HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20171003
AGENDA
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
REGULAR MEETING
October 03, 2017
4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room
130 S Galena Street, Aspen
I. SITE VISIT
II. ROLL CALL
III. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
B. Planning Staff
C. Public
IV. MINUTES
A. September 19, 2017 Draft Meeting Minutes
V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 802 W Main St - Major Public Project Review
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
VIII. ADJOURN
Next Resolution Number: 13, 2017
Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings
1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda)
2) Provide proof of legal notice (affi d avit of notice for PH)
3) Staff presentation
4) Board questions and clarifications of staff
5) Applicant presentation
6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant
7) Public comments
8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments
9) Close public comment portion of bearing
10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment
1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification
End of fact finding.
Deliberation by the commission commences.
No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public
12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners.
13) Discussion between commissioners*
14) Motion*
*Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met.
Revised April 2, 2014
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
1
Mr. Skippy Mesirow, Chair, called the September 19, 2017 meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members
Ms. Jasmine Tygre, Mr. Ryan Walterscheid, Mr. Rally Dupps and Mr. Mesirow.
Mr. Jesse Morris, Mr. Keith Goode, Ms. McNicholas Kury and Mr. Spencer McKnight were not present.
Also present from City staff; Ms. Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney, Ms. Jennifer Phelan, Deputy
Planning Director and Mr. Justin Barker, Senior Planner.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
There were none.
STAFF COMMENTS:
There were none.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were none.
MINUTES
Ms. Tygre motioned to approve the June 30th and September 5th minutes and Mr. Mesirow motioned to
approve May 23rd minutes. Mr. Walterscheid seconded both motions. All in favor, both motions passed.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Mr. Mesirow noted Mr. McKnight recused himself from tonight’s hearing.
PUBLIC HEARINGS – 517 Park Circle – Major Public Project Review
Mr. Mesirow asked if public notice was provided and Ms. Bryan confirmed.
Mr. Mesirow then opened the hearing and turned the floor over to staff.
Mr. Justin Barker, Senior Planner, noted the application is being brought forward by Aspen Housing
Partners on behalf of the City of Aspen who owns the property. He then provided background
information of the property noting the following.
· Lot is sized just under 14, 500 sf
· Currently vacant
· Zoned as moderate density residential (R-15) with a planned development (PD) overlay
· Part of the two lot Wager / Detweiler Subdivision
· The other lot contains a single family home
· PD overlay limits the to one 3,000 sf single family home with established setbacks
Mr. Barker stated the proposal includes rezoning the property to the Affordable Housing/Planned
Development (AH/PD) zone district in order to develop 11 affordable housing units consisting of seven
one-bedroom units on the lower and upper floors and four two-bedroom units on the main floor. It is a
P1
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
2
three-story building with the lower level partially below grade and 11 surface parking spaces on the
property.
As an affordable housing project being developed by the City, the application is subject to the major
public projects review which combines all the applicable land use reviews into one two-step process.
P&Z will provide a recommendation to City Council who will make the final decision. The state limitation
of a 60-day timeframe for a decision is not applicable for City projects.
Mr. Barker stated the AH/PD zone district is to provide protected zones for affordable housing and is
intentionally to be scattered about town to provide a mix of housing throughout the community. He
provided a map showing several other similar properties nearby. In general, staff is supportive of the
rezoning.
As part of the AH/PD zone district, all the dimensions are required to be established through the PD
review process. He provided a chart of the proposed dimensions as well as those under the current
zoning and a similar multi-family zoning. Staff is generally supportive of the proposed dimensions. Staff
is concerned with the following areas:
· Trash area – Originally proposed as 50 sf and the code requires a minimum of 121.5 sf for 11
units. Amount was revised to 120 sf which is closer.
· Parking
Mr. Barker noted three of the dimensions that are listed at 10% above or below what is in the current
design to accommodate flexibility in the design as it progresses. Staff is comfortable with this. He stated
it is important to note the maximum allowable floor area is well below (approximately 2,700 sf) what
the AH/PD zone district recommends for a lot of this size.
Mr. Barker then discussed the parking stating in terms of the location and number of bedrooms, this
bedroom would require 15 parking spaces. With the recent update of the code regarding parking, the
total number can be reduced by one space. He added the project has transportation impact credits
beyond what is required for the project. The applicant is proposing 11 spaces or one per unit. Based on
the density and use of the property, staff is concerned about the proposed number. Staff has outlined
three options:
1. Pursue a shared parking agreement with Pitkin County on the Smuggler overflow parking lot off
Park Circle.
2. Provide excess Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) improvements above what is already
provided in the amount equivalent to the cast-out price of the four parking spaces based on an
established per space value of $38,000 for a total of $114,000.
3. Provide a cash-in-lieu for transportation improvements, preferably near the site.
Mr. Barker stated the project is subject to an 8040 Greenline review. He noted there are not issues
regarding the availability of utilities and services. The one concern staff has is the property is located
within the Smuggler Superfund Site. He noted in the 1990’s the City added some additional regulations
and requirements that properties located within this area mitigate for or remove potentially toxic soils.
A particular methodology has not been provided as of yet so staff recommends it to be included in any
development agreement approved as part of the project.
P2
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
3
Mr. Barker then discussed the growth management requirements. He said the project is required to
receive 11 affordable housing unit allotments, noting for 2017 there is no annual limit for affordable
housing making it a tracking concern. Each unit is below the net livable the area size established in the
Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) guidelines. APCHA has the ability to grant reductions
and the board did approve the reduction due to the livability of the units with the additional storage,
bathrooms for each bedroom, natural light. The categories for the units have not yet been established
because this is one of three developments and the mix has yet to be determined. The applicant is
proposing the units be rental to start with and perhaps changed down the road. Overall, staff is
supportive of the growth management requirements.
Mr. Barker stated as a multi-family development this project is subject to residential design standards
(RDS). The limited requirements are focused on a strong presence on the street as well as a good
interaction with the public realm. The project includes four street-facing entrances for all ground level
units as well as multiple windows that exceed the amount required by code. Overall, staff is comfortable
with the application meeting the RDS.
Mr. Barker noted the applicant is looking to amend the subject lot as a separate PD plat to reflect any
new approvals granted including dimensions. This is viewed as a general clean-up item and staff is
supportive of it as well.
Mr. Barker identified the following discussion points for P&Z. Overall, staff is recommending P&Z
recommend approval to Council with the conditions outlined in the resolution.
1. The proposed dimensions for the site including the 10% flexibility on the three dimensions.
2. Overall site planning and building design.
3. Parking Issue.
Mr. Mesirow asked for any questions of staff.
Mr. Mesirow asked for a recap of the history of the soil mitigation. Mr. Barker believed in 1986 the EPA
identified this area as a priority 4 clean-up due to the mine waste located in several properties in the
area of Smuggler Mountain. This was generally dealt with and removed from the EPA’s list. The City
adopted an Ordinance in 1996 requiring any site potentially containing toxic soils would need to
mitigate to ensure the removal of the toxic soils from the site. This includes a process during the building
permit review to obtain approval from the environmental health department to ensure the method
used to clean the site is appropriate. Mr. Barker added it is an additional process prior to the
development.
Mr. Mesirow then turned the floor over to the applicant.
Mr. Chris Everson, City of Aspen Affordable Housing Project Manager, introduced himself and the other
members of the applicant’s team.
· Jason Bradshaw, Aspen Housing Partners
· Adam Roy, Method 1 Planning and Development
P3
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
4
Mr. Roy then provide background of the project. He provided pictures of the lot pointing out
neighboring facilities. The city purchased this property in 2007 with the plan on developing it. Through
outreach in 2012 and 2015, it was determined there was a need for additional rental units. This location
was identified as a good candidate for affordable rental housing. In 2016, and request for proposal (RFP)
was issued and Aspen Housing Partners was selected to develop the project in partnership with the City.
Two additional properties; 802 W Main St and 488 Castle Creek Rd, are included the partnership. The
financing instrument to be used to help develop this property will be the Low Income Housing Tax
Credits (LIHTC). Other properties have utilized LIHTC including the Aspen Country Inn, Truscott and
Maroon Creek.
A four-month outreach process was initiated including community wide open houses in January,
establishing communications with key neighborhood stakeholders and check-ins with Council to update
them on the progress and receive adjustments on direction. Over 500 participants at the open houses
providing the following feedback.
· Fairly strong support of rezoning.
· Encouragement to maximize the density.
· Programing of the units
· Unit size
· Ensure adequate storage
· One bathroom per bedroom
· Need for parking while encouraging
An extensive traffic and parking analysis was also conducted of the area.
He provided a slide of the outreach activities to date and indicated Council did not change much from a
density per unit, but did reduce the bedroom density.
Mr. Roy then displayed a site plan for representation. He noted the larger setback to the south where
the single-family resident neighbor is located. They have met with the family a number of times in an
attempt to minimize any impacts. He noted each of the units has a lot of outdoor space. He stated they
also worked a lot with the traffic engineer in the TIA process to establish as many credits as possible
towards transportation. The project has a surplus of 42 credits. He stated the size of the trash area has
been increased to the suggested sf.
He displayed vignettes of the building showing the outdoor amenities.
Mr. Roy then displayed floor plans of the different types of units. Each unit has the following:
· Access to approximately 100 sf of non-unit storage and lockable bike storage
· Its own mud & laundry room
· Entry porch or patio
· Bathroom for each bedroom
Mr. Roy provided a table of the floor area calculations including the flexible percentages.
P4
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
5
Elevations were then displayed to show materials and how they established their height restrictions of
32 ft off the rear of the building and 25 ft off the front. The materials are a combination of wood siding,
stucco, metal and the stairs are enclosed with a wood lattice rain screen.
Mr. Roy stated they conducted a thorough land use pattern analysis that showed numerous multi-family
projects in the area, some more dense and some less dense than this project. The pattern indicated the
requested rezoning would be appropriate.
They also did a comparison chart with other pre-existing multi-family properties in the area and it
indicated this project is very close or on par with the average density measurements.
Mr. Mesirow asked for any questions of the applicant.
Mr. Mesirow asked for additional information of the advantages and disadvantages of using the LIHTC.
Mr. Bradshaw replied the affordable housing tax credit program was established with the 1986 tax code
to address incentives for developing affordable housing for wage earners at 60% or less of medium
income. The 60% or less of medium income compares with the category one and the lower part of
category two. The tax program is for rental housing and the 60% is based on the medium income for the
county. This allows the City to utilize the credit program to develop housing for these categories and a
powerful debt financing tool which minimize the impact to the affordable housing fund and comes with
a pretty stringent ongoing property management and maintenance requirement. The state housing
authority will audit the property annually and reserves will be set up for the maintenance. This will also
have a perpetual deed restriction for affordable housing on these units for the 60% and a local rent
schedule for 15 years.
Mr. Mesirow asked when the categories will be determined. Mr. Everson replied there will be two
additional projects included and about 50% of the combined total number of units (49) proposed will be
low income tax credit units. In addition, they are planning to have about 30% category two units and
about 20% category three units. They have yet to determine the percentages at each site. They will
apply for the tax credits as a consolidation of the three sites and they anticipate the credits will be
awarded scattered across the three sites. Mr. Bradshaw noted the categories can be moved around to
the different sites as needed.
Mr. Everson noted the City conducted outreach as early as 2015 to assist with the use determination.
First, the use was determined to be rental and as a result, the LIHTC was a fit.
Mr. Dupps referred to p 31 of staff’s memo and asked if the total unit sf included the basement storage.
