply to the
development of all commercial, lodging and mixed-use development within the CC, C-1, MU,
NC, S/C/I, L, CL, LP and LO Zone Districts, as well as any Essential Public Facility pursuant to
section 26.412.020(A). This area represents the City's primary pedestrian-oriented downtown, as
well as important mixed-use, service and lodging neighborhoods. Development in these zone
districts consisting of entirely residential uses is exempt from these provisions. Remodel and
renovation activities that do not trigger demolition, and which maintain 100% of the existing
pedestrian amenity present on the site are exempt from this Section. Changes to pedestrian
amenity space as a result of required accessibility or building code compliance are exempt from
compliance with the 25% requirement if demolition is not triggered.
Twenty-five percent (25%) of the Gross Lot Area of properties within the applicable area shall
be provided as pedestrian amenity regardless of existing onsite pedestrian amenity amount. A
project that qualifies as demolition, as defined in Section 26.104.100, must meet the
requirements of this Section. Vacated rights of way do not count toward pedestrian amenity
requirements.
Calculation of pedestrian amenity shall include stairs, walkways or other means of accessing
pedestrian amenity space from rights-of-way or internal circulation ways counted as non-unit
space per Section 26.575.020. Airlocks providing access to internal pedestrian amenity space,
and which meet the criteria provided in Section 26.575.020 may be included in the calculation of
pedestrian amenity space.
B. Provision of pedestrian amenity. Unless specified, the Planning and Zoning Commission or
Historic Preservation Commission shall determine the appropriate method or combination of
methods for providing this required amenity. One (1) or more of the following methods may be
used to meet the requirement.
1. On-site pedestrian amenity. On-site pedestrian amenity options are provided within the
Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines.
a. For properties located on rights-of-way designated as pedestrian malls including
Hyman and Cooper Streets between Galena and Mill Streets, and Mill Street between
Hyman Street and Durant Street, new pedestrian amenity is limited to second floor or
street level. Existing on-site pedestrian amenity may be maintained, with any
difference between the existing amount and the 25% required to be provided as cash-
in-lieu.
P101
IV.B.
2. Off-site pedestrian amenity. These may be improvements to private property, public
property or public rights-of-way.
a. An easement providing public access over an existing public amenity space for which
no easement exists may be accepted if the easement provides permanent public access
and is acceptable to the City Attorney.
b. Off-site improvements shall:
i. equal or exceed the value of an otherwise required cash-in-lieu payment as
determined by the City Engineer, and
ii. be consistent with any public infrastructure or capital improvement plan for
that area.
3. Cash-in-lieu provision. Cash-in-lieu for pedestrian amenity requirements may be
provided, subject to the following requirements:
a. For properties located on rights-of-way designated as pedestrian malls including
Hyman and Cooper Streets between Galena and Mill Streets, and Mill Street between
Hyman Street and Durant Street, cash-in-lieu of on-site public amenity space is
encouraged. Fees collected as cash-in-lieu for public amenity of designated
pedestrian malls shall be held in reserve by the City for the maintenance and
improvement of the pedestrian malls.
b. For properties not located adjacent to the pedestrian malls, where on-site public
amenity is not appropriate or may not be feasibly provided due to site or development
constraints, cash-in-lieu may be accepted as an alternative. Such conditions shall be
determined on a case-by-case basis at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning
Commission or Historic Preservation Commission.
c. A cash-in-lieu payment for 50% or more of the required pedestrian amenity for
properties not located on a pedestrian mall or less than 100% for properties located on
a pedestrian mall requires City Council approval.
4. Alternative method. The Commission may accept any method of providing a pedestrian
amenity not otherwise described herein if it finds that the alternative method meets the
intent of pedestrian amenity, equals or exceeds the monetary value, or meets the purpose
and intent of these regulations to an equivalent extent, of an otherwise required on-site
amenity space or cash-in-lieu payment.
5. Pedestrian links. If the City has adopted a trail plan incorporating mid-block pedestrian
links, any required public amenity space must, if the City shall so choose, be applied and
dedicated for that use. The development of mid-block walkways to access second tier
P102
IV.B.
commercial spaces located off the primary street frontage, which are not part of an
adopted trail plan, may be counted towards public amenity space requirements for a
property and must be designed in accordance with the Commercial, Lodging and Historic
District Standards and Guidelines.
STAFF RESPONSE: Pedestrian Amenity must only be addressed if the applicant decreases the
qualified Pedestrian Amenity that exists on the site now. The applicant does propose a decrease
and would mitigate through a cash-in-lieu payment. Staff finds that the criteria for cash-in-lieu
or not met. A fee may be accepted if on-site amenity is not appropriate or not feasible. Staff
does not find that to be the case. Generous front yards are typical of the Main Street Historic
District. The applicant does not have to extend the front porch into the Amenity and in fact staff
has found that to not meet the design guidelines.
26.412.080. Second Tier Commercial Space
The Aspen Area Community Plan establishes policies to encourage a balanced, diverse and vital
commercial use mix that meets the needs of the year-round residents and visitors, and to
facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs. These
design standards ensure “second tier” space in commercial zones are maintained, allows for the
redevelopment of commercial properties, maintains a meaningful ratio of commercial space that
serves the day to day needs of residents and visitors, and allows for creative designs that add
variety and interest to the City’s commercial areas.
A. Applicability.
1. Development or redevelopment. This section applies to all new development and
redevelopment in the CC, C-1, S/C/I, NC, and MU districts. Proposals that are 100%
lodge projects shall be exempted from this requirement. Remodel and renovation
activities that do not trigger demolition, and which maintain 100% of the existing second
tier space present on the site are exempt from this Section. Changes to second tier space
as a result of required accessibility or building code compliance are exempt from
compliance with the section if demolition is not triggered.
2. Second Tier Commercial Space. See Section 26.104.100, Definitions.
3. Limitations. No portion of Second Tier Commercial Space may be used as storage,
office, and the like, for another commercial space. For instance, if a retail shop is located
on the ground floor, the basement Second Tier Commercial Space may not be used as the
office or storage for that business, and must instead be an entirely separate space.
B. Requirement.
1. The following minimum and maximum net leasable area shall be designed as second tier
commercial space:
P103
IV.B.
Table 26.412.100-1
Zoning District Second tier commercial space provided
Minimum Maximum
Commercial Core (CC) 20% 75%
Commercial (C-1) 25% 75%
Service Commercial Industrial (S/C/I) 35% --
Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 35% --
Mixed Use (MU) 25% 50%
2. The redevelopment of any building that includes existing second tier commercial space
shall provide the greater of fifty-percent (50%) of the existing space or the minimums
outlined in Table 26.412.100-1.
3. In order to satisfy the requirements of this Section, issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy or Letter of Completion for ground floor commercial space is contingent
upon the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Letter of Completion for all second
tier space located within the development. This includes the completion of all utilities,
structural assemblies and other building accessibility requirements, and life safety
elements necessary for the completion of inspections, to permit occupancy, and facilitate
the intended use of the space. This may include the installation of HVAC systems, as
well as grease traps, ventilation and fire suppression systems for restaurant, bar, bakery,
commercial kitchen and related uses. An agreement, acceptable to the City Attorney,
outlining the process for completion and occupancy of ground floor and second tier
commercial space, to be signed by the Community Development Director, shall be
required as part of the Development Documents, and shall be required prior to issuance
of a core and shell or tenant finish building permit.
4. Pedestrian amenity is encouraged to provide access to second tier commercial spaces
within a development. This access may be provided via a mid-block walkway accessing
commercial space off the primary street frontage, a sub-grade courtyard, an internal
enclosed courtyard, or access to upper level commercial areas.
STAFF RESPONSE: There are two areas of the existing building that contain qualified Second
Tier Commercial Space, the basement and the 2nd floor. The total area of qualified space is
1,619 square feet. The remodel must retain the equivalent of half that area. The applicant is
achieving this through net leasable located in the basement, not directly accessible from any
prime space or other use in the structure.
P104
IV.B.
EXHIBIT D
GROWTH MANAGEMENT CRITERIA
26.470.070.F. Remodeling of existing commercial development. Remodeling of existing
commercial buildings and portions thereof shall be exempt from the provisions of growth
management, provided that demolition is not triggered, no additional net leasable square footage
is created, and there is no change in use. If redevelopment involves an expansion of net leasable
square footage, the replacement of existing net leasable square footage shall not require growth
management allotments and shall be exempt from providing affordable housing mitigation only
if that space previously mitigated. Existing, prior to demolition, net leasable square footage and
lodge units shall be documented by the City Zoning Officer prior to demolition. Also see
definitions of demolition and net leasable commercial space, Section 26.104.100.
