Loading...
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 0.140.035PL00.0850.170.0425NPVICINITY 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 ϭ͕ϯϱϰ͘ϰϬdžƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϲϳ͘ϴϬйdžƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;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>ĞǀĞůŽĨůĞǀĂƚŽƌ 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 ϭϬ͕ϰϳϮ͘ϯϬŽŵďŝŶĞĚdžŝƐƚŝŶŐdŽƚĂůWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ&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 Ϯ͕ϵϲϰ͘ϬϬdžƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϰϳ͘ϬϬйdžƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;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 ϭ͕ϯϱϰ͘ϱϬdžƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϰϮϲ͘ϭϬйdžƉŽƐĞĚtĂůůƌĞĂ;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>ĞǀĞůŽĨůĞǀĂƚŽƌ 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 ϳϰϲ͘ϬϬϮ͕ϱϳϯ͘ϬϬŽŵďŝŶĞĚdŽƚĂůdžŝƐƚŝŶŐEŽŶͲƵŶŝƚн>ĞĂƐĂďůĞƌĞĂ;^&Ϳ ϯ͕ϯϭϵ͘ϬϬϭϮϮdžŝƐƚŝŶŐEĞƚ>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.