Mr. Bradshaw responded it includes the net livable in the sf.
Mr. Dupps asked how APCHA received the sf being less. Mr. Bradshaw replied APCHA noted the layouts
provided could possibly be used as a model for livability. Mr. Everson stated APCHA was pleased with
the amount of storage provided and that each bedroom has a bathroom.
Ms. Tygre asked if the applicant would consider changing the units to for sale units at some point down
the road. Mr. Bradshaw replied after 15 years the City can’t remove the affordability deed restriction
but they could sell them as affordable condominiums. The City could pay of any remaining debt after 15
years. Ms. Tygre stated she is concerned the deed restrictions remain in place in perpetuity. Mr. Everson
replied the deed restrictions will be on the land and the City will put that in place in perpetuity. The
P5
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
6
City’s long term plan includes developing housing at the lumber yard which is a much more sizable piece
of property. In the future, the City wants the flexibility to possibly convert some of these properties to
for sale units. He noted the City will be bringing funds to the development depending on the tax credits
awarded. In order to protect this investment, the City want to be able to step in and buy back any debt if
they choose to do so.
Mr. Walterscheid asked to speak to what is being done to deal with the traffic impact and the eleven
parking spaces. Mr. Roy replied the trip generation impact for this property at peak hours is four trips
for rush hour. This project will be generating a total of 46 credits for a surplus of 42 credits including
enhancements to the pedestrian realm, the addition of the sidewalk, ADA accessibility across the
property, bus stop improvements and others. They are providing private, lockable bike storage on site
and other enhancements to encourage the residents to not rely on vehicles. Mr. Everson noted Council
spent about a year looking at different mobility options. Two points stuck out for them. One, there is a
management program in place to control the enforcement than is possible in other developments. Two,
they looked at the proximity of the site to Burlingame Ranch which has .9 parking spaces per bedroom.
Mr. Mesirow asked them to speak more to the maximization of the density. Mr. Bradshaw replied for
this project, it had to be weighed against adjacent property owners and the conditions surrounding the
property.
Mr. Mesirow asked the percentage of people from the outreach that wanted to see more density. Mr.
Roy did not have the exact number but recalled it being in the double digits and stated it was a fairly
recurring comment relative to other comments. Mr. Everson added the users of the affordable housing
system were pro-density who don’t live in the neighborhood. At one time, the applicant considered
rezoning the property to residential multi-family (RMF) which would allow significant more floor area
which would have made onsite parking more of a challenge. Mr. Roy added there are different ways of
looking at density including unit count, bedroom count, FTE calculation. Based on careful consideration,
it was determined to hold the unit count, but give relief to the number of bodies on the property.
Mr. Dupps asked how they intend to respond to staff’s guest parking concern. Mr. Roy replied a
conversation needs to start with the county to see if there is a creative way to address this situation. Mr.
Everson noted the City is somewhat reluctant to approach the County and they plan to work with City
Council on how to utilize the funds for this effort.
Mr. Mesirow then opened for public comment.
Mr. Mesirow noted the letter received earlier in the day from Jackie Tracy who was generally in support
of affordable housing but had significant concerns around the parking shortfall.
Mr. Dirk Detweiler lives next door to the project and raised the following concerns:
· Main objections to the project are the size, density and the addition traffic and noise associated
with the project.
· When they developed their property, they had a reasonable expectation something similar
would be developed in the neighboring lot. Moreover, the applicant is charged with the
presentation of a thoughtful design that would allow the property to be utilized for a high-level
of taxpayer value while also addressing concerns of nearby neighbors complimenting the fabric
of the existing neighborhood. He does not feel this project meets those requirements.
P6
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
7
· He noted the applicant is requesting a rezoning, a 50% waiver of the community development
fees, 10% increase of site coverage, 10% reduction of open space to be provided, 10% increase
in FAR, a reduction of 3 onsite parking spaces and a waiver of school land dedication fees and
parks/TDM/air quality impact fees.
· On p 6 of the application regarding the existing property conditions, the property sits on a
decommissioned superfund site. He is concerned even minimal excavation will stir up toxic mine
waste.
· He believes the statement on p 26 of the application noting a small increase in traffic is
incorrect.
· On p 165 of the TIA report, it shows the 11 units placed under the land use of lodging rather
than affordable housing. He believes the placement is incorrect.
· He believes there will be three times the number of trips generated if the calculations were
correct.
· On p 30 the published neighborhood zoning and land use context map shows a quarter mile
radius from the center of the proposed development which he believes was partly used in the
determination of the multi-family density matrix. His measurement of the area was 950 ft. He
wanted to know why single-family was not considered in the matrix.
· He noted they found toxic soil on his property when he developed his home and questioned
how the applicant plans to remove the toxic soil. The application states it will be done per
prescribed standards, but he wants a definition of the standards and who would oversee the
process.
· He is also concerned about any restrictions on pets and the possible impacts to the wildlife in
the area. He doesn’t want his backyard to have the same issues with dog waste as the Smuggler
Trail.
· He understands the needs for affordable housing, but strongly protests it being shoe horned in a
small lot in a congested neighborhood. He feels the project remains too large and too dense. He
suggested building a duplex similar to the Snyder project on Midland. He also suggested using
pre-fab housing similar to what the Aspen Skiing Company has been considering.
Torre, Aspen Resident, stated he was present as a citizen and a member and current President of the
Smuggler Racquet Club. He stated the club supports the comments just made by Mr. Detweiler. He
noted if it wasn’t an affordable housing project, you would not be seeing anything like this being
proposed for this property. He noted he was on Council when the City was negotiating for the property.
He remembered it being contemplated for affordable housing but not quite this much. The club feels
the density is a little great. While they appreciate the reduction in bedrooms, they would prefer a
reduction in the massing and impacts to the neighborhood. They feel this is a little much on this
location. He asked the applicant to show the site map. He noted the view from club will be of a three-
story building. While the majority of the comments from the members is about the massing, they are
concerned about the density. He noted for years the club has accommodated access of a trail through
their property and they are a dog friendly club. But they are concerned about the pets. They currently
suffer pretty great impacts from the dogs using the park and trail. He asked the board to make a
recommendation about limited pet ownership in the units, perhaps on the walk-out units on the first
floor.
Mr. Mesirow then closed the public comment portion of the hearing and opened for commissioner
discussion.
P7
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
8
Ms. Tygre is a bit concerned about the parking as well. She is opposed to the current policy telling
people they can’t have cars and removing parking spaces. She mentioned a phrase ‘schlep factor’ made
by Mr. Chris Bendon which relates to the proximity housing is to a bus stop. She noted people do more
than travel to and from work. They shop, buy groceries, and bring home supplies. She believes the
availability of the bus from this project makes a big difference in the schlep factor. In this case, if the
applicant works to make the bus convenient, she would not be as concerned for the lack of parking
spaces.
Ms. Tygre noted they often hear from neighbors who would rather see for sale units instead of rental
units. In this case, she feels having rental units for at least 15 years is a much greater asset because the
management will be a lot tighter. You can evict renters who do not obey the rules. She added the
community desperately needs rental units.
Mr. Dupps agrees and feels it is a very well-conceived project striking a balance between density and
providing accessibility. For him it ticks all the boxes and does not have a problem with the lack of three
spaces. He hopes they can work out something with the County.
Mr. Mesirow noted the trends on driving a car and ownership are declining.
Mr. Walterscheid echoed the points made by Mr. Dupps. He feels it is a well thought out project and
does not have any issues with the density. He struggles with the fact the property had been subdivided
and PD placed on it to be R-15 and now it will be rezoned to something larger. He noted if you drive
down the hill, you encounter higher density residential projects.
Ms. Tygre noted properties get rezoned all the time and usually it involves greater density.
Mr. Mesirow has no issue with the density but is aware of the need for housing and the lack of available
spots to land them.
Ms. Tygre want the board to know she stopped by APCHA today to renew her rental application. While
there she put in an application for a one-bedroom for sale unit. There was a day left in the bidding
process and already more than 60 people had applied. Mr. Walterscheid replied he does not doubt
there is a need and is happy to see it be a rental.
Mr. Dupps noted he was previously on the APCHA board and rentals were the way to go forward for the
management. He likes the possibility this property could be for sale at some time in the future.
Mr. Mesirow asked the commissioners if they were comfortable making a recommendation to re-
explore more density since there are so few opportunities. Mr. Dupps replied his issue with that would
be the parking which he feels is at its maximum. Ms. Tygre and Mr. Walterscheid agreed with Mr.
Dupps. Mr. Mesirow just feels there are so few parcels available and the need is so great. Mr.
Walterscheid noted there are other housing projects being proposed in this area.
Mr. Barker stated if the board was leaning toward making a recommendation, he wanted to note a
couple of corrections on the draft resolution.
· On p1 of the resolution, it should state the Community Development Department recommends
approval with conditions.
P8
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission September 19, 2017
9
· On p2, Section 1, it should state an amendment of the subdivision plat.
· In Section 4, the size of the trash area should state 120 sf.
Mr. Mesirow wanted to note P&Z has consistently a reduction in unit sizes for affordable housing
programs.
Mr. Dupps made a motion to approve Resolution 12, Series 2017 with the conditions and amendments
recommended by staff. Ms. Tygre seconded the motion. Mr. Mesirow requested a roll call. Roll call: Mr.
Dupps, yes; Ms. Tygre, yes; Mr. Walterscheid, yes; and Mr. Mesirow, yes; for a total of four (yes) votes
and zero (0) not votes. The motion was approved.
Mr. Mesirow then closed the hearing.
OTHER BUSINESS
None.
A motion was made to adjourn and seconded. All in favor, motion passed.
Cindy Klob
City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager
P9
IV.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 1 of 13
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Justin Barker, Senior Planner
THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director
RE: 802 W. Main Street – Major Public Project Review
Resolution No. __, Series of 2017 – Public Hearing
DATE: October 3, 2017
APPLICANT:
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
OWNER:
City of Aspen
REPRESENTATIVE:
Method Planning + Development
LOCATION:
802 W. Main Street
CURRENT ZONING:
Moderate Density Residential (R-15)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Affordable Housing/Planned
Development (AH/PD)
SUMMARY:
The applicant requests P&Z
recommend approval to City Council
for rezoning the property to AH/PD,
and the development of ten (10)
affordable housing units.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends P&Z recommend
approval to City Council with
conditions.
Locator Map
Current image of subject property (from Main Street)
P10
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 2 of 13
LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES:
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning & Zoning
Commission:
· Major Public Project Review – (Chapter 26.500) for development proposed by a
governmental entity. (See “Staff Evaluation” for full description of this review process).
This is a two-step process, with P&Z making recommendation to Council. Council has
the final decision-making authority. The Major Public Project Review process
consolidates the following Land Use Code reviews:
o Rezoning – (Chapter 26.310) for rezoning the property from R-15 to AH/PD.
o Planned Development – (Chapter 26.445) to establish the dimensional
requirements for the proposed development.
o Growth Management – for the development of affordable housing.
o Residential Design Standards – for residential multi-family development.
PROPERTY BACKGROUND:
The proposed project site is a 9,000 sq. ft. lot located on the northwest corner of the intersection
at Main Street and 7th Street. The property currently contains a single-family home that was
originally constructed in 1954 and is zoned Moderate-Density Residential (R-15). The lot is
generally flat and includes vegetation primarily around the property boundary, including a
hedgerow along the north edge of the property. Vehicular access is currently from a curb cut
along Main Street.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
This is one of three affordable housing projects that Aspen Housing Partners LLC is currently
developing in partnership with the City of Aspen. The other two locations include 517 Park
Circle and 488 Castle Creek Road. The applicant proposes to rezone the property to Affordable
Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD) and develop ten (10) affordable housing units.