26.470.100.B Change in use. A change in use of an existing property, structure or portions of
an existing structure between the development categories identified in Section 26.470.020
(irrespective of direction), for which a certificate of occupancy has been issued and which is
intended to be reused, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and
Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. No more
than one (1) free-market residential unit may be created through the change-in-use.
26.470.100.H Expansion or new lodge development. The expansion of an existing lodge or
the
development of a new lodge shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the
Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria:
1) If the project contains a minimum of one (1) lodge unit per five hundred (500) square
feet of lot area, the following affordable housing mitigation standards shall apply:
a. Affordable housing net livable area equaling a percentage, as defined in the unit
size table below, of the additional free-market residential net livable area shall be
mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
b. A percentage, as defined in the table below, of the employees generated by the
additional lodge, timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units and associated
commercial development, according to Paragraph 26.470.100.A.1, Employee
generation, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
Average Net Livable
Area of Lodge Units
Being Added to the
Parcel
Affordable Housing Net
Livable Area Required
(Percentage of Free-
Market Net Livable
Area)
Percentage of
Employee Generation
Requiring the
Provision of Mitigation
600 square feet or
greater 30% 65%
500 square feet 30% 40%
400 square feet 20% 20%
P105
IV.B.
300 square feet or
smaller 10% 10%
When the average unit size falls between the square-footage categories, the
required affordable housing shall be determined by interpolating the above
schedule. For example, a lodge project with an average unit size of four hundred
fifty (450) square feet shall be required to provide mitigation for thirty percent
(30%) of the employees generated.
c. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph
26.470.100.D, Affordable housing.
2) If the project contains less than one (1) lodge unit per five hundred (500) square feet
of lot area, the following affordable housing mitigation standards shall apply:
i. Affordable housing net livable area equaling thirty percent (30%) of the
additional free-market residential net livable area shall be mitigated
through the provision of affordable housing.
ii. Sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional
lodge, timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units and associated commercial
development, according to Paragraph 26.470.050.B, Employee generation,
shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
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.
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.
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.
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,
P106
IV.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.
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:
Development Order applied for
during calendar year -
Mitigation required
(percent of employees generated by the
existing space that has previously not
mitigated)
2017 15%
2018 18%
2019 21%
2020 24%
2021 27%
2022 30%
2023 33%
2024 36%
2025 39%
2026 42%
2027 45%
2028 48%
2029 51%
2030 54%
2031 57%
2032 60%
2033 63%
2034 65%
P107
IV.B.
4) 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.
5) 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.
6) For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on
Section 26.470.110.D.
7) For all affordable housing provided as mitigation pursuant to this chapter or for the
creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540:
a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority, as amended. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard.
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. A recommendation from the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard, and
the approved forms of mitigation methods shall be based on this recommendation.
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 .25 FTEs, a cash-in-
lieu payment may be made by right. If the total mitigation requirement for a
project is .25 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.
P108
IV.B.
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
8) 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 RESPONSE: The application touches on two provisions of the Growth Management
chapter; Change in Use and Expansion or New Lodge Development. In either case, only the
newly created employee generation resulting from the project must be mitigated.
Using the employee generation rates specified in the land use code based on zone district, use,
and floor level, the existing development on this site generates approximately 30.78 full-time
equivalent employees. The existing net leasable area found at 122 W. Main and 132 W. Main
combined is 9,385 square feet (2,573 + 6,812).
The proposed net leasable area that will be located at 122 W. Main and 132 W. Main combined
is 8,509 square feet (1,697 + 6,812) and net livable/lodge is 1,443 square feet. This
configuration generates 30.11 FTEs.
The proposed development actually represents a slight decrease in employees because a lodge
requires fewer employees per square foot of space than commercial. No affordable housing
mitigation is required.
Regarding Growth Management allotments for the project, 6 pillows are available to award to
this project.
P109
IV.B.
EXHIBIT E
TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT CRITERIA
26.515.060.C. Review Criteria. All development and redevelopment projects are required to
submit a Mobility Plan, which shall include and describe a project’s mitigations for TIA and
Parking Requirements. The Engineering, Transportation, and Community Development
Department staff shall determine whether the project conforms to this Chapter requirements
using the following standards:
1. Project TIA and the resulting mitigation program meets requirements for exempt,
minor, or major project categories as outlined in the TIA Guidelines.
2. Project provides full mitigation for the Parking Requirements pursuant to Section
26.515.050.
3. If existing development is expanded, additional Parking Requirements shall be
provided for that increment of the expansion.
4. If existing development is redeveloped, on-site parking deficits may not be
maintained unless all parking, or at least 20 spaces are provided as Public Parking.
Projects failing to meet the requirements of this section may apply for a variation to the Planning
and Zoning Commission through the Special Review process (Section 26.430 and Section
26.515.080).
STAFF RESPONSE: The parking requirement for the project is based on the degree to which
new parking demands are generated by the proposal.
The existing development on this site, including the two affordable housing units at 132 W.
Main, was required in the 1990 approval to be addressed with 14 on-site spaces along the alley.
The required parking is in place.
The proposed net leasable area that will be located at 122 W. Main and 132 W. Main combined
is 8,509 square feet. In addition, there will be two lodge units and two affordable housing units.
The total mitigation required under today’s code is 12.5 parking units, less than what exists now.
No additional mitigation is required.
P110
IV.B.
Hotel Address Phone Website
# of
Units Contact Sq Ft
Annabelle Inn 232 W Main St 970.925.3822 http://www.annabelleinn.com/35 Charley Case 15,243
Jeanine
Marianne Neiley
Base 1 - if
move forward 700 E Cooper N/A 40?Mark Hunt
Boomerang
Lodge 500 W Hopkins N/A 47 Steve Stunda
Carol Blomquist
Carol Blomquist
Hearthstone
House
134 E Hyman
Ave 970.925.7632 http://www.hearthstonehouse.com/16 Scott Sinta 8,857
Brian Schaefer
Brian Schaefer
Hotel Lenado 200 S Aspen St 970.925.6246 http://www.hotellenado.com/19 Denise Virtue
Molly Gibson 101 W Main St 970.925.3434 http://www.mollygibson.com/53 19,843
Hotel Aspen 110 W Main St 970.925.3441 http://www.hotelaspen.com/45 16,218
Michael Brown
Aaron Brown
Craig Melville
Craig Melville
Snow Queen
Lodge
124 E Cooper
Ave 970.925.8455 http://www.snowqueenlodge.com/8 David Ledingham 3,088
St. Moritz
Lodge
334 W Hyman
Ave 970.925.3220 http://www.stmoritzlodge.com/37 Michael Behrendt 13,534
Tyrolean
Lodge 200 W Main St 970.925.4595 http://www.tyroleanlodge.com/16 Pierre Wille 6,525
Shadow
Mountain
Lodge
232 W Hyman
Ave Office. 970.274.9759
10
Wally Wilson
Prospector
Condos
301 E Hyman
Ave 970-920-2030 19 Janet Hunt
11,715
3,810
7,392
31,052
Mountain
Chalet
Hotel Durant
Chalet Lisl
Aspen
Mountain
Lodge
Molly Gibson,
Hotel Aspen,
Mountian
House
Jeff Bay
(See above)
333 E Durant
Ave 970.925.7797 http://www.mountainchaletaspen.com/58
122 E Durant
Ave 970.925.8500 http://www.durantaspen.com/20
100 E Hyman 970.925.3520 http://www.chaletlisl.com/9
311 W Mian St 970.925.7650 http://www.aspenmountainlodge.com/38
P111IV.B.
August 22, 2017
Updated September 18, 2017
City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
c/o Amy Simon
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Minor HPC and GMQS Application for
Northstar Building – 122 West Main Street, Aspen, Colorado
Dear Historic Preservation Commission and Ms. Simon:
122 West Main Street is not historic; however, it is located within the Main Street Historic District
and is under the purview of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Zoning for the property
is City of Aspen Mixed-Use (MU). The MU Zone District allows a wide variety of land uses
including office, retail, restaurant, lodging, and residential. The owner of 122 would like to convert
the upper floor office into two lodge rooms. Minor exterior changes and a small roof dormer toward
the rear of the property are proposed to update the building and to accommodate the change in
use. The basement and first floor will remain commercial (office) use. There is no change
proposed to the adjacent 132 West Main “Ajax View” building.
Existing Conditions
The 13,500 square-foot property contains two buildings, 122 West Main and 132 West Main,
connected with a large lightwell. The Northstar Building (122) shares the parcel with the adjacent
Ajax View building (132) which also houses several commercial offices and two deed restricted
affordable housing rental units. The 132 property is a local historic landmark, added to Aspen’s
historic inventory in 1994. Both properties combined have a total of about 10,472 sf of floor area,
which is well under the allowed 1:1 FAR or 13,500 sf. 122 West Main Street is assigned 3 surface
parking spaces with alley access.