The proposed units are all one-bedroom, one-bathroom units in two connected two-story
structures that form an L-shape along 7th Street and Main Street. Each unit contains interior and
exterior storage, at least one outdoor porch or balcony area, and washer/dryer hookups. The
proposal includes removal of the existing curb cut on Main Street, and providing ten (10) surface
parking spaces in the Main Street right-of-way, with no on-site parking due to neighborhood
input and feedback from public outreach. A site plan, renderings, and example unit floor plan are
provided below.
P11
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 3 of 13
Figure 1: Main Street Perspective
Figure 2: 7th Street Perspective
P12
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 4 of 13
Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan
Figure 4: Example Unit Layout
PARK CIRCLE
N
P13
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 5 of 13
STAFF EVALUATION:
Public Project (Exhibit A):
The proposed project is subject to Major Public Project review. The Public Project review
process was adopted by City Council in December 2015 to bring the Land Use Code into
compliance with Colorado Revised Statute §31-23-209. Public Project review is an alternative
process for development projects submitted by governmental entities, quasi-municipal
organizations, or public agencies providing essential services to the public. The review process
includes a requirement to provide a decision within 60 days of application, however this time
limitation is not applicable to City of Aspen projects.
The following sections of the Land Use Code apply to the proposed project: Rezoning, Planned
Development, Growth Management, and Residential Design Standards. Staff responses to each
section are detailed in Exhibits B-E, with specific highlights noted in the sections below.
Rezoning (Exhibit B):
The property is currently zoned as Moderate-Density Residential (R-15). The R-15 zone district
allows for a maximum density of two dwelling units on an appropriately sized lot. The applicant
is proposing to rezone the property to Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD) in
order to permit the development of 10 affordable housing units. The existing zoning map for the
area is shown below.
Figure 5: Surrounding Zoning
PROJECT SITE
P14
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 6 of 13
Staff finds the proposed rezoning meets the applicable review criteria and is supportive of the
proposed rezoning. The purpose of the AH/PD zone district is to provide for the use of land for
the production of category affordable housing and is intended for residential use primarily by
permanent residents of the community. The AH/PD zone is intended to be scattered throughout
the City to ensure a mix of housing types and should be located within walking distance of the
center of the City or on transit routes. This property is both walkable to downtown and located
on several bus routes that travel along Main Street. Surrounding zoning includes R-6, R-15,
RMF, MU and AH/PD. Surrounding land uses include a variety of housing types ranging from
single-family to dense multi-family development (several of which are affordable housing) and
some commercial along Main Street. The property is bounded on the north and west by the
Bavarian Inn Condos affordable housing and caddy corner from the 7th and Main affordable
housing. There are also several multi-family developments within the nearby vicinity, including
the Villas of Aspen, Aspen Villas, Skandia Townhouses, and 700 W. Hopkins Condos. Affordable
multi-family housing falls within this range of development and is compatible with these uses.
Planned Development (Exhibit C):
As part of the rezoning, the AH/PD zone district requires dimensional standards to be established
through the adoption of a Final Planned Development Plan. Typically, Planned Development is a
two-step process including Project Review (uses, layout, mass scale, dimensions, parking) and
Detailed Review (landscape, fenestration, materials, lighting). As a Public Project, Project
Review and Detailed Review are consolidated into one review, with a recommendation from
P&Z and final approval on all aspects of the project from City Council. The proposed
dimensional requirements for this project, the current zoning requirements (R-15), and a similar
use zone district (RMF) are provided in the table below for comparison.
Table 1: Proposed Dimensional Requirements
Dimensions Proposed R-15 (existing) RMF
Minimum Gross Lot Area 9,000 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft.
Minimum Net Lot Area per Unit 900 sq. ft. n/a n/a
Maximum Allowable Density 10 units 1 unit n/a
Minimum Lot Width 75 ft. 75 ft. 60 ft.
Minimum Front Yard Setback 2.5 ft.1 25 ft. 5 ft.
Minimum Side Yard Setback (East) 2.5 ft.1 10 ft. 5 ft.
Minimum Side Yard Setback (West) 3.5 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft.
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft.
Maximum Site Coverage 47% n/a n/a
Maximum Height 28 ft. 25 ft. 32 ft.2
Minimum Percent Open Space 50% n/a n/a
Minimum Trash Access Area 150 sq. ft. n/a 120 sq. ft.3
Maximum Allowable Floor Area 8,416 sq. ft. 4,500 sq. ft. 13,500 sq. ft.2
Maximum Allowable Deck Area 2,463 sq. ft. 675 sq. ft. 2,025 sq. ft.
Minimum Off-street Parking 10 spaces4 1 space 10 spaces
1projections such as decks and balconies may encroach into the setback.
2based on parcel density
3based on number of units
4to be provided in the Main Street right-of-way
P15
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 7 of 13
Overall, staff is supportive of the proposal. The applicant has requested to establish Maximum
Allowable Floor Area, Deck Area, and Site Coverage at 10% higher and Minimum Open Space
at 10% lower than what is currently designed. This is to allow for some flexibility in more
refined Floor Area calculations and other minor changes to the design than may need to be
accounted for as the design is refined. The AH/PD zone district suggests an Allowable Floor
Area of 1.1:1 for this size lot, which is approximately 9,900 sq. ft. Even with the 10% increase,
the proposed 8,416 sq. ft. falls well below this amount. There are no recommended Site
Coverage or Open Space requirements in the zone district.
The overall site plan for the project requires reduced setbacks, placing the buildings up close to
the street, which provides a strong pedestrian presence along 7th Street and Main Street. This
also allows for a generous common open space on the property in the northwest corner and
provides some relief from the surrounding development to the north and west. The height and
massing for the project are designed as a two-story form that emphasizes verticality with a
pattern of modules that alternate in setback, height, form and materiality. The verticality is
important due to the corner location (as seen in Figure 6 below), surrounding context and long
building frontages along both streets.
Figure 6: Southeast perspective
Although the parking requirement is established through the Planned Development review
process, the parking requirements in Chapter 26.515 are used as a guide for comparative uses.
This property is located within the Aspen Infill Area, which requires a minimum of one parking
unit and maximum of 1.25 parking units per dwelling unit for multi-family residential. The
proposed project includes 10 one-bedroom units for a total 10 minimum and 12.5 maximum
parking units. The parking requirement total may be reduced by 1 unit through the provision of
excess Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) credits beyond the required amount. This can be in
P16
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 8 of 13
the form of on-site or nearby off-site mobility improvements. With excess mobility improvements,
the minimum parking units on site could be 9 spaces. The Code also allows for multi-family
residential projects in residential zone districts within the Aspen Infill Area to provide up to
100% of the parking requirement through a cash-in-lieu payment of $38,000 per space. These
funds are used for the construction of public parking facilities, transportation and mobility
improvements, transportation demand management facilities or programs, shared automobiles
or programs, and similar transportation or mobility-related facilities or programs as determined
appropriate by the City.
The applicant is proposing to provide 10 parking spaces (one per unit) within the Main Street
right-of-way to meet the Code recommended parking requirement. The proposal also includes a
variety of excess transportation improvements such as a new sidewalk on Main Street, bike
parking and storage, and upgrades to the existing bus stop on 7th Street. This project is located
close to town and has great access to public transit. Staff is appreciative of the large excess of
transportation improvements proposed for this project.
In traditional development, parking is typically located on-site and accessed from the alley and
required in both the residential and commercial design standards. When alley access is
available, this is the configuration that staff generally supports. Alleys are often used to locate
services such as utilities and trash, and also provide secondary access to a lot in order to
minimize conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles on the street. However, through a
combination of public outreach responses and an extensive traffic study, location of parking in
Main Street is the preferable option with no significant impact on traffic patterns. Engineering is
supportive of this location, provided final space configuration and orientation are determined
prior to building permit. The proposed design also results in a net increase of parking spaces for
the neighborhood by reconfiguring the existing parallel parking.
Since this project is going through a Planned Development process, alternative methods of
meeting the parking method may be considered, such as off-site parking, shared parking, or
additional TIA credits beyond the one permitted in Chapter 26.515. The applicant has stated that
the area adjacent to the alley (shown below) is retained as open space which could
accommodate parking if necessary in the future. This area could accommodate approximately 9-
10 of the required parking spaces.
If parking is not to occur off the alley at this time, staff suggests it should be memorialized in the
PD plat and agreement that no future structures or above ground utilities can be located in this
area if it is needed in the future for parking due to potential changes to the adjacent Main Street
right-of-way or additional parking is determined necessary.
P17
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 9 of 13
Figure 7: Area to reserve for future parking
The proposed design may necessitate a new transformer on-site. The Applicant will need to
determine this prior to City Council review and identify the proposed location, if necessary. A
new transformer should not be located within the area identified above.
Growth Management (Exhibit D):
As proposed affordable housing, there is no required mitigation in association with the
development. The project needs development allotments for ten (10) affordable housing units,
but there is no annual limit on affordable housing unit allotments. This project is subject to the
general growth management review requirements in Section 26.470.080 as well as those for
development of affordable housing, Section 26.470.100.D.
This is one of three affordable housing projects that are being proposed by Aspen Housing
Partners LLC in partnership with the City of Aspen. The proposed project is expected to be
financed in part using the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. As such,
the project will be deed-restricted and rented to qualified employees based on the APCHA and
LIHTC requirements. The project will be owned and operated by Aspen Housing Partners for a
period of 15-years minimum while the land remains under City ownership. At that time, the
applicant anticipates either reestablishing the LIHTC financing, operating the facility solely
under the APCHA guidelines, or converting the units to for-sale to qualified APCHA purchasers.
The units will remain deed-restricted in perpetuity regardless of the direction chosen after the
15-year period. Staff recommends that the details of this agreement be memorialized in the
Development Agreement.
At this time, the applicant has not proposed category designations for any of the units. It is
expected that these will be memorialized as part of the Development Agreement once all of the
City housing projects are finalized and a complete unit inventory is determined.
P18
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 10 of 13
The APCHA Board of Directors will review this proposal at their meeting on October 4, 2017.
The proposed units all require approval of a reduction in the Net Minimum Livable Square
Footage, pursuant to the APCHA Employee Housing Guidelines. Minimum required size is 700
sq. ft. for a one-bedroom. The average reduction required for this project is 3.6% (25.2 sq. ft.)
with a maximum reduction of 10.5% (73.5 sq. ft.). On September 6, 2017, the APCHA Board
reviewed the affordable housing project for 517 Park Circle. The Board supported reductions on
that project averaging 6.9%, stating that the livability of the units more than meets their needs of
an exceptional project. Staff anticipates a similar result from the 517 Park Circle project, but
recommends including a condition that the reductions need to be approved by APCHA prior to
City Council review.
Residential Design Standards (Exhibit E):
As a 100% residential development with more than 2 units, this project is subject to the Multi-
family Residential Design Standards. The Residential Design Standards are intended to ensure a
strong connection between residences and streets; ensure buildings provide articulation to break
up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood scale and character. The standards do not
prescribe architectural style, but do require that residences, while serving the needs of the
owners, contribute positively to the streetscape.
Staff finds the proposed project to meet all applicable Residential Design Standards for a multi-
family residential project. The project is oriented to the street and does not contain any garages.
The proposed design includes five ground-level units and 10 street-facing units. Therefore, a
minimum of two street-facing entrances are required (one per four ground-leve street-facing
units) and ten principal windows (one per street-facing unit). The design includes five street-
facing entrances, and each street-facing unit contains a window that meets the minimum
dimensions of the standard. The design standards state that a multi-family building that has
access from an alley is required to access parking from the alley. Discussion of proposed
parking and staff recommendation is in the “Planned Development” section above.
Although the project meets the minimum requirements for Residential Design Standards, the
Planned Development review allows for a more robust conversation related to design. The
criteria require a project to provide visual interest and incorporate present day details, while
using materials that are respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history.
While the project provides visual interest and the overall form of the design is appropriate, the
prevalent materials in the vicinity include wood or brick as a primary material, with other more
modern materials such as metal panels or stucco as a secondary material. Generally, where
wood and brick are used in the area, the materials help to reduce the scale of buildings with
their roughly 4-inch high coursing, such as the 7th & Main affordable housing and 734 W. Main
Street, which are both across the street from this project. Staff is concerned with the relatively
large-scale composite panels being applied to the largest modules of the project and recommend
adjustment, such as cladding the gable elements with horizontal or vertical siding/rain screen
and using the larger composite panels on the flat roofed elements. Staff would like to see the use
of primary and secondary materials be more consistent with the surrounding character of
residential properties.
P19
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 11 of 13
Figure 8: Proposed 7th Street Façade
P20
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 12 of 13
Figure 9: 7th & Main Affordable Housing Figure 10: 734 W. Main Street
The upper floor balconies do not contain any covering, which could pose a snow/ice shedding
issue with some sloped roofs angling toward the balconies. Staff suggests incorporating roof
eaves or overhangs to provide cover for these balconies. Additionally, eaves or overhangs can
help reduce the perceived scale of the project and reference historic building details
traditionally found on residential structures.
REFERRAL DEPARTMENTS:
The application was reviewed by Engineering, Building, Zoning, Parks, Environmental Health,
Sanitation District, and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA). The APCHA
Board of Directors will review the application at their October 4th meeting. All received
comments from referral departments are included in Exhibit F, with applicable comments
P21
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street – Staff Memo 10.3.17
Page 13 of 13
included in the draft resolution. There are a few issues with building accessibility that appear to
be addressed in the updated plan set. The applicant also needs to determine if a new transformer
is required for this project. A new transformer will be required on-site, which can have a large
impact on the site planning for this project. In general, most other comments can be dealt with
during the building permit process.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends P&Z recommend approval to City Council with the following conditions:
1. Revise material configuration to reduce prominence of panels and provide a more
residential scale.
2. Incorporate roof eaves or overhangs on upper levels to prevent snow shedding and
provide a more residential scale.
3. Verify if a new transformer is needed for the project. If a new transformer is necessary,
provide the proposed location on updated site plan.
4. Provide a revised Transportation Impact Analysis in response to Engineering comments.
5. Receive APCHA approval for unit size reductions.
PROPOSED MOTION:
“I move to recommend approval to City Council with conditions for the project located at 802
W. Main Street.”
EXHIBITS:
A. Review Criteria – Public Project
B. Review Criteria – Rezoning
C. Review Criteria – Planned Development
D. Review Criteria – Growth Management
E. Review Criteria – Residential Design Standards
F. DRC Comments
G. Application
H. Application updates received 9.25.17
I. Public Notice
J. Public Comment received by 9.28.17
P22
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street
Planning & Zoning Commission
Resolution No.__, Series 2017
Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. __
(SERIES OF 2017)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL GRANT APPROVAL OF MAJOR PUBLIC
PROJECT REVIEW AND ASSOCIATED LAND USE REVIEWS FOR 802 W. MAIN
STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS Q, R, AND S, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF
ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
Parcel ID: 273512308005
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application for 802
W. Main Street (the Application) from Aspen Housing Partners LLC (Applicant) with consent
from the City of Aspen (Owner) for Major Public Project Review; and,
WHEREAS, all code citation references are to the City of Aspen Land Use Code in
effect on the day of initial application – August 2, 2017, as applicable to this project; and,
WHEREAS, as the property is owned by a governmental agency and this is an
affordable project developed by the City in conjunction with a private developer, the Applicant
has requested this Application to be reviewed as a Public Project, pursuant to Chapter
26.500.030 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received comments on the
Application from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building
Department, Environmental Health Department, Parks Department, Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority, and Public Works Department, as a result of the Development Review
Committee meeting held on September 6, 2017; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the proposed
Application and recommended approval with conditions; and,
WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of
public noticing submitted to the record, a summary of public outreach was provided by the
applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304.035, and the public was
provided full access to review the Application; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed the Application at a duly
noticed public hearing on October 3, 2017, during which the recommendations of the
Community Development Director and comments from the public were heard by the Planning &
Zoning Commission, and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of ____ to ____ (_ –
_).
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
P23
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street
Planning & Zoning Commission
Resolution No.__, Series 2017
Page 2 of 4
Section 1: Approvals
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends City Council grant 802 W. Main Street
Major Public Project review approval and the associated land use reviews for Rezoning, Planned
Development, Growth Management, and Residential Design Standards, subject to the
recommended conditions of approval as listed herein. The proposed project includes rezoning
the property to Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD), and development of ten
(10) affordable housing units. The recommended dimensions are attached as Exhibit A to this
resolution.
Section 2: Subsequent Reviews
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Applicant is required to obtain Public Project Review approval from the City Council. Prior to
second reading of the ordinance by the City Council, Applicant shall:
1. Revise material configuration to reduce prominence of panels and provide a more
residential scale.
2. Incorporate roof eaves or overhangs on upper levels to prevent snow shedding and
provide a more residential scale.
3. Verify if a new transformer is needed for the project. If a new transformer is necessary,
provide the proposed location on updated site plan.
4. Provide a revised Transportation Impact Analysis in response to Engineering comments.
5. Receive APCHA approval for unit size reductions noted in Section 3 below.
Section 3: Affordable Housing
The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends approval of ten (10) affordable
housing units. The unit types shall be as follows:
1. Ten (10) 1-bedroom units (17.5 FTEs)
As represented in the application, the proposed units are recommended to be granted a reduction
in the Net Minimum Livable Square Footage, pursuant to the APCHA Employee Housing
Guidelines (“Guidelines”) as follows:
Unit Proposed Minimum % Deficit
101 681.9 700 2.6%
102 690.6 700 1.4%
103 626.5 700 10.5%
104 690.6 700 1.4%
105 684.9 700 2.2%
201 681.9 700 2.6%
202 690.6 700 1.4%
203 626.5 700 10.5%
204 690.6 700 1.4%
205 684.9 700 2.2%
P24
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street
Planning & Zoning Commission
Resolution No.__, Series 2017
Page 3 of 4
Section 4: Parking Impact Requirement
A minimum of ten (10) parking spaces should be provided in the Main Street right-of-way, with
final configuration and orientation to be approved by the Engineering Department. The Final
Planned Development Plat and Agreement should include language that no future structures or
above ground utilities can be located in the area adjacent to the alley if it is needed in the future
for parking due to potential changes to the adjacent Main Street right-of-way.
Section 5:
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation
presented before the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development
approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by
other specific conditions or an authorized authority.
Section 6:
This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of
any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended
as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 7:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be
deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 3rd day of October, 2017.
Approved as to form: Approved as to content:
_______________________________ ___________________________________
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Skippy Mesirow, Chair
Attest:
_______________________________
Cindy Klob, Records Manager
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Recommended Dimensional Requirements
P25
VI.A.
802 W. Main Street
Planning & Zoning Commission
Resolution No.__, Series 2017
Page 4 of 4
Exhibit A – Recommended Dimensional Requirements
Dimensions Proposed
Minimum Gross Lot Area 9,000 sq. ft.
Minimum Net Lot Area per Unit 900 sq. ft.
Maximum Allowable Density 10 units
Minimum Lot Width 75 ft.
Minimum Front Yard Setback 2.5 ft.1
Minimum Side Yard Setback (East) 2.5 ft.1
Minimum Side Yard Setback (West) 3.5 ft.
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 ft.
Maximum Site Coverage 47%
Maximum Height 28 ft.
Minimum Percent Open Space 50%
Minimum Trash Access Area 150 sq. ft.
Maximum Allowable Floor Area 8,416 sq. ft.
Maximum Allowable Deck Area 2,463 sq. ft.
Minimum Parking 10 spaces2
1decks and balconies are permitted to encroach into the setback in addition to the allowed projections
listed in Section 26.575.020.E(5).
2to be provided pursuant to Section 4: Parking Impact Requirement, of this Resolution.
P26
VI.A.
Exhibit A – Public Project
Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT A
PUBLIC PROJECT
26.500.070 General review standards
The following review standards shall be used in review of any application for Public Projects:
1. The proposed project complies with the zone district limitations, or is otherwise
compatible with neighborhood context; and
Staff Findings: The project site is currently located in the R-15 zone district. The applicant
proposed to rezone the property to AH/PD. The purpose of the AH/PD zone district is to
provide for the use of land for affordable housing. These properties are intended to be
scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types. All dimensional requirements
are established through the Planned Development review process, though some are
recommended, including density and Allowable Floor Area. The proposed project is easily
within these recommended dimensions. Surrounding land uses include a variety of housing
types ranging from single-family to dense multi-family development (several of which are
affordable housing) and some commercial along Main Street. The property is bounded on the
north and west by the Bavarian Inn Condos affordable housing and caddy corner from the 7th
and Main affordable housing. There are also several multi-family developments within the
nearby vicinity, including the Villas of Aspen, Aspen Villas, Skandia Townhouses, and 700 W.
Hopkins Condos. Affordable multi-family housing falls within this range of development and
is compatible with these uses. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed project supports stated community goals; and
Staff Findings: The proposed project supports several community goals found within the
Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). There is an entire chapter in the AACP that speaks to
the importance of developing affordable housing. Below is a list of AACP housing policy
statements that this project supports:
I.2. Deed-restricted housing units should be utilized to the maximum degree possible.
I.3 Deed-restricted housing units should be used and maintained for as long as
possible, while considering functionality and obsolescence.
II.1 The housing inventory should bolster our socioeconomic diversity.
III.1 Ensure fiscal responsibility regarding the development of publicly-funded
housing.
III.2 Promote broader support and involvement in the creation of non-mitigation
housing inventory.
IV.1 Affordable housing should be designed for the highest practical energy efficiency
and livability.
IV.2 Affordable housing must be located within the Urban Growth Boundary.
P27
VI.A.
Exhibit A – Public Project
Page 2 of 2
IV.5 The design of new affordable housing should optimized density while
demonstrating compatibility with the massing, scale, and character of the
neighborhood.
IV.6 The residents of affordable housing and free-market housing in the same
neighborhood should be treated fairly, equally, and consistently with regard to any
restrictions or conditions on development such as parking, pet ownership, etc.
The AH/PD zone district purpose is intended to be scattered throughout the City and serve as
protected areas that provide deed-restricted housing for year-round employees. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
3. The proposed project complies with all other applicable requirements of the Land Use
Code; and
Staff Findings: See detailed responses to applicable Code sections in Exhibits B-E. Staff finds
this criterion to be met with conditions.
4. The proposed project receives all development allotments required by Chapter 26.470,
Growth Management Quota System.
Staff Findings: The proposed project is requesting allotments for 10 affordable housing units.
There is no annual limit for affordable housing units. See detailed responses in Exhibit D.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
P28
VI.A.