Proposed Remodel
The owner of 122 West Main requests Minor HPC Review, Consolidated Commercial Design
Review, and Growth Management Review for the change in use of the upper floor office to lodge
units and some minor exterior changes to refresh the building. A total of 496 sf of floor area is
proposed to be added as part of the remodel. The additional floor area is captured in a new loft
space above the second floor. The proposed lodge use includes a reception area on the ground
floor. Off-site management will provide services for the lodge units such as cleaning.
A second floor deck facing Main Street, dormers toward the rear of the property and a ramp to
provide ADA access to the front entrance are proposed. The front yard setback is reduced from
P112
IV.B.
2
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
15’ to 10’ to accommodate a larger front porch that minimizes the length of the ramp into the
primary entrance. Larger windows facing the street and a redesigned main entrance are
proposed to update the existing building.
The basement space meets the Second Tier commercial space requirement with separate access
from the main level commercial space. Pedestrian Amenity is provided through required setbacks
and cash in lieu payment to meet the minimum 25% for the entire parcel.
The addition of two lodge rooms requires a change in use through Growth Management,
Transportation Impact Analysis, and compliance with the City’s trash and recycle requirements
for commercial use that does not include a restaurant. One of the three parking spaces along the
alley is proposed to be converted to a trash and recycle area. Environmental Health Special
Review is required for the proposed dimensions of the trash area which meets the overall square
footage, but is oriented to be deeper than it is wide along the alley. Two surface spaces remain
for the 122 building. The remaining parking requirement is mitigated through TIA measures as
described in Exhibit C and L.
We look forward to working with you on this minor remodel project. Please do not hesitate to
contact me for additional information that will aid your review.
Sincerely,
Sara Adams, AICP
BendonAdams LLC
sara@bendonadams.com
970.925.2855
Exhibits:
A – Minor Development and Commercial Design Review
B – Growth Management and Change in Use
C – Transportation and Parking Management
D - Land Use Application
E – Dimensional Requirements Form
F – Pre- application summary
G – Agreement to Pay
H – Authorization to Represent
I – Proof of Ownership
J – HOA form
K – Vicinity Map
L – Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA)
M – Environmental Health Special Review for trash dimensions
N - Drawings
P113
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
Exhibit A
HPC Minor Development and Commercial Design Review
26.415.060.B.2 The City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, as amended, which
are on file with the Community Development Department, will be used in the review of requests
of certificates of no negative effect or certificates of appropriateness. Conformance with the
applicable guidelines and the common development review procedures set forth in Chapter
26.304 will be necessary for the approval of any proposed work:
Please find an analysis of the Commercial Core Historic District Design Standards and
Guidelines. Commercial Design Standard Review uses the same design guidelines for
the Commercial Core Historic District and the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. As
described below, the project conforms with the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines/
Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines.
26.412.040. Commercial Design Procedures for Review.
E. Consolidation of applications and combining of reviews. If a development project includes
additional City land use approvals, the Community Development Director may consolidate or
modify the review process accordingly, pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B of this title.
If a proposed development, upon determination of the Community Development Director in
consultation with the applicant, is of limited scope, the Director may authorize the application to
be subject to a one-step process that combines both conceptual and final design reviews…
Response - This application proposes to remodel the existing building with minor updates
to the windows, entrance, decks, roof and interior spaces. All pertinent guidelines listed
in the Commercial Core Historic District Character Area are addressed below.
26.412.060 Review Criteria.
An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or
denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
A. Guidelines and Standards
1. The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines are
met as determined by the appropriate Commission. The Standards and Guidelines
include design review criteria that are to be used to determine whether the application is
appropriate.
2. All applicable standards in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design
Standards and Guidelines shall be met unless granted a variation pursuant to Section
26.412.040.D.
3. Not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines
must occur on a case-by-case basis. The applicable Commission must:
a. determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines are adequately
met in order to approve a project proposal.
P114
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
b. weight the applicable guidelines with the practicality of the measure.
1.33 All remodel projects shall meet Standards 1.22 and 1.23.
1.22 Complete and accurate identification of materials is required.
• Provide drawings that identify the palette of materials, specifications for the
materials, and location on the proposed building as part of the application.
• Physical material samples shall be presented to the review body. An onsite mock-
up prior to installation may be required.
1.23 Building materials shall have these features:
• Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block context or
seen historically in the Character Area.
• Convey pedestrian scale.
• Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension.
• Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a primary
material.
• Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen’s climate.
• A material with an integral color shall be a neutral color. Some variation is allowed
for secondary materials.
Response – All materials are identified on the proposed elevations (Sheet A2.3). The
existing wood siding is not proposed to change. Metal clad windows and sliding door are
proposed. Composite roof shingles and simple metal railings are proposed. These
materials are found throughout the Main Street Historic District and are consistent with
surrounding landmark buildings.
1.34 Consider updating windows, doors, and/or primary entrances to better relate to the
Character Area and pedestrian experience.
Response - Updated windows, doors and primary entrances are included in the proposed
remodel to better relate to the District and to freshen up the existing building.
1.35 Design alterations to relate to the existing building style and form that may remain.
Response – The proposed minor changes relate to the existing traditional building form.
1.36 Incorporate elements that define the property line in accordance with Guideline 1.6.
Response – There is no change to the footprint of the building or the site plan with the
exception of a new ADA ramp to access the front porch and primary entrance.
1.37 Creative solutions that incorporate ADA compliance into the architecture are
encouraged.
• Minimize the appearance of ramps by exploring other on-site options such as
altering interior floor levels or exterior grade.
P115
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
Response – A new ramp is proposed to provide direct access from the Main Street sidewalk
to the primary entrance. Access is also provided from the parking area to the front porch
along the east elevation.
Main Street Historic District Design Guidelines
3.1 Orient a new building or addition to the street.
• All buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional
grid pattern.
• Generally, do not set a structure forward of any historic resources within the block.
Alignment of front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner
lot.
Response – no change.
3.2 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 should relate strongly to the historic district in at least two of these
elements. Departing from one of these categories allows for creativity and a
contemporary design response.
o When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the
historic district.
o When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in
scale and finish to those used historically in the district and use building
materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale.
o When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are
similar in size and shape to those in the historic district.
Response – Both building form and the wood siding currently on 122 West Main are
traditional elements found within the Historic District. The minor remodel proposes
updated windows, doors and a second story street facing deck that are more
contemporary in design.
3.3 The imitation of older historic styles blurs the distinction between old and new
buildings and is discouraged.
• Overall, details should be model in character.
Response – Proposed materials and details are simple and understated, and do not mimic
adjacent historic landmarks.
3.4 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic
buildings in the district.
• Subdivide larger masses into smaller modules that are similar in size to the historic
buildings in the historic district.
• Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic district.
• Use secondary structures to break up mass of buildings. These are most
appropriately located along alleyways.
Response – no change.
3.5 Roof forms should be in character with surrounding historic buildings.
P116
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
• Roof forms should be simple.
• If applicable, gable ends should be oriented toward the street.
• Carefully consider roof eaves, orientation of ridgelines, roof pitch, formers, and
other features as a way to either create compatibility or differentiate a new building
or addition.
Response – Two simple shed dormers are proposed on the east and west elevations to
improve head height and the overall experience in the loft area above the second floor. The
dormers have been carefully placed toward the rear of the building behind a gable roof form
to shield visibility from Main Street.
3.6 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to historic buildings in the district.
• The primary plane of the front elevation should not appear taller than historic
structures.
Response - The scale of the front elevation is unchanged. Windows and doors are proposed
to be updated. The redesigned windows and doors are consistent with similar features on
historic landmarks.
3.7 Clearly define the primary entrance to a new building with a front porch or similar
feature.
• The front porch should be functional, and used as the means of access to the front
door.
• A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
Response – The materials and entrance of the existing front porch is proposed to change.
The front entrance is shifted to the east and the entrance to the front porch is also shifted to
the east to provide direct access from the porch ramp to the front door. The size of the porch
is not proposed to change.
3.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
• An addition that is lower, or similar in height to the existing building, is preferred.
Response – The new shed dormers are hidden behind the side gables as viewed from Main
Street. The dormers are visible from the side elevations and the rear elevation; however they
add interest to the simple roof form. The dormers are small in size and scale and relate to the
proportions of the 122 W. Main building.
3.9 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic
alignments on the street.
• Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately
the same height.
• An addition should not be placed in a location where these relationships would be
altered or obscured.