Exhibit B – Rezoning
Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT B
REZONING
26.310.090. Rezoning - Standards of review.
In reviewing an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning
and Zoning Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land
uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Findings: The project site is currently located in the R-15 zone district. The applicant
proposes to rezone the property to AH/PD. The purpose of the AH/PD zone district is to
provide for the use of land for affordable housing. These properties are intended to be
scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types. All dimensional requirements
are established through the Planned Development review process, though some are
recommended, including density and Allowable Floor Area. The proposed project is easily
within these recommended dimensions. Surrounding land uses include a variety of housing
types ranging from single-family to dense multi-family development (several of which are
affordable housing) and some commercial along Main Street. The property is bounded on the
north and west by the Bavarian Inn Condos affordable housing and caddy corner from the 7th
and Main affordable housing. There are also several multi-family developments within the
nearby vicinity, including the Villas of Aspen, Aspen Villas, Skandia Townhouses, and 700 W.
Hopkins Condos. Affordable multi-family housing falls within this range of development and
is compatible with these uses. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
B. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on
public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage
facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Findings: In general, the included ability to serve letters from utility providers express
that there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed development, or that required upgrades
will be undertaken by the corresponding utility provider. An email from the Water Department
states that it is unknown if there is capacity within the existing water mains to serve the
development. If there is not enough capacity, the applicant is responsible to upsize the mains
as part of this development. As additional housing units, it is expected this development will
likely result in increased use of the parks, schools, transportation facilities and emergency
medical facilities, however 9 additional units from what could be built today is unlikely to
represent a significant impact on these facilities. The applicant is proposing several alternative
transportation improvements to help offset and diversify the transportation options available to
future residents of this development. The project is still subject to Impact Fees intended to help
offset the impacts of additional development. Staff finds this criterion to be met with
conditions.
C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment.
P29
VI.A.
Exhibit B – Rezoning
Page 2 of 2
Staff Findings: The proposed development does not result in significantly adverse impacts to
the natural environment. The site is generally flat and will remain that way. The subgrade
area has a minimal footprint, reducing the required excavation. There is not a significant
amount of existing mature vegetation on this site. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City and in harmony with the public interest and the intent of this Title.
Staff Findings: The proposed project supports several goals related to the development of
affordable housing, which can be found within the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP).
Below is a list of AACP housing policy statements that this project supports:
I.2. Deed-restricted housing units should be utilized to the maximum degree possible.
I.3 Deed-restricted housing units should be used and maintained for as long as
possible, while considering functionality and obsolescence.
II.1 The housing inventory should bolster our socioeconomic diversity.
III.1 Ensure fiscal responsibility regarding the development of publicly-funded
housing.
III.2 Promote broader support and involvement in the creation of non-mitigation
housing inventory.
IV.1 Affordable housing should be designed for the highest practical energy efficiency
and livability.
IV.2 Affordable housing must be located within the Urban Growth Boundary.
IV.5 The design of new affordable housing should optimized density while
demonstrating compatibility with the massing, scale, and character of the
neighborhood.
IV.6 The residents of affordable housing and free-market housing in the same
neighborhood should be treated fairly, equally, and consistently with regard to any
restrictions or conditions on development such as parking, pet ownership, etc.
The AH/PD zone district purpose is intended to be scattered throughout the City and serve as
protected areas that provide deed-restricted housing for year-round employees. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
P30
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 1 of 11
EXHIBIT C
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26.445.050. Project Review Standards.
The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any
dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. The
burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application
and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The underlying
zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the
dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional
variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review
of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the
Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following:
A. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies
with applicable adopted regulatory plans.
Staff Findings: This property is not subject to any adopted regulatory plans. Staff finds this
criterion to be not applicable.
B. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development
on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the
property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep,
rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide
areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could
harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable
for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed
in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation
techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs,
mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review
and documented within a Development Agreement.
Staff Findings: The Geotechnical Report in the application states that the property is suitable
for development. There are no natural or man-made hazards located on this property. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
C. Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the
area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used:
1. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints such as
steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows
development to blend in with or enhance said features.
Staff Findings: The existing site topography is generally flat and will remain so in the
proposed design. There is little existing vegetation, with those in the northwest being preserved
as part of the open space. There are no waterways or hazards to account for on this site. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
P31
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 2 of 11
2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or
features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or
contribute to the identity of the town.
Staff Findings: The proposed project preserves the topography, which is general flat. There is
not a significant amount of mature vegetation. There are no other features that have historic,
cultural or ecological importance. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context.
Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and
service vehicle access.
Staff Findings: The proposed building is oriented to the public street and sited to reflect the
neighborhood context, which is generally oriented along the Original Townsite grid. Sufficient
access is provided to the property through Main Street or by the alley. Staff finds this criterion
to be met.
D. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established
during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional
requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following
criteria:
1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations.
Staff Findings: The applicant proposes to rezone the property to Affordable Housing/Planned
Development (AH/PD). The AH/PD zone district establishes all dimensional requirements for
a project through the adoption of a Planned Development approval, with a couple of
recommended dimensions. The proposed project dimensions are in the table below, related to
existing zoning and a similar use zone district.
Dimensions Proposed R-15 (existing) RMF
Minimum Gross Lot Area 9,000 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft.
Minimum Net Lot Area per Unit 900 sq. ft. n/a n/a
Maximum Allowable Density 10 units 1 unit n/a
Minimum Lot Width 75 ft. 75 ft. 60 ft.
Minimum Front Yard Setback 2.5 ft. 25 ft. 5 ft.
Minimum Side Yard Setback (East) 2.5 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft.
Minimum Side Yard Setback (West) 3.5 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft.
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft.
Maximum Site Coverage 47% n/a n/a
Maximum Height 28 ft. 25 ft. 32 ft.*
Minimum Percent Open Space 50% n/a n/a
Minimum Trash Access Area 150 sq. ft. n/a 120 sq. ft.**
Maximum Allowable Floor Area 8,594 sq. ft. 4,500 sq. ft. 13,500 sq. ft.*
Maximum Allowable Deck Area 2,463 sq. ft. 675 sq. ft. 2,025 sq. ft.
Minimum Off-street Parking 10 spaces*** 1 space 10 spaces
*based on parcel density
**based on number of units
P32
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 3 of 11
***to be provided in the Main Street right-of-way
Since there are no established dimensions for the proposed zone district, the application does
not require any variations. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable.
2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary
uses of the project.
Staff Findings: The primary use of the project is multi-family affordable housing. The
proposed dimensions strike a balance between the allowances of the Residential Multi-Family
(RMF) zone district and the underlying and surrounding residential zone districts, which
include R-6, R-15, RMF, MU and AH/PD. Staff also has some conditions related to the
proposed parking (see response to 4. below). Staff finds this criterion to be met with
conditions.
3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the
neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of
nearby historical or cultural resources.
Staff Findings: The pattern of development for this neighborhood is a mix of primarily
residential uses, including a significant amount of free-market and affordable multi-family
housing. The project is a two-story building that is pushed closer to Main Street and 7th Street
to reduce the apparent mass of the project from neighboring development. The proposed
setbacks allow for an improved street presence while providing meaningful open space on site
and increased separation from the development to the west and north. The proposed floor area
is significantly lower than what is suggested in the AH/PD zone district for a lot of this size to
appropriately fit the context. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable
number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of
the proposed uses. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities,
including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile
disincentive techniques in the proposed development, and the potential for joint use of
common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement
Staff Findings: Although the parking requirement is established through the Planned
Development review process, the parking requirements in Chapter 26.515 are used as a guide
for comparative uses. This property is located within the Aspen Infill Area, which requires a
minimum of one parking unit and maximum of 1.25 parking units per dwelling unit for multi-
family residential. The proposed project includes 10 one-bedroom units for a total 10
minimum and 12.5 maximum parking units. The parking requirement total may be reduced by
1 unit through the provision of excess Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) credits beyond
the required amount. This can be in the form of on-site or nearby off-site mobility
improvements. With excess mobility improvements, the minimum parking units on site could
be 9 spaces. The Code also allows for multi-family residential projects in residential zone
districts within the Aspen Infill Area to provide up to 100% of the parking requirement
through a cash-in-lieu payment of $38,000 per space. These funds are used for the
construction of public parking facilities, transportation and mobility improvements,
P33
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 4 of 11
transportation demand management facilities or programs, shared automobiles or programs,
and similar transportation or mobility-related facilities or programs as determined appropriate
by the City.
The applicant is proposing to provide 10 parking spaces (one per unit) within the Main Street
right-of-way to meet the Code recommended parking requirement. The proposal also includes
a variety of excess transportation improvements such as a new sidewalk on Main Street, bike
parking and storage, and upgrades to the existing bus stop on 7th Street. This project is located
close to town and has great access to public transit. Staff is appreciative of the large excess of
transportation improvements proposed for this project.
In traditional development, parking is typically located on-site and accessed from the alley and
required in both residential and commercial design standards. When alley access is available,
this is the configuration that staff generally supports. However, through a combination of
public outreach responses and an extensive traffic study, location of parking in Main Street is
the preferable option with no significant impact on traffic patterns. Engineering is supportive
of this location, provided final space configuration and orientation are determined prior to
building permit. The proposed design also results in a net increase of parking spaces for the
neighborhood.
Since this project is going through a Planned Development process, alternative methods of
meeting the parking method may be considered, such as off-site parking, shared parking, or
additional TIA credits beyond the one permitted in Section 26.515. The applicant has stated
that the area adjacent to the alley (shown below) is retained as open space which could
accommodate parking if necessary in the future. This area could accommodate approximately
9-10 of the required parking spaces.
If parking is not to occur off the alley at this time, staff suggests it should be memorialized in
the PD plat and agreement that no future structures or above ground utilities can be located in
this area if it is needed in the future for parking due to potential changes to the adjacent Main
Street right-of-way or additional parking is determined necessary. Staff finds this criterion to
be met with conditions.
5. The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include specific
allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review.
Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110 –
Amendments.
Staff Findings: As a Major Public Project, Project Review and Detailed Review are combined
at City Council. The applicant has requested a 10% increase in both the Site Coverage and
Allowable Floor Area and 10% decrease in Open Space from what is currently designed to
accommodate more refined Floor Area calculations and potential minor changes as the design
progresses. There is no required maximum for Site Coverage or minimum for Open Space.
Even with the 10% increase, the Allowable Floor Area will still be far below what the AH/PD
zone district suggests for a lot this size. Staff recommends the Floor Area and Site Coverage
limitations incorporate the 10% increase and Open Space incorporate the 10% decrease.
P34
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 5 of 11
E. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the
context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be
used:
1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in
Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design
Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation.
Staff Findings: This project is subject to the Residential Design Standards. See responses in
Exhibit E. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design
standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are
finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or
conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review.
Staff Findings: See responses in Detailed Review Standards, Section 26.445.070.D, below.
F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle,
and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular
facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on
existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific
designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed
Review and documented within a Development Agreement.
Staff Findings: The proposed design improves alternative transportation facilities through a
number of methods. A new sidewalk is proposed along Main Street, which currently does not
exist. Bike parking and storage is proposed on site. Improvements to the existing bus stop on
7th Street are proposed. Final details of these facilities will require Engineering and
Transportation approval and should be memorialized in the Development Agreement. Staff
finds this criterion to be met with conditions.
G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering
design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the
applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the
City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require
specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the
Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement.
Staff Findings: Engineering design and mitigation techniques are identified in the
Preliminary Engineering Report and Preliminary Drainage Report. Engineering has provided
comments regarding the proposed techniques in the DRC comments (Exhibit F). Staff finds
this criterion to be met with the condition that Engineering comments are addressed.
H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall
upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be
at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation
P35
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 6 of 11
techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and
documented within a Development Agreement.
Staff Findings: In general, the included ability to serve letters from utility providers express
that there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed development, or that required upgrages
will be undertaken by the corresponding utility provider. An email from the Water Department
states that it is unknown if there is capacity within the existing water mains to serve the
development. If there is not enough capacity, the applicant is responsible to upsize the mains
as part of this development. The proposed development may require a new transformer. The
applicant needs to determine this prior to City Council review. If a new transformer is deemed
necessary, applicant should identify where the proposed location is on a revised site plan. As
additional housing units, it is expected this development will likely result in increased use of
the parks, schools, transportation facilities and emergency medical facilities, however 9
additional units is unlikely to represent a significant impact on these facilities. The applicant
is proposing several alternative transportation improvements to help offset and diversify the
transportation options available to future residents of this development. The project is still
subject to Impact Fees intended to help offset the impacts of additional development. Staff
finds this criterion to be met with conditions.
I. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed
legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or
obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned
Development retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure
adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and
driveways are prohibited.
Staff Findings: The project proposes to eliminate the existing curb cut on Main Street.
Vehicular access will still occur from Main Street through the form of on-street parking. Staff
has recommended it should be memorialized in the PD plat and agreement that no future
structures or above ground utilities can be located in the area adjacent to the alley if it is
needed in the future for parking due to potential changes to the adjacent Main Street right-of-
way or additional parking is determined necessary. There are no proposed gates at this
location and no streets will be under private ownership. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
26.445.070. Detailed Review Standards.
Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the
development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a
development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the
Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following:
A. Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all
dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses
conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review.
Staff Findings: As part of the Public Project review process, Project Review and Detailed
Review are combined for City Council final review. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
P36
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 7 of 11
B. Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS
allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments.
Staff Findings: The project requires 10 affordable housing allotments. There is no annual
limit for affordable housing units. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C. Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible with the
context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be
used:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well-designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserves
existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental
plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Vegetation removal, protection, and
restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space.
Staff Findings: The proposed landscape plan preserves an adequate amount of existing
vegetation, particularly around the property edges, and proposes an amply quantity and variety
of new vegetation surrounding the project to improve the streetscape and screening from
neighboring properties. The exterior spaces on the project are primarily used to accommodate
new vegetation and circulation, with a larger area in the northwest corner of the property for
other uses. The presence of parks and open space in close proximity to this project makes on-
site usable open space less necessary. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive
grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency,
maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated.
Staff Findings: The design of the structure and site grading allow for at-grade entrances to all
ground-level units from Main Street and 7th Street. Upper level units are only accessible by
stairway both at the north end of the east structure and between the two structures within the
breezeway. A lift is located within the breezeway to allow access into the storage area below
grade. The applicant has indicated that the project will meet the requirements of ADA,
however building has noted that two of the units have stepped back entrances and do not
provide an accessible route to the trash area. The site provides adequate access for emergency,
maintenance and service vehicles either by the alley or Main Street. The area along the
alleyway has been identified for snow storage. Final snow storage areas will be confirmed
prior to permit submittal. If future parking is to occur off the alley, additional snow storage
will need to be identified. Staff finds this criterion to not be met.
3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner
that enhances the site.
Staff Findings: There are currently no energy efficiency or production features proposed in
the landscape for this project. Any such features contemplated in the future are anticipated to
be located on the structure and integrated into the architecture. Staff finds this criterion to be
not applicable.
P37
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 8 of 11
4. All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any
kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s
outdoor lighting standards.
Staff Findings: The proposed site lighting includes two simple bollard lights to define access
points from Main Street and 7th Street. Four other bollard lights are proposed in the
courtyard. Strip lighting is located on the inside of the garden planter. This represents
minimal lighting that is only located to identify site entrances and for safety purposes. The
applicant has stated that all exterior lighting will comply with the City’s standards. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
5. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29
– Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties.
Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that all site drainage will be accommodated on
site and will meet the requirements of Title 29. Engineering has provided initial comments on
the project drainage in the DRC comments (Exhibit F). Staff finds this criterion to be met with
the condition that Engineering comments are addressed.
D. Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize
quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria
shall be used:
1. The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details
and use of materials respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic
history.
Staff Findings: While the project provides visual interest and the overall form of the design is
appropriate, the prevalent materials in the vicinity include wood or brick as a primary
material, with other more modern materials such as metal panels or stucco as a secondary
material. Generally, where wood and brick are used in the area, the materials help to reduce
the scale of buildings with their roughly 4’ high coursing. Staff is concerned with the
relatively large-scale composite panels being applied to the largest modules of the project and
recommend adjustment, such as cladding the gable elements with horizontal or vertical
siding/rain screen and using the larger composite panels on the flat roofed elements. Staff
would like to see the use of primary and secondary materials be more consistent with the
surrounding character of residential properties. Staff finds this criterion to not be met.
Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with applicable design standards,
including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412,
Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation.
Staff Findings: Although the project meets the minimum requirements for Residential Design
Standards, see staff response to materials in Section 26.445.070.D, Design Standards and
Architecture above. Staff finds this criterion to not be met.
2. Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects.
P38
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 9 of 11
Staff Findings: The upper floor balconies facing Main Street and 7th Street do not contain
any covering, which could pose a snow/ice shedding issue with some sloped roofs angling
toward the balconies. Staff suggests incorporating roof eaves or overhangs to provide cover for
these balconies. Additionally, eaves or overhangs can help reduce the perceived scale of the
project and reference historic building details traditionally found on residential structures.
Staff finds this criterion to not be met.
3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that
enhances the architecture.
Staff Findings: There are no energy efficiency or production features that are proposed at this
time. There is a consideration for PV panels introduced into the architecture. If these features
are incorporated they will be subject to the height limitations established in the Land Use
Code, or will otherwise require an amendment to the Planned Development. Staff finds this
criterion to be not applicable at this time.
4. All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of
any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s
outdoor lighting standards.
Staff Findings: Structure lighting has not been identified at this time. Any proposed lighting
on the building will be required to meet the City’s outdoor lighting requirements or will
otherwise require an amendment to the Planned Development. Staff finds this criterion to not
be applicable at this time.
E. Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed
development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a
proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner
within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities
together with a prohibition against future development is required.
Staff Findings: On-site open space will be provided, but will not be prorated between
residential units at this point, as they will be rental units. Maintenance and upkeep of the open
space and common elements will be the responsibility of the property management entity. Staff
finds this criterion to be not applicable.
F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle,
and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular
facilities and improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing
pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities.
Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during
Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise
required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the
design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any
required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction
documents.
P39
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 10 of 11
Staff Findings: The proposed design improves alternative transportation facilities through a
number of methods. A new sidewalk is proposed along Main Street, which currently does not
exist. Bike parking and storage is proposed on site. Improvements to the existing bus stop on
7th Street are proposed. Final details of these facilities will require Engineering and
Transportation approval and should be memorialized in the Development Agreement. Staff
finds this criterion to be met with conditions.
G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering
design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to
comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design
Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP).
Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during
Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 –
Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP).
These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept
complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction
documents.
Staff Findings: Engineering design and mitigation techniques are identified in the
Preliminary Engineering Report and Preliminary Drainage Report. Engineering has provided
comments regarding the proposed techniques in the DRC comments (Exhibit F). Staff finds
this criterion to be met with the condition that Engineering comments are addressed.
H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall
upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be
at the sole costs of the developer.
Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during
Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 –
Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP).
These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept
complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction
documents.
Staff Findings: In general, the included ability to serve letters from utility providers express
that there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed development, or that required upgrages
will be undertaken by the corresponding utility provider. An email from the Water Department
states that it is unknown if there is capacity within the existing water mains to serve the
development. If there is not enough capacity, the applicant is responsible to upsize the mains
as part of this development. The proposed development may require a new transformer. The
applicant needs to determine this prior to City Council review. If a new transformer is deemed
necessary, applicant should identify where the proposed location is on a revised site plan. As
additional housing units, it is expected this development will likely result in increased use of
the parks, schools, transportation facilities and emergency medical facilities, however 9
additional units is unlikely to represent a significant impact on these facilities. The applicant
is proposing several alternative transportation improvements to help offset and diversify the
P40
VI.A.
Exhibit C – Planned Development Review
Page 11 of 11
transportation options available to future residents of this development. The project is still
subject to Impact Fees intended to help offset the impacts of additional development. Staff
finds this criterion to be met with conditions.
I. Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each
phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on
subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases
from the construction of later phases. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public
facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly
by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and
any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts
associated with the phase.
Staff Findings: The applicant does not propose phasing as part of this development plan. Staff
finds this criterion to be not applicable.
P41
VI.A.
Exhibit D – Growth Management
Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT D
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
26.470.080. General Review Standards.
All Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council applications for growth management
review shall comply with the following standards.
A. Sufficient Allotments: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to
accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.040.B. Applications for
multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110.A shall be required to meet
this standard for the growth management years from which the allotments are requested.
Staff Findings: The proposed development requires allotments for ten (10) affordable housing
units. There is no annual limit for affordable housing units. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
B. Development Conformance: The proposed development conforms to the requirements and
limitations of this Title, of the zone district or a site specific development plan, any adopted
regulatory master plan, as well as any previous approvals, including the Conceptual Historic
Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and
the Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable.
Staff Findings: The project site is currently located in the R-15 zone district. The applicant
proposed to rezone the property to AH/PD and amend the Planned Development. The purpose
of the AH/PD zone district is to provide for the use of land for affordable housing. These
properties are intended to be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types.
All dimensional requirements are established through the Planned Development review
process, though some are recommended, including density and Allowable Floor Area. The
proposed project is easily within these recommended dimensions. This property is not subject
to any regulatory master plans. Planned Development – Project Review is being consolidated
with Growth Management as part of the Public Project review process. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
C. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade public
infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole
costs of the developer. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage
treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid
waste disposal, parking and road and transit services.
Staff Findings: The applicant has provided ability to serve letters from all of the utility
providers. Most have stated that there is available capacity within the existing infrastructure to
accommodate the development, with the exception of the Water Department. Any necessary
upgrades to existing water lines will be required of the applicant as part of this development.
Any required upgrades to other utility lines will be undertaken by the respective utility
provider. The proposed development may require a new transformer. The applicant needs to
determine this prior to City Council review. If a new transformer is deemed necessary,
P42
VI.A.
Exhibit D – Growth Management
Page 2 of 5
applicant should identify where the proposed location is on a revised site plan. Staff finds this
criterion to be met with conditions.
D. Affordable Housing Mitigation.
a. 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.
Staff Findings: There is no commercial component to this application. Staff finds this
criterion to be not applicable.
b. 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.
Staff Findings: There is no lodge component to this application. Staff finds this criterion to be
not applicable.
c. 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%
P43
VI.A.
Exhibit D – Growth Management
Page 3 of 5
2027 45%
2028 48%
2029 51%
2030 54%
2031 57%
2032 60%
2033 63%
2034 65%
Staff Findings: There is no existing commercial development. Staff finds this criterion to be
not applicable.
d. Unless otherwise exempted in this chapter, when a change in use between
development categories is proposed, the employee mitigation shall be based on the
use the development is converting to. For instance, if a commercial space is being
converted to lodge units, the mitigation shall be based on the requirements for lodge
space, outlined in subsection 2, above. Conversely, if lodge units are being converted
to commercial space, the mitigation shall be based on the requirements for
commercial space, outlined in subsections 1 and 3, above.