• Detach building mass along alleyways, similar ot the pattern of traditional shed
development.
Response – no change.
P117
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
3.10 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian-
era residences seen traditionally on Main Street.
• These include windows, doors and porches.
• Overall, details should be modest in character.
Response – Details are simple are modest in character. The windows and doors on the first
floor are more traditional than those proposed on the upper floor. The upper floor sliding glass
doors provide a contemporary design element that contrasts with the very traditional form,
materials and details of the rest of the existing building.
3.11 Architectural details should reinforce the historic context of the block.
• Consider how detailing can be used to create relationships between new and old
buildings while still allowing for current architectural expression.
• Consider scale, location, and purpose of historic detailing to inform new designs.
• It is inappropriate to imitate historic details.
Response – Proposed architectural detailing is simple and understated.
3.12 Primary materials should be wood or brick.
• Alternate primary materials may be considered on a case by case basis depending
on the historic context of the block.
Response – No change is proposed to the existing wood siding on 122 W. Main Street.
3.13 Secondary materials should relate to the historic context.
• More variety is acceptable for secondary materials if a relationship to the historic
palette can be demonstrated.
• Stone should be limited to the foundation.
Response – Secondary materials are metal and glass which are consistent with the historic
context.
3.14 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically.
Response – Composite shingles are proposed as part of the remodel.
26.412.070. Pedestrian Amenity
B. Provision of Pedestrian Amenity. Unless specified, the Planning and Zoning Commission
or the Historic Preservation Commission shall determine the appropriate method or combination
of methods for providing this required amenity. One (1) or more of the following methods may be
used to meet the requirement.
1. On-site pedestrian amenity. On-site pedestrian amenity options are provided within the
Commercial, Lodge and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines.
Response – The enlarged front porches trigger the 25% pedestrian amenity requirement.
The property is located within the Main Street Historic District which is permitted to use
required setbacks to meet the onsite pedestrian amenity requirement. The proposed
pedestrian amenity is 27%, above the required 25% minimum for the 122 W. Main portion
of the property; however the City calculates pedestrian amenity based on the entire 13,500
P118
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
sf lot. The application proposes a mix of onsite amenity and cash in lieu considering the
remodel project is limited to 122 only. Pedestrian Amenity Guidelines and Standards are
addressed below:
PA1.1 Maximize solar access to Pedestrian Amenity space on the subject property.
• At grade Pedestrian Amenity on the north side of the street is discouraged, except
when providing a front yard along Main Street.
Response – The existing pedestrian amenity space at street level is proposed to
remain. It is slightly reduced with the larger front porches.
PA1.2 Consider all four corners of an intersection when designing street level
amenity space on a corner lot.
• If one or more lots on the intersection already includes a large corner Pedestrian
Amenity, a new corner amenity space may not be appropriate.
Response – There is no change proposed to the amenity space located at the corner
intersection.
PA1.3 Street level Pedestrian Amenity spaces should be equal to a minimum of 1/3
of the total Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
Response – The proposed street level space exceeds 1/3 of the requirement.
PA1.4 Street level Pedestrian Amenity shall be within 18 inches above or below the
existing grade of the street or sidewalk which abuts the space.
Response – Street level Amenity is within 18 inches of the surrounding grade.
PA1.5 Street level Pedestrian Amenity areas shall be open to the sky.
• Direct access to the Pedestrian Amenity from the street is required.
• A street level Pedestrian Amenity space may be covered, subject to HPC or P&Z
approval. If the space is covered, the street-facing portion shall be entirely open.
Response – All areas are open to the sky.
PA1.6 Design meaningful street level space that is useful, versatile, and accessible.
• Small unusable spaces are inappropriate.
• Consider providing space for future outdoor merchandising or restaurant seating
opportunities when designing the space.
• Providing good solar access, capturing mountain views, and providing seating is
recommended.
• Do no duplicate existing nearby open space.
• Storage areas, delivery areas, parking areas, or trash areas are not allowed uses
within Pedestrian Amenity space.
Response – Proposed Amenity space is located in the setbacks and is passive open
space, which is consistent with the Main Street Historic District and PA1.11.
P119
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
PA1.7 Design amenity space that enhances the pedestrian experience and faces
the street.
• On corner lots, Pedestrian Amenity space may be considered on side streets or
adjacent to the alley rather than facing primary streets.
Response – Proposed Amenity space faces the street and enhances the open yard
pattern found within the Main Street Historic District.
PA1.8 Street level Pedestrian Amenity space should reinforce the property line.
Consider the context of the block when selecting an appropriate technique.
Response – Amenity space is open and passive, which is consistent with PA1.11.
PA1.9 Street level Pedestrian Amenity may be appropriate on a case by case basis
within the Commercial Core Historic District.
Response – n/a.
PA1.10 Street level Pedestrian Amenity may include providing public access to the
mountain or river in the Mountain Base and River Approach Character Areas
through a trail easement, subject to Parks and Engineering approval.
Response – n/a.
PA1.11 Within the Main Street Historic District, required building setbacks may be
used toward a Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
Response – The subject property is located within the Main Street Historic District.
Building setbacks are used toward the Pedestrian Amenity requirement.
26.412.070.B.3 Cash in lieu provision
Cash in lieu for pedestrian amenity requirements may be provided, subject to the following
requirements:
a. For properties located on rights of way designated as pedestrian malls including Hyman and
Cooper Streets between Galena and Mill Streets, and Mill Street between Hyman Street and
Durant Street, cash in lieu of on-site public amenity is encouraged. Fees collected as cash in lieu
for public amenity of designated pedestrian malls shall be held in reserve by the City for the
maintenance and improvement of the pedestrian malls.
Response- n/a. Property is located on Main Street.
b. For properties not located adjacent to the pedestrian malls, where on-site public amenity is
not appropriate or may not be feasibly provided due to site or development constraints, cash in
lieu may be accepted as an alternative. Such conditions shall be determined on a case-by-case
basis at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation
Commission.
Response – The site is developed with two buildings – 132 W. Main is an historic landmark
with a large addition and 122 W. Main is a non-historic building. The 13,500 sf lot is
condominiumized to separate ownership into 132 (Ajax View) and 122 (NorthStar). This
P120
IV.B.
Exhibit A – Commercial Design
122 W. Main Street
proposed remodel is only for 122 W. Main Street. The area attributed to 122 W. Main
exceeds the 25% pedestrian amenity requirement; however, the new Code requires 25%
pedestrian amenity for the entire property which in this case includes 132 W. Main. There
are no changes proposed to 132 W. Main Street. The owners of 122 W. Main are in a
difficult situation, but nevertheless propose cash in lieu to mitigate for the lack of
pedestrian amenity at the adjacent 132 W. Main Street. The calculation is provided below:
13,500 sf lot * 25% = 3,375 sf required pedestrian amenity
122 W. Main = 858 sf
132 W. Main = 1,608 sf
Total onsite = 2,466 sf
Remainder requested as cash in lieu = 3,375 – 2,466 = 909 sf as cash in lieu
909sf * $100 = $90,900 cash in lieu
c. A cash in lieu payment for 50% or more of the required pedestrian amenity for properties not
located on a pedestrian mall or less than 100% for properties located on a pedestrian mall requires
City Council approval.
Response – n/a. The requested cash in lieu is less than 50% of the requirement.
26.412.080 Second Tier Commercial Space
B. Requirement.
2. The redevelopment of any building that includes existing second tier commercial space shall
provide the greater of fifty-percent (50%) of the existing space or the minimums outlined in Table
26.412.100-1. (For Mixed Use the minimum is 25% and the maximum is 50%).
Response - Existing second tier space within the 122 W. Main Street building is located
on the basement and upper floor.
Table 1. Second Tier Calculation
Existing Proposed
Basement (second tier) 640 837
Main floor (prime) 954 861.5
Second floor (second tier) 979 n/a
Total commercial 2,573 1,698.5
Total second tier 1,619 837
Required second tier 50% - 809.5 sf Min. 25% - 424.6 sf
The proposed basement is second tier commercial which meets the required 809.5 sf of
net leasable space. It has a separate entrance and meets the definition of second tier.
P121
IV.B.
Exhibit B – GMQS
122 West Main Street
Exhibit B
Growth Management
26.470.070.F Remodeling or existing commercial development. Remodeling of
existing commercial buildings and portions thereof shall be exempt from the provision of
growth management, provided that demolition is not triggered, no additional net leasable
square footage is created, and there is no change in use. If redevelopment involves an
expansion of net leasable square footage, the replacement of existing net leasable square
footage shall not require growth management allotments and shall be exempt from
providing affordable housing mitigation only if that space previously mitigated.