Staff Findings: There is no change of use required or proposed in this project. Staff finds this
criterion to be not applicable.
e. For free-market residential development, affordable housing net livable area shall be
provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-
market residential net livable area.
Staff Findings: There is no free-market residential component to this application. Staff finds
this criterion to be not applicable.
f. For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on
Section 26.470.110.D.
Staff Findings: This project is not considered an essential public facility. Staff finds this
criterion to be not applicable.
g. 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:
P44
VI.A.
Exhibit D – Growth Management
Page 4 of 5
i. 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.
ii. 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.
iii. 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.
iv. 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.
v. 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.
vi. 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.
vii. 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
Staff Findings: The proposed units are not required as mitigation or proposed for the
development of Affordable Housing Credits. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable.
h. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary
units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential
occupied (RO).
Staff Findings: The proposed units are being provided absent a requirement. The applicant
has not identified what categories the units will be at this time. It is anticipated that the
categories will be memorialized as part of the development agreement. Staff finds this criterion
to be met.
D. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance
with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with
P45
VI.A.
Exhibit D – Growth Management
Page 5 of 5
conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements
outlined in Section 26.470.080.
1) The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The
owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned
qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The
deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to
own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing
Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended.
The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by
an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages
affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with
the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge.
Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin
County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to
this mandatory "for sale" provision.
Staff Findings: The proposed project is expected to be financed in part using the federal Low
Income Housing Tax Credit program. As such, the project will be deed-restricted and rented to
qualified employees based on the APCHA and LIHTC requirements. The project will be
owned and operated by Aspen Housing Partners for a period of 15-years minimum while the
land remains under City ownership. At that time, the applicant anticipates either
reestablishing the LIHTC financing, operate the facility solely under the APCHA guidelines,
or converting the units to for-sale to qualified APCHA purchasers. The units will remain
deed-restricted in perpetuity regardless of the direction chosen after the 15-year period. At this
time, the applicant has not proposed category designations for any of the units. It is expected
that these will be memorialized as part of the Development Agreement once all of the City
housing projects are finalized. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
P46
VI.A.
Exhibit E – Residential Design Standards
Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT E
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
26.410.040. Multi-family standards
A. Applicability. Unless stated otherwise below, the design standards in this section shall apply
to all multi-family development.
B. Design standards.
1. Building Orientation (Flexible).
a) Applicability. This standard shall apply to all lots except:
(1) Lots with a required front yard setback of at least ten (10) vertical feet above or
below street grade.
b) Intent. This standard seeks to establish a relationship between buildings and streets to
create an engaging streetscape and discourage the isolation of homes from the
surrounding neighborhood. The placement of buildings should seek to frame street
edges physically or visually. Buildings should be oriented in a manner such that they
are a component of the streetscape, which consists of the street itself and the
buildings that surround it. Building orientation should provide a sense of interest and
promote interaction between buildings and passersby. Building orientation is
important in all areas of the city, but is particularly important in the Infill Area where
there is a strong pattern of buildings that are parallel to the street. Designs should
prioritize the visibility of the front façade from the street by designing the majority of
the front façade to be parallel to the street or prominently visible from the street.
Front facades, porches, driveways, windows, and doors can all be designed to have a
strong and direct relationship to the street.
c) Standard. The front façade of a building shall be oriented to face the street on which
it is located.
d) Options. Fulfilling one of the following options shall satisfy this standard:
(1) Strong Orientation Requirement. The front
façade of a building shall be parallel to the
street. On a corner lot, both street-facing
façades of a building shall be parallel to each
street. See Figure 30.
(2) Moderate Orientation Requirement. The front
façade of a building shall face the street. On a
corner lot, one street-facing façade shall face
each intersecting street.
The availability of these options shall be determined according to the following
lot characteristics:
Figure 30
P47
VI.A.
Exhibit E – Residential Design Standards
Page 2 of 5
Staff Findings: The subject site is located within the Aspen Original Townsite grid and is a
corner lot. The proposed development is oriented parallel to both Main Street and 7th Street.
Staff finds this standard to be met.
2. Garage Access (Non-flexible).
a) Applicability. This standard is required for all lots that have vehicular access from an
alley or private street.
b) Intent. This standard seeks to minimize potential conflicts between pedestrians and
vehicles by concentrating parking along alleys and away from the street where
pedestrian activity is highest. This standard also seeks to minimize the visibility of
plain, opaque and unarticulated garage doors from streets by placing them in alleys
wherever possible. Properties with alleys shall utilize the alley as an opportunity to
place the garage in a location that is subordinate to the principal building, further
highlighting the primary building from the
street. This standard is important for any
property where an alley is available, which is
most common in the Infill Area.
c) Standard. A multi-family building that has
access from an alley or private street shall be
required to access parking, garages and
carports from the alley or private street. See
Figure 31.
Staff Findings: The proposed project has access from an alley. However, through a
combination of public outreach responses and an extensive traffic study, location of parking
in Main Street is the preferable option with no significant impact on traffic patterns.
Engineering is supportive of this location, provided final space configuration and orientation
are determined prior to building permit. The proposed design also results in a net increase of
parking spaces for the neighborhood.
Since this project is going through a Planned Development process, alternative methods of
meeting the parking method may be considered, such as off-site parking, shared parking, or
additional TIA credits beyond the one permitted in Section 26.515. The applicant has stated
that the area adjacent to the alley is retained as open space which could accommodate parking
if necessary in the future. If parking is not to occur off the alley at this time, staff suggests it
should be memorialized in the PD plat and agreement that no future structures can be located
in this area to allow for parking there if it is needed in the future due to potential changes to
Figure 31
P48
VI.A.
Exhibit E – Residential Design Standards
Page 3 of 5
the adjacent Main Street ROW. This area could accommodate approximately 9-10 of the
required parking spaces. Staff finds this criteria to be met with conditions.
3. Garage Placement (Non-flexible).
a) Applicability. This standard is required for all lots that do not have vehicular access
from an alley or private street.
b) Intent. This standard seeks to prevent large
expanses of unarticulated facades close to the
street and ensure garages are subordinate to
the principal building for properties that
feature driveway and garage access directly
from the street. Buildings should seek to
locate garages behind principal buildings so
that the front façade of the principal building
is highlighted. Where locating the garage behind the front façade
of the principal building is not feasible or required, designs should minimize the
presence of garage doors as viewed from the street. This standard is important in all
areas of the city where alley access is not an option.
c) Standard. The front of a garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport shall
be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front façade of the
principal building. See Figure 32.
Staff Findings: The proposed project does not include any garages in the design. Surface
parking is proposed within the Main Street right-of-way. Staff finds this standard to be not
applicable.
4. Entry Connection (Non-flexible).
a) Applicability. This standard shall apply to all lots except:
(1) Lots with a required front yard setback of at least ten (10) vertical feet above or
below street grade.
b) Intent. This standard seeks to promote visual and physical connections between
buildings and the street. Buildings should use architectural and site planning features
to establish a connection between these two elements. Buildings shall not use features
that create barriers or hide the entry features of the house such as fences, hedgerows
or walls. Buildings and site planning features should establish a sense that one can
directly enter a building from the street through the use of pathways, front porches,
front doors that face the street and other similar methods. This standard is critical in
all areas of the city.
c) Standard. A building shall provide a visual and/or physical connection between a
primary entry and the street. On a corner lot, an entry connection shall be provided to
at least one (1) of the two intersecting streets.
d) Options. Fulfilling at least one of the following options shall satisfy this standard:
Figure 32
P49
VI.A.
Exhibit E – Residential Design Standards
Page 4 of 5
(1) Street Oriented Entrance. There shall be at
least one (1) entry door that faces the street for
every four (4) street-facing, ground-level units
in a row. Fencing, hedgerows, walls or other
permitted structures shall not obstruct
visibility to the entire door. See Figure 33.
(2) Open Front Porch. There shall be at least one
(1) porch or ground-level balcony that faces
the street for every street-facing, ground-level
unit. Fencing, hedgerows, walls or other
permitted structures shall not obstruct
visibility to the porch or the demarcated
pathway. See Figure 34.
Staff Findings: The proposed design includes five ground-level units, therefore a minimum of
two street-facing entrances are required. The design includes five street-facing entrances (one
per unit) that are not obstructed by fencing, hedgerows or walls. Staff finds this standard to be
met.
5. Principal Window (Flexible).
a) Applicability. This standard shall apply to all lots except:
(1) Lots with a required front yard setback of at least ten (10) vertical feet above or
below street grade.
b) Intent. This standard seeks to prevent large expanses of blank walls on the front
façades of principal buildings. A building should incorporate significant transparency
on the front façade. Designs should include prominent windows or groups of
windows on the front façade to help promote connection between the residence and
street. This standard is important in all areas of the city.
c) Standard. At least one (1) street-facing principal window or grouping of smaller
windows acting as a principal window shall be provided for each unit facing the
street. On a corner unit with street frontage on two streets, this standard shall apply to
both street-facing façades.
d) Options. Fulfilling at least one of the following options shall satisfy this standard:
(1) Street-Facing Principal Window. The front façade shall
have at least one (1) window with dimensions of three
(3) feet by four (4) feet or greater for each dwelling
unit. See Figure 35.
Figure 33
Figure 34
P50
VI.A.
Exhibit E – Residential Design Standards
Page 5 of 5
(2) Window Group. The front façade shall have at
least one (1) group of windows that when
measured as a group has dimensions of three (3)
feet by four (4) feet or greater for each dwelling
unit. See Figure 36.
Staff Findings: In the proposed design, all ten units face a street, with six facing 7th Street and
four facing Main Street. Although this standard only requires the front façade to provide
principal windows, all ten units contain a window or group of windows facing the respective
street that meet the minimum dimensions of this standard. Staff finds this standard to be met.
Figure 35
Figure 36
P51
VI.A.
Exhibit F – DRC comments
Page 1 of 4
EXHIBIT F
DRC COMMENTS
Engineering
These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet
submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting.
Utilities:
1. The application documents call out that a new water service line might be needed, this will
need to be determined prior to building permit issuance, ideally prior to submittal. Include
line size and location on the civil sheets.
2. If the water service line will need to be 4” or larger, fire flow calcs and a thrust restraint
design are required for review. 2” or smaller, a letter from a fire flow designer stating that a
2” line or smaller is sufficient in providing adequate fire flows will be acceptable.
3. If a new service line is proposed, the existing water service line to the property it shall be
abandoned per COA Water Department Standards.
4. Sheet C-105 shows a proposed alignment for the water service line, how will this be installed
at 7’ deep without impacting the neighboring property?
5. Page 13 calls out that there may not be adequate capacity in the existing transformer. Please
verify. If a new transformer needs to be installed or this transformer needs to be upsized, the
City’s standard is for the new transformer/utility pedestals to be located on the projects
property. Note that adequate clearance distances will be required (3’ sides and rear, 10’ front)
and that an easement be granted prior to building permit issuance. If an example easement is
desired by the applicant the Engineering Department can provide one.
ROW:
1. A raised pedestrian crossing is not permitted to be installed in this location due to the
complexity of the intersection and snow removal. We can discuss traffic calming measures in
a separate meeting if desired by the applicant.