Response – No new net leasable square footage is added to the commercial
component of the project; therefore, the commercial net leasable portion of the
project is exempt from growth management.
26.470.100. B Change in Use. A change in use of an existing property, structure or
portions of an existing structure between the development categories identified in Section
26.470.020 (irrespective of direction), for which a certificate of occupancy has been
issued and which is intended to be reused, shall be approved, approved with conditions
or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements
outlined in Section 26.470.080. No more than one (1) free market residential unit may be
created through the change in use.
Response – The project proposes to convert existing commercial space to two
lodge rooms. Section 26.470.080 is addressed below.
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 form which the
allotments are requested.
Response – 2017 allotments are available for 4 pillows (two new lodge units).
B. Development Conformance. The proposed development conforms to the
requirements and limitations of this Title, of the zone district for 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.
P122
IV.B.
Exhibit B – GMQS
122 West Main Street
Response – The minor remodel project conforms to the requirements of the Land
Use Code and to the Mixed Use zone district. Commercial Design and Minor
Development Review for a property located within a Historic District are
consolidated with the GMQS application.
C. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade
public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be
a 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.
Response – The proposed remodel converts existing commercial space to two
lodge units. Sufficient infrastructure and facilities are available for the proposed
change in use.
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.
Response – not applicable. See Section 26.470.070.F above.
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.
Response – The Land Use Code calculates 0.6 FTEs per lodging bedroom in the
Mixed Use Zone District. The proposed two units and total of 3 lodge bedrooms
equals 1.8 FTEs. The complete calculation is provided in part 4 below.
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 201, and by 3% each year
thereafter until 65% is reached.
Response – no increase in net leasable commercial space is proposed. Demolition
is not triggered with the remodel.
4) 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
P123
IV.B.
Exhibit B – GMQS
122 West Main Street
being converted to commercial space, the mitigation shall be based on the
requirements for commercial space, outlined in subsections 1 and 3.
Response – Mixed use has a generation rate of 3.6 FTEs per 1,000 square feet of
net leasable commercial space (2.7 FTEs per 1,000 square feet of net leasable
commercial space for upper and lower floors), and 0.6 FTEs per lodge bedroom.
Table 1. Existing commercial net leasable
Net leasable area FTEs
Basement 640 1.73
Main floor 954 3.43
Upper floor 979 2.64
Total 7.8
Table 2. Proposed project
Net leasable area FTEs
Basement 837 2.26
Main floor 861.5 3.1
Upper floor + Loft 3 bedrooms (2 lodge units) 1.8
Total 7.16
The existing building generates 7.8 FTEs and the change in use of the upper floors
generates 7.16 FTEs. There is no increase in FTEs associated with the project.
5) 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.
Response – n/a.
6) For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined base don
Section 26.470.110.D.
Response – n/a.
7) For all affordable housing provided as mitigation pursuant to this chapter or for the
creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26. 540.
Response – n/a.
8) 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).
Response – n/a.
P124
IV.B.
Exhibit C – Parking/Transportation
122 West Main Street
Exhibit C
Transportation and Parking Management
26.515.060.C. Review Criteria. All development and redevelopment projects are
required to submit a Mobility Plan, which shall include and describe a project’s mitigations
for TIA and Parking Requirements. The Engineering, Transportation, and Community
Development Department staff shall determine whether the project conforms to this
Chapter requirements using the following standards:
1. Project TIA and the resulting mitigation program meets requirements for
exempt, minor or major project categories as outlined in the TIA Guidelines.
Response – A completed TIA is attached. Due to the reduction in
commercial net leasable space, the project generates a negative number of
trips. The TIA provisions mitigate for just under 5 trips. One of these trips
will be used to offset the 0.79 parking space requirement noted in Part 3
below.
2. Project provides full mitigation for the Parking Requirements pursuant to
Section 26.515.050.
Response – Demolition is not triggered with the proposed remodel.
3. If existing development is expanded, additional Parking Requirements shall be
provided for that increment of the expansion.
Response – The parking requirement is below:
Commercial net leasable is 1,698.5 sf = 1.7 spaces
2 lodge units = 1 space
Total = 2.7 spaces
In the Mixed Use Zone District 60% of the parking requirement, or 1.62
spaces, must be met onsite. The remainder may be through up to 1 TIA
measure or cash in lieu. The existing building at 132 W. Main has 6,812 sf
of net leasable area requiring 6.81 parking spaces. Two affordable housing
units require 2 parking spaces, so a total of 8.81 parking spaces are
required for 132 W. Main. Currently there are three parking spaces along
the alley allotted to 122. A total of 14 parking spaces are located along the
alley for the entire property.
The existing site plan is very complicated and includes light wells,
walkways, etc. that are shared between Northstar and Ajax View. The trash
P125
IV.B.
Exhibit C – Parking/Transportation
122 West Main Street
requirement for a 20’ x 10’ area means that one of the existing parking
spaces must be turned into a trash/recycle enclosure. We propose
converting one of the parking spaces into a 10’ x 17’ trash enclosure.
The parking requirement is 8.81 spaces (132 W. Main building) + 2.7 spaces
(122 W. Main building) or 11.51 spaces. 13 onsite spaces are provided
after 1 space is converted to a trash area.
4. If existing development is redeveloped, on-site parking deficits may not be
maintained unless all parking, or at least 20 spaces are provided as Public Parking.
Response – n/a.
P126
IV.B.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application
PROJECT:
Name:
Location:
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________
Applicant:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
Historic Designation
Certificate of No Negative Effect
Certificate of Appropriateness
-Minor Historic Development
-Major Historic Development
-Conceptual Historic Development
-Final Historic Development
-Substantial Amendment
Relocation (temporary, on
or off-site)
Demolition (total demolition)
Historic Landmark Lot Split
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
122 West Main Street
Northstar Office Bulding, Units 118 - 120, Units 122- 124, Units 126-128, and
common areas.
2735-124-77-011 thru -013, and 2735-124-77-800
Jason Taets, Timberline Bank
633 24 Road, Grand Junction, CO 81505
970-205-1911 jasont@timberlinebank.com
Sara Adams, BendonAdams
300 S. Spring St., #202, Aspen CO 81611
925-2855 sara@bendonadams.com
Growth Management
Commercial Design Review
two story commercial building
two story commercial and lodge building. Minor exterior changes.
exhibit D
P127
IV.B.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high
water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the
Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Proposed % of demolition: __________
DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Height
Principal Bldg.:
Accessory Bldg.:
On-Site parking:
% Site coverage:
% Open Space:
Front Setback:
Rear Setback:
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N, S, E, W
Side Setback:
Side Setback:
Combined Sides:
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:__________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Distance between
buildings:
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
P128
IV.B.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high
water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the
Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Proposed % of demolition: __________
DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Height
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N, S, E, W
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Distance between
buildings:
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
P129
IV.B.
HPC
122 W. Main Street
Minor Development
273512477800
1
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Reilly Thimons, 970.429.2754 DATE: 4/19/17
PROJECT: 122 W. Main Street
REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Bendon, chris@bendonadams.com
DESCRIPTION:
122 W. Main Street is a portion of a larger property located within the Main Street Historic District. 122 W. Main is a
two story condominiumized building, called Northstar Office Building. Next door, on the same lot is 132 W. Main, a
designated structure with three floors (including the basement) of commercial space and surface parking spaces.
The owner of 122 W. Main would like to remodel and change the second story commercial space to a lodge use
with the intent of creating one lodge unit with an additional loft sleeping area. The Applicant has also proposed the
addition of a second story deck on the front of the existing structure facing Main Street to serve the proposed lodge
unit. Any exterior changes require Minor Development Review by HPC. HPC must find that the relevant review
criteria in Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code and the applicable design guidelines are met. City Council recently
adopted new Commercial Design Standards via Ordinance 33, Series of 2016. This project is subject to Chapter
26.412, Commercial Design Review, and will be reviewed under the General and Main Street Historic District
chapters of the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines.
The application will also need to comply with Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System where proof of
any previous mitigation will be submitted with the Land Use application. Under the new Growth Management Quota
System regulations, Section 26.470.070.F and Section 26.470.080.D.4 mitigation will be required for the conversion
of a commercial use to a lodge use. This requested change in use of the second story from commercial to lodge is
subject to review and will be combined under Section 26.304.060.A Review Procedures and Standards.
The Applicant must provide information on how the proposal will meet the definitions and standards for occupancy
and floor plan requirements found in Chapter 26.100 General Provisions, Lodge Key and Lodge Use definitions.
The definition of Hotel states that it is a building or parcel containing individuals units for overnight lodging. The
definition requires multiple units to be considered a lodge. The proposal will be subject to the updated requirements
of Chapter 26.515, Transportation and Parking Management and will need to provide documentation for existing on-
site parking spaces and any required mitigation for a change in use.
All land use reviews will be conducted by HPC because the property is in the historic district. The area on which the
Northstar Office Building sits is not landmarked (see Ordinance #56, Series of 1976 and Ordinance #33, Series of
1994.)
REVIEW PROCESS:
Step 1: HPC Minor Development, Commercial Design Standards Review, GMQS
City Council has an optional call-up of the conceptual review approval
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.100 General Provisions (Definitions)
P130
IV.B.
2
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.412 Commercial Design Review
26.415 Historic Preservation
26.415.070.D Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development
26.470 Growth Management Quota System
26.470.040 Allotment Procedures
26.470.050 Calculations 26.470.070.F Remodeling of existing commercial development
26.470.080.D.4 Affordable Housing Mitigation
26.515 Transportation and Parking Management
26.575 Miscellaneous
26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
26.710.180 Mixed Use (MU) zone district and Municipal Code Section
12.10 Space Allotment for Trash and Recycling Storage
Below are links for your convenience:
Land Use App:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/businessnav/ApprovaltoDevelop/Land%20Use%20Application%20
Form.pdf
Land Use Code:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-Land-Use-
Code/
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/HPC/New%20Historic%20Preservation%20Guideline
s.pdf
Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines:
https://app.box.com/s/wddyzggiei2wzr9imau5day9u61h21cc
Review by: Staff for complete application and recommendation
HPC for decision
Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC
Planning Fees: $4,550 Deposit for 14 hours of staff time (less/additional planning hours are refunded
or billed at a rate of $325/hour)
Referral Fees: N/A
Total Deposit: $4,550.00
To apply, submit 1 complete copy of the following information:
Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement.
Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).
P131
IV.B.
3
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)
A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the
proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application
and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.
A proposed site plan.
Scaled drawings of all 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.
Selection of primary exterior building materials.
Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic
property or historic district including at least one (1) of the following: diagrams, maps, photographs,
models or streetscape elevations.
Documentation showing the proposal meets all Transportation Mitigation Requirements as outlined in
the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and Mitigation Tool, available online at:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Recent-
Code-Amendments/. A copy of the tool showing trips generated and the chosen mitigation measures
should be included with the application.
A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation
showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State
of Colorado.
An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
Once the application is determined by the Planning Office to be complete, please submit:
Total deposit for review of the application.
A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format. Please provide text and graphics as
separate files.
Disclaimer:
P132
IV.B.
4
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.
P133
IV.B.
970-205-1911
jasonT@timberlinebank.com
Timberline Bank
633 24 Road
Grand Junction, CO 81505
P134
IV.B.
P135
IV.B.
P136
IV.B.
P137
IV.B.
P138
IV.B.
P139
IV.B.
P140
IV.B.
P141
IV.B.
P142
IV.B.
P143
IV.B.
P144
IV.B.
P145
IV.B.
P146
IV.B.
jasont@timberlinebank.com 970-205-1911
P147
IV.B.
P148IV.B.
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
APPLICANT CONTACT
INFORMATION:
NAME, COMPANY,
ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL
Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated
AM -1.5 5 -0.06 4.94 0.00
Sara Adams
BendonAdams
300 S. Spring Street, #202, Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-2855
sara@bendonadams.com
Summary and Narrative:
Narrative:
122 W. Main St.
122 W. Main St.
Trip Generation
SUMMARY
Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE
MITIGATED
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.
Project Description
In the space below provide a description of the proposed project.
A minor interior remodel of an existing commercial building and the change of use of the upper floor from commercial to two lodge units.
MMLOS
Include any additional information that pertains to the MMLOS plan in the space provided below.
no additional information.
TDM
Explain below the transit fare subsidy strategy. The successful project will provide subsidized/discounted daily or monthly public transit
passes for the RFTA valley system. These passes can be partially or wholly subsidized by the project, with additional points being provided
for larger subsidies. Many entities use revenue from parking to offset the cost of such a project.
Timerline Bank offers RFTA bus passes to all employees.
P149
IV.B.
Explain the proposed trip reduction marketing/incentive program in the space provided. A trip reduction marketing programs should
include a number of the following strategies: orientation to trip reduction programs and benefits; orientation to specific alternative
transportation modes such as bus service information, bike/walk route maps, etc.; publishing of web or traditional informational
materials; events and contests such as commuter fairs, new employee orientations, bike to work days, etc.; educational opportunities
such bicycle commute/repair classes; web or traditional materials aimed at guests/customers such as bike/walk maps, free transit day
passes, etc.; incentive programs such as prizes, rewards or discounts for alternative commuting.
Orientation to trip reduction programs and benefits and other alternative commuter opportunities will be available during employee
orientation.
Include any additional information that pertains to the TDM plan in the space provided below.
no additional information.
MMLOS Site Plan Requirements
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
Enforcement and Financing
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.
An audit may be requested by the City to determine the success of the proposed measures.
Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures.
Enforcement is handled by the City of Aspen. Financing for the plan depends on available funds.
Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures
Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures.
Transportation Mitigation measure will be implemented as soon as possible after the completion of the remodel.
P150
IV.B.
= input= calculation
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
APPLICANT CONTACT
INFORMATION:
NAME, COMPANY,
ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL
Minor
Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total
Commercial (sf)-876.0 sf -1.37 -0.62 -1.99 -1.45 -2.18 -3.63
Free-Market Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Affordable Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lodging (Units)2 Units 0.29 0.22 0.50 0.32 0.30 0.62
Essential Public Facility (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.09 -0.40 -1.49 -1.13 -1.88 -3.01
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
AM Peak Average PM Peak Average
Trips Generated
AM Peak-Hour PM Peak-Hour
TOTAL NEW TRIPS
ASSUMPTIONS
ASPEN TRIP GENERATION
Is this a major or minor project?
122 W. Main St.
122 W. Main St.
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.
Sara Adams
BendonAdams
300 S. Spring Street, #202, Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-2855
sara@bendonadams.com
Trip Generation
8/16/2017
Instructions:
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 Roundabout
Helpful 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 Questions
P151
IV.B.
= input
= calculation
5
Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points
1
Does the project propose a detached sidewalk where an attached
sidewalk currently exists? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer
meet standard minimum widths?
No 0
2 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width greater than the standard
minimum width?No 0
3 Does the project propose a landscape buffer greater than the
standard minimum width?No 0
0
4
Does the project propose a detached sidewalk on an adjacent
block? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard
minimum widths?
No 0
5 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width on an adjacent block
greater than the standard minimum width?No 0
6 Is the proposed landscape buffer on an adjacent block greater than
the standard minimum width?No 0
0
7 Are slopes between back of curb and sidewalk equal to or less than
5%?Yes 0
8 Are curbs equal to (or less than) 6 inches?Yes 0
9
Is 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 0
10 Does the project propose an improved crosswalk? This measure must
get City approval before receiving credit. No 0
0
11 Are existing driveways removed from the street?No 0
12 Is pedestrian and/or vehicle visibility unchanged by new structure or
column?Yes 0
13 Is the grade (where pedestrians cross) on cross-slope of driveway 2%
or less?Yes 0
14
Does 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 0
15 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist
interaction with vehicles at driveway areas?No 0
0
16 Is the project's pedestrian directness factor less than 1.5?Yes 0
17
Does 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 0
18 Is the project proposing an off site improvement that results in a
pedestrian directness factor below 1.2?* No 0
19 Are traffic calming features proposed that are part of an approved
plan (speed humps, rapid flash)?*No 0
0
20
Are additional minor improvements proposed which benefit the
pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of
Aspen staff?
No 0
21
Are additional major improvements proposed which benefit the
pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of
Aspen staff?
No 0
0
0Pedestrian Total*
MMLOS Input Page
Subtotal
SubtotalSidewalk Condition on Adjacent BlocksSidewalk Condition on Project FrontageSubtotal
Instructions: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable to each measure under the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections.
Subtotal
Subtotal
PedestriansSubtotalAdditional Proposed ImprovementsTOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS MITIGATED:Pedestrian RoutesTraffic Calming and Pedestrian NetworkDriveways, Parking, and Access ConsiderationsP152
IV.B.
Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points
22 Is a new bicycle path being implemented with City approved design?No 0
23 Do new bike paths allow access without crossing a street or
driveway?No 0
24 Is there proposed landscaping, striping, or signage improvements to
an existing bicycle path?No 0
25 Does the project propose additional minor bicycle improvements
which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 0
26 Does the project propose additional major bicycle improvements
which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 0
0
Bicycle Parking27 Is the project providing bicycle parking?Yes 5
5
5
Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points
28 Is seating/bench proposed?No 0
29 Is a trash receptacle proposed?No 0
30 Is transit system information (signage) proposed?No 0
31 Is shelter/shade proposed?No 0
32 Is enhanced pedestrian-scale lighting proposed?No 0
33 Is real-time transit information proposed?No 0
34 Is bicycle parking/storage proposed specifically for bus stop use?No 0
35 Are ADA improvements proposed?No 0
0
36 Is a bus pull-out proposed at an existing stop?No 0
37 Is relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway
operations proposed?No 0
38 Is a new bus stop proposed (with minimum of two basic amenities)?No 0
0
0
Bicycles Total*
Transit Total*BicyclesModifications to Existing Bicycle PathsTransitBasic AmenitiesSubtotal
Subtotal
Enhanced AmenitiesSubtotal
Subtotal
P153
IV.B.
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will an onsite ammenities strategy be implemented?No
Which onsite ammenities will be implemented?
Will a shared shuttle service strategy be implemented?No
What is the degree of implementation?
What is the company size?
What percentage of customers are eligible?
3 Nonmotorized Zones Will a nonmotorized zones strategy be implemented?No 0.00%
0.00%
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will a network expansion stragtegy be implemented?No
What 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?No
What 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?No
What is the extent of access improvements?
7 Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented?0.00%
0.00%
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will there be participation in TOP?No
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented?Yes
What percentage of employees are eligible?100%
What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)?100%
Is an employee parking cash-out strategy being implemented?No
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a workplace parking pricing strategy implemented?No
What is the daily parking charge?
What percentage of employees are subject to priced parking?
Is a compressed work weeks strategy implemented?No
What percentage of employees are participating?
What is the workweek schedule?
Is an employer sponsered shuttle program implemented?No
What is the employer size?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a carpool matching strategy implemented?No
What percentage of employees are eligble?
Is carshare participation being implemented?No
How many employee memberships have been purchased?
What percentage of employees are eligble?
Is participation in the bikeshare program WE-cycle being implemented?No
How many memberships have been purchased?
What percentage of employees/guests are eligble?
Is an end of trip facilities strategy being implemented?No
What is the degree of implementation?
What is the employer size?
Is a self-funded emergency ride home strategy being implemented?No
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy being implemented?No
What is the employer size?
What number of parking spots are available for the program?
Is a private employer shuttle strategy being implemented?No
What is the employer size?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a trip reduction marketing/incentive program implemented?Yes
What percentage of employees/guests are eligible?100%
3.76%
0.00%
3.76%
1. 22% work trips represents a mixed-used site (SF Bay Area Travel Survey). See Assumptions Tab for more detail.
Maximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryTransit System Improvements Strategies1
2
4
5
6
8
9
10
4.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category
Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category
13.80%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Bikeshare Program
0.00%
TDM Input Page
0.00%
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 Improvement
Participation 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 Facilities
Cross Category Maximum Reduction, Neighborhood and Transit
Global Maximum VMT Reductions
11
12
13
14
15
21
16
17
18
19
20
Instructions TDM: 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.
P154
IV.B.
Exhibit M – Trash Special Review
122 West Main Street
Exhibit M
Trash/Recycle Area – Special Review
The proposed trash area updates the current haphazard condition by providing a trash
enclosure that is 10w by 17d, open to the sky in size. The addition of 2 new lodge units
triggers compliance with the following standards:
Sec. 12.10.030.(A).a
For Commercial Buildings that will not contain nor will have the capacity to contain
an establishment with a Retail Food Service License, as defined by the State of
Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations, a minimum of twenty
(20) linear feet adjacent to the alleyway must be reserved for trash and recycling
facilities. The required area shall have a minimum vertical clearance of ten (10)
feet and a minimum depth of ten (10) feet at ground level.
The project requests Special Review to vary the dimensional requirements. The building
is proposed to be commercial on the basement and ground levels and to contain two
lodge units on the upper level. The project is a minor remodel to an existing building that
does not trigger demolition. The adjacent building 132 West Main has its own trash area.
Sec. 12.10.080.E Special Review
The Environmental Health Department may reduce the required dimensions of a
trash and recycling service area if:
(i) There is demonstration that, given the nature of the potential uses of the building
and its total square footage, the trash and recycling area proposed will be
adequate:
a. For the purposes of approvals, adequate will be defined as follows:
i. For a Commercial, Lodge or Multi-family building the space must
accommodate and provide access to the following types of bins at a
minimum:
• One garbage collection bin
• One comingled container recycling collection bin
• One office paper recycling collection bin
• One newspaper/magazine recycling collection bin
• One cardboard recycling collection bin or collection area
where boxes can be stacked and contained in an enclosed
space.
Response – Please refer to site plan for delineated trash area.
P155
IV.B.
Exhibit M – Trash Special Review
122 West Main Street
ii. Access by both the tenants and the waste hauling companies to
the trash and recycling service area is adequate; and,
Response – Access to the trash area is from the alley for the hauling
companies and accessed from the rear of the property for the tenants of
122.
iii. Measures are provided for locating and enclosing trash bins and
making them easily movable by trash personnel; and,
Response – The trash area is located at the alley and is at grade.
iv. The proposed area meets the requirements to the greatest extent
practicable given physical constraints of the property or existing
improvements.
Response – The project involves a minor interior remodel and change of
use. An existing parking space is proposed to be converted into the trash
area. The Land Use Code does not allow a reduction of onsite parking
beyond that proposed.
P156
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ1.0tĂůů>ĂďĞů dŽƚĂůtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳϭ ϭϲϴ͘ϰϬ ϱ͘ϬϬϮ ϭϯϮ͘ϬϬ ϱϬ͘ϬϬϯ ϰϭ͘ϯϬ ϰϭ͘ϯϬϰ ϭϯϱ͘ϰϬ ϭϯϱ͘ϰϬϱ ϰϭ͘ϯϬ ϰϭ͘ϯϬϲ ϭϴϴ͘ϰϬ ϴϴ͘ϴϬϳ ϭϲϴ͘ϰϬ ϵϮ͘ϭϬϴ ϭϴϴ͘ϰϬ ϯ͘ϭϬϵ ϭϭ͘ϳϬ Ϭ͘ϯϬϭϬ ϭϯϱ͘ϰϬ ϰ͘ϯϬϭϭ ϭϭ͘ϳϬ Ϭ͘ϰϬϭϮ ϭϯϮ͘ϬϬ ϱ͘ϴϬKǀĞƌĂůůdŽƚĂůtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϯϱϰ͘ϰϬ džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϲϳ͘ϴϬй džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ; džƉŽƐĞĚͬdŽƚĂůͿ ϯϰ͘ϱϰй'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϭϰ͘ϭϯdŽƚĂůĂƐĞŵĞŶƚŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϭϰ͘ϭϯ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬdŽƉ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ^ƚĂŝƌ Ͳϭϭϯ͘ϬϬdŽƉ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ ůĞǀĂƚŽƌ Ͳϰϴ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϰϭϰ͘ϭϯ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ Ϯ͕ϲϱϭ͘ϭϯĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞůĂƐĞŵĞŶƚtĂůůĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ&ŝƌƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ^ĞĐŽŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶEXISTING FLOOR AREAϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϰϭϰ͘ϭϯ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůĨŽƌϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ Ϯ͕ϲϱϭ͘ϭϯϭϯϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϴϱϭ͘ϭϳ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϱ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϳϮ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůĨŽƌϭϯϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ ϳ͕ϴϮϭ͘ϭϳŽŵďŝŶĞĚdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭϬ͕ϰϳϮ͘ϯϬŽŵďŝŶĞĚ džŝƐƚŝŶŐdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶP157
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ1.21,148 SFNET LEASABLE573 SFNET LEASABLEP158
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ1.3132 EXISTING FLOOR AREAtĂůů>ĂďĞů dŽƚĂůtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳϭ ϲϳϯ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϮ ϴϭϯ͘ϬϬ Ϯϴϱ͘ϬϬϯ ϮϮϳ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϰ Ϯϭ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϱ ϴϮ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϲ ϯϮ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϳ ϯϯϬ͘ϬϬ ϲϵ͘ϬϬϴ ϯϱ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϵ ϭϮϱ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϭϬ ϯϴϬ͘ϬϬ ϱϵ͘ϬϬϭϭ ϯϰ͘ϬϬ ϯϰ͘ϬϬϭϮ ϭϭϲ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϭϯ ϭϯ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϭϰ Ϯϰ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϭϱ ϯϯ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϭϲ Ϯϲ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬKǀĞƌĂůůdŽƚĂůtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ Ϯ͕ϵϲϰ͘ϬϬ džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϰϳ͘ϬϬй džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ; džƉŽƐĞĚͬdŽƚĂůͿ ϭϱ͘Ϭϴй'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϱ͕ϲϰϰ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϴϱϭ͘ϭϳdŽƚĂůĂƐĞŵĞŶƚŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϴϱϭ͘ϭϳ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϱ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϱ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϱ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϬϬ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϳϮ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϳϮ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϳϮ͘ϬϬĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϴϱϭ͘ϭϳ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϱ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϭ͕ϮϳϮ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϳ͕ϴϮϭ͘ϭϳ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞůĂƐĞŵĞŶƚtĂůůĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ&ŝƌƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ^ĞĐŽŶĚ&ůŽŽƌExisting Net Leasable Basement Level (SF) 1,721.00 First Floor (SF) 5,091.00 Total Net Leasable (SF) 6,812.00 5,091 SFNET LEASABLEP159
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ1.4PROPOSED FLOOR AREAtĂůů>ĂďĞů dŽƚĂůtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳϭ ϭϲϴ͘ϰϬ ϱ͘ϬϬϮ ϴϮ͘ϱϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϯ ϰϭ͘ϯϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬϰ ϭϴϱ͘ϬϬ ϭϴϱ͘ϬϬϱ ϰϭ͘ϯϬ ϰϭ͘ϯϬϲ ϭϴϴ͘ϰϬ ϴϴ͘ϴϬϳ ϭϲϴ͘ϰϬ ϵϮ͘ϭϬϴ ϭϴϴ͘ϰϬ ϯ͘ϭϬϵ ϭϭ͘ϳϬ Ϭ͘ϯϬϭϬ ϭϯϱ͘ϰϬ ϰ͘ϯϬϭϭ ϭϭ͘ϳϬ Ϭ͘ϰϬϭϮ ϭϯϮ͘ϬϬ ϱ͘ϴϬKǀĞƌĂůůdŽƚĂůtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϯϱϰ͘ϱϬ džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϮϲ͘ϭϬй džƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ; džƉŽƐĞĚͬdŽƚĂůͿ ϯϭ͘ϰϲй'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϯϯϭ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϯϴϳ͘ϮϱdŽƚĂůĂƐĞŵĞŶƚŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϯϴϳ͘Ϯϱ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϬϮ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϬϮ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϬϮ͘ϬϬ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϭϵϵ͘ϬϬdŽƉ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ^ƚĂŝƌ Ͳϭϭϯ͘ϬϬdŽƉ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ ůĞǀĂƚŽƌ Ͳϰϴ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬ'ƌŽƐƐ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϱϮϯ͘ϬϬdŽƉ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ^ƚĂŝƌ ͲϯϬ͘ϬϬŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϵϯ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂů>ŽĨƚ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶƚĂďůĞ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϵϯ͘ϬϬĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϯϴϳ͘Ϯϱ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϭ͕ϮϬϮ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬ>ŽĨƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳϰϵϯ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϯ͕ϭϮϬ͘Ϯϱ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ>ŽĨƚ>ĞǀĞů>ŽĨƚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞůĂƐĞŵĞŶƚtĂůůĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ&ŝƌƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ^ĞĐŽŶĚ&ůŽŽƌϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϯϴϳ͘Ϯϱ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϬϮ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϴ͘ϬϬ>ŽĨƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϰϵϯ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůĨŽƌϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ ϯ͕ϭϮϬ͘ϮϱϭϯϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϴϱϭ͘ϭϳ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϱ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭ͕ϮϳϮ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůĨŽƌϭϯϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ ϳ͕ϴϮϭ͘ϭϳŽŵďŝŶĞĚWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚdŽƚĂů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϭϬ͕ϵϰϭ͘ϰϮŽŵďŝŶĞĚWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚdŽƚĂů&ůŽŽƌƌĞĂĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶůŽĚŐĞ ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůďĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ ϯϴϳ ϮϵϳĨŝƌƐƚ ϭϮϬϮ ϵϭϮƐĞĐŽŶĚ ϭϬϯϴ ϭϬϯϴůŽĨƚ ϰϵϯ ϰϵϯƚŽƚĂůŐƌŽƐƐϯϭϮϬϭϱϯϭ ϭϮϬϵďĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ ϵϬĨŝƌƐƚ ϮϵϬƐĞĐŽŶĚ ϬůŽĨƚ ϬϯϴϬĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů ϰϰйůŽĚŐĞ ϱϲйĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů ϭϲϳůŽĚŐĞ ϮϭϯϯϴϬĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů ϭϯϳϲůŽĚŐĞ ϭϳϰϰdŽƚĂů&Z ϯϭϮϬŐƌŽƐƐĨůŽŽƌĂƌĞĂŶŽŶƵŶŝƚƉĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞŽĨƵƐĞŶŽŶƵŶŝƚĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŽƚĂů&ZǁŝƚŚĂůůŽĐĂƚĞĚŶŽŶƵŶŝƚP160
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ1.5EXISTING NET LEASABLE AREAϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ EŽŶͲhŶŝƚƌĞĂ EĞƚ>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϰϭϳ͘ϬϬϲϰϬ͘ϬϬ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭϳϳ͘ϬϬϵϱϰ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭϱϮ͘ϬϬϵϳϵ͘ϬϬdŽƚĂůĨŽƌϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ ϳϰϲ͘ϬϬϮ͕ϱϳϯ͘ϬϬŽŵďŝŶĞĚdŽƚĂů džŝƐƚŝŶŐEŽŶͲƵŶŝƚн>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϯ͕ϯϭϵ͘ϬϬϭϮϮ džŝƐƚŝŶŐEĞƚ>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂP161
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ1.6PROPOSED NET LEASABLE AREAϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ EŽŶͲhŶŝƚƌĞĂ EĞƚ>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂ EĞƚ>ŝǀĂďůĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϮϱϮ͘ϬϬ ϴϯϳ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬ&ŝƌƐƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ Ϯϳϳ͘ϱϬ ϴϲϭ͘ϱϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬ^ĞĐŽŶĚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ ϭϱϮ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬ ϵϳϲ͘ϮϮ>ŽĨƚ>ĞǀĞů;^&Ϳ Ϭ͘ϬϬ Ϭ͘ϬϬ ϰϲϳ͘ϲϯ^ƵďƚŽƚĂůĨŽƌϭϮϮtĞƐƚDĂŝŶ;^&Ϳ ϲϴϭ͘ϱϬϭ͕ϲϵϴ͘ϱϬϭ͕ϰϰϯ͘ϴϱdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚEŽŶͲƵŶŝƚн>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂн>ŝǀĂďůĞϯ͕ϴϮϯ͘ϴϱϭϮϮWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚEĞƚ>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂP162
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comZ2.0LODGE UNIT PLANUNIT AUNIT B(LOCK OFF)+ LODGERECEPTIONP163
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA1.0P164
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA1.1PROPOSED SITE PLANP165
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA1.2PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE122 + 132 PARCELS = 13,500 SFREQUIRED OPEN SPACE = 3,375 SFPROPOSED OPEN SPACE = 2,466 SFP166
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA1.3TIA PLANBICYCLERACKCROSS SLOPE< 5%EXISTING CURB IS </= 6”42’ - 4”35’ - 7”21’ - 9”21’ - 9”DIRECTNESSFACTOR = 1DIRECTNESSFACTOR = 1.2P167
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA2.0EXISTING FLOOR PLANSP168
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA2.1EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED WEST ELEVATIONEXISTING EAST ELEVATIONEXISTING NORTH ELEVATIONP169
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA2.2PROPOSED FLOOR PLANSP170
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA2.3PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATIONPROPOSED WEST ELEVATIONPROPOSED EAST ELEVATIONPROPOSED NORTH ELEVATIONP171
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA3.0STREET + CONTEXT VIEWP172
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA3.1PROPOSED STREET VIEWP173
IV.B.
122 WEST MAIN REMODELHPC REVIEW SUBMITTAL AUGUST 14, 2017Gilbert Sanchez / Architect / 300 South Spring Street / Aspen, CO / 81612 / 970.948.0597 / grsanchezaia@gmail.comA4.0MATERIAL + FINISH IMAGESNEW SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING PAINTED STEEL PORCH/DECK FRAMINGNEW DORMER COMPOSITE SHINGLESTO MATCH EXISTINGSTEEL + GLASS STOREFRONT METAL CLAD SLIDING WOOD DOORS NEW WINDOWS TO MATCH EXISTINGCLAD WOOD WINDOWSP174
IV.B.