2. The alley shall be brought into compliance with the COA Engineering Design Standards for
alley entrances. Provide a design at building permit submittal.
3. Discussions with the City and the applicant have resulted in an agreement that the ROW
improvements (parking alignment, orientation, curb and gutter and storm infrastructure) shall
be kept in the land use application plans with a disclaimer on the drawings and in the
application, that the final configuration and orientation of the ROW improvements and
assignment of the parking will be determined prior to building permit. The Engineering
Department will work with the applicant to finalize the disclaimer wording prior to P&Z.
TIA (MMLOS):
1. Clarify what traffic calming features are proposed for claiming credit. We can discuss
options in an additional meeting.
2. TDM to be reviewed by Lynn.
P52
VI.A.
Exhibit F – DRC comments
Page 2 of 4
Parks
1. Tree permit required.
2. Tree mitigation amounts may be incorrect.
3. Tree protection fencing is required and must be inspected PRIOR to any construction
activity.
4. 5’ minimum planting strip for Right of Ways.
5. City Forester to determine how close to trunk of evergreen at corner of 7th & Main applicant
can get for foundation of house.
6. Floating sidewalk may be required around large evergreen at corner of 7th & Main.
7. Bike parking area raises concerns with proximity to evergreen.
8. Aspen tree at neighbors to the west will require a jogged sidewalk with a floating component.
9. Tree species to be planted need to be vetted by City Forester.
Building
10. Upper level has only 1 exit. This allows for a max of 4 units on the upper level and a
maximum travel distance of 125' from the furthest point, travelling down the stairs to either a
protected exit or to a spot clear of the building. You exceed this distance and have 5 units.
2015 IBC 1006.3.2
11. Basement storage is a common facility and must be accessible. The total area of inaccessible
stories exceeds 3,000 sqft so you may not take the 3000 sqft exemption. A lift would be
acceptable if occupant load of basement storage is 5 or less. 2015 IBC 1104.4
12. No elevator: Only main level units required to be Type B. No Type A req'd. 2015 IBC
1107.7
13. Need accessible on property route from all accessible units to trash. 2 units appear to have
stepped porches. 2015 IBC 1104.5
14. Van accessible parking space: 8' space and 8' aisle ICC A117.1-2009 section 502.
Environmental Health
1. The current proposal does not specific what the dimensions of the trash and recycling space
will be (pg. L.2.00 & L.4.00). Code (12.10.050 (A) a) requires a minimum of 120 square
feet. The proposed location meets other parts of the code requirements (i.e. alley access,
ADA access, hauler access, etc.).
2. Table 03 (pg. 33 of the application) indicates there will be 150 SF of space for trash and
recycling, but this is not shown on any of the drawings.
3. The narrative indicates the enclosure will meet the wildlife protection requirements of
12.08.020.
I suggest the applicant send me revised drawings showing how they will meet code or have
meeting with me to develop a plan for meeting code.
Zoning
1. Addressing, request from the City; don’t wait until building permit
2. Mail delivery, is there a room, or area dedicated to mail?
3. Setbacks: East setback the balconies are in the setback and the Code does not provide an
exception for the encroachment of a balcony into setbacks.
P53
VI.A.
Exhibit F – DRC comments
Page 3 of 4
4. Provide FA calculations which include subgrade calculations (storage under building does
not appear to have subgrade calculations), and deck in totals. Conversation is needed for the
extensive space below the walk-ways and 2nd level area. The Code exempts space below a
deck. However, the space below the second level ‘deck’ is extensive.
5. Garden in setback shall meet 26.575.020(E)(5)Allowed projections into Setback.
Planning
Although the project meets the minimum requirements for Residential Design Standards, the
Planned Development review allows for a more robust conversation related to design. The
criteria require a project to provide visual interest and incorporate present day details, while
using materials that are respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history.
While the project provides visual interest and the overall form of the design is appropriate, the
prevalent materials in the vicinity include wood or brick as a primary material, with other more
modern materials such as metal panels or stucco as a secondary material. Generally, where wood
and brick are used in the area, the materials help to reduce the scale of buildings with their
roughly 4’ high coursing. We are concerned with the relatively large-scale composite panels
being applied to the largest modules of the project and recommend adjustment, such as cladding
the gable elements with horizontal or vertical siding/rain screen and using the larger composite
panels on the flat roofed elements. Staff would like to see the use of primary and secondary
materials be more consistent with the surrounding character of residential properties.
The upper floor balconies do not contain any covering, which could pose a snow/ice shedding
issue with some sloped roofs angling toward the balconies. This is also in contrast to the PD
review criteria which requires building entrances to be designed to minimize icing and snow
shedding effects. Staff suggests incorporating roof eaves or overhangs to provide cover for these
balconies. Additionally, eaves or overhangs can help reduce the perceived scale of the project
and reference historic building details traditionally found on residential structures.
The applicant has stated that the area adjacent to the alley is retained as open space which could
accommodate parking if necessary in the future. In traditional development, parking is typically
located and accessed from the alley and required in both residential and commercial design
standards. If parking is not to occur off the alley at this time, it should be memorialized in the PD
plat and agreement that no future structures can be located in the open space area adjacent to the
alley to allow for parking there if it is needed in the future due to potential changes to the
adjacent Main Street ROW.
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and specifications,
which are on file at the District office.
ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof,
foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system.
Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to
specific ACSD requirements and prior to soil stabilization. Soil nails are not allowed in ROW.
On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD.
P54
VI.A.
Exhibit F – DRC comments
Page 4 of 4
Connection to the ACSD sewer system will require installation of a pumping system.
One tap is allowed for each building.
Shared service line agreements will be required where more than one unit is served by a single
service line.
Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans
will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or
easements to be dedicated to the district.
All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office can
develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district.
Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve
capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional
proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment
capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all
development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed.
Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity
of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees
to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The
District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the
material cost difference for larger line).
The glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to
any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have
approved containment facilities.
The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed
building and utility plans are available.
P55
VI.A.
802 West Main Street
Affordable Housing Development
Public Project Application for Rezoning to Affordable Housing
Planned Development and Related Reviews
Method Planning + Development
119 South Spring Street, Ste. 102
Aspen Colorado 81611
EXHIBIT G
P56
VI.A.
Public Project Review of an Application for
Rezoning to Affordable Housing Planned
Development including Planned
Development, Growth Management,
Residential Design, and Transportation &
Parking Reviews for the Property at 802
West Main Street in Aspen, Colorado
Submitted on behalf of:
City of Aspen
in Partnership with
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
(970)319-9298
July 27, 2017
Prepared by:
Method Planning + Development
102 South Spring Street, Ste. 102
Aspen, CO 81611
970.274.0890
P57
VI.A.
PROJECT DIRECTORY
OWNER
City of Aspen
Chris Everson
130 S. Galena St
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.429.1834
Chris.everson@cityofaspen.com
APPLICANT
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
Jason Bradshaw
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970-319-9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
PLANNER
Method Planning + Development
119 South Spring St.
Suite 102
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.274.0890
adam@methodpd.com
ARCHITECT
David Johnston Architects
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.3444
F: 970.920.2186
brian@djarchitects.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Connect One Design
0123 Emma Rd.
Suite 200A
Basalt, CO 81621
P. 970.279.1030
hh@connectonedesign.com
CIVIL ENGINEER
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
P: 970.340.4130
F: 866.876.5873
richardg@rfeng.biz
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
McDowell Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
P: 970.623.0788
kari@mcdowelleng.com
P58
VI.A.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1
II. PROPERTY HISTORY & EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................ 3
A. History and Background ........................................................... 3
B. Existing Approvals .................................................................... 4
C. Existing Property Conditions ................................................... 4
D. Public and Neighborhood Outreach ........................................ 5
III. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................. 7
A. General Project Summary ......................................................... 7
B. Site Planning and Landscape Design ...................................... 8
1. Site and Landscape Design ................................................................ 9
2. Site Calculations ............................................................................... 11
3. Site and Exterior Lighting ............................................................... 12
C. Civil Engineering Design ........................................................ 13
1. Utilities .............................................................................................. 13
2. Stormwater and Drainage ............................................................... 14
3. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter ............................................................. 14
D. Building and Architectural Design ......................................... 15
1. Sustainability .................................................................................... 16
2. Main Level ........................................................................................ 16
3. Lower Level ...................................................................................... 17
4. Upper Level ...................................................................................... 17
5. Floor Area Calculations .................................................................. 18
6. Building Mass, Scale and Architectural Character ...................... 21
E. Transportation and Parking Management ............................. 24
1. Proposed Parking Plan and Management ..................................... 24
P59
VI.A.
2. Transportation Management .......................................................... 27
F. Area Land Use and Property Rezoning .................................. 29
G. School Land Dedication and Impact Fees ............................ 34
IV. REGULATORY REVIEW REQUIREMENTS ...................................... 36
A. Public Projects Review (Chapter 26.500) .............................. 36
1. Major Public Project Review (26.500.040.C) ................................ 36
2. General Review Standards (26.500.070) ........................................ 36
B. Amendments to Official Zone District Map – Rezoning
(Chapter 26.310) ............................................................................... 37
1. Rezoning – Procedure for amendment (26.310.060) ..................... 37
2. Rezoning - Standards of review (26.310.090) ............................... 37
C. Planned Development (Chapter 26.445) ................................ 39
1. Project Review Standards (26.445.050) ......................................... 39
2. Detailed Review Standards (26.445.070) ........................................ 45
D. Growth Management Quota System (Chapter 26.470) ......... 51
1. General Review Standards (26.470.080) ........................................ 51
2. Planning and Zoning Commission applications (26.470.100) ...... 51
E. Transportation and Parking (Chapter 26.515) ....................... 52
1. Parking Requirements (26.515.040) ............................................... 53
2. Meeting Parking Requirements (26.515.050). ............................... 53
3. Off-Street Parking Requirements (26.515.070) ............................. 55
F. Residential Design Standards – Multi-family (Chapter 26.410)
58
1. Building Orientation (Flexible) ....................................................... 58
2. Garage Access (Non-Flexible) ......................................................... 59
3. Garage Placement (Non-Flexible) .................................................. 59
P60
VI.A.
4. Entry Connection (Non-Flexible) ................................................... 59
5. Principle Window (Flexible) ........................................................... 59
Appendix A – Application Documents ................................................... A
Appendix B – Reports, Studies & Letters .............................................. B
Appendix C – Planned Development Plan Set (24X36 Formatting) .... C
P61
VI.A.
1
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this application is to request approval for the development of a multifamily
affordable housing facility (the “Proposed Project”) on the property at 802 West Main Street (the
“Property”) in the City of Aspen, (Legal Description – LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY
AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF
COLORADO). A vicinity map showing the location of the Proposed Project is provided as
Exhibit 1 in Appendix A of this application. This application is submitted pursuant to Title 26,
Land Use Regulations, of the 2017 Aspen Municipal Code (the “Code”) by Aspen Housing
Partners, LLC (the “Applicant”), in partnership with and on behalf of the current ownership of
the property, the City of Aspen (the “Ownership”).
In accordance with the Code and as outlined in the Pre-Application Conference Summary
(Exhibit 2, Appendix A), this application is requesting to rezone the Property to AH/PD by way
of the creation and adoption of a Final PD Development Plan pursuant to Section 26.445 of the
Code and subsequent Planned Development Agreement for the Property. There are no prior
approvals associated with the Property that require consideration for the purposes of this
application review. As an affordable housing project developed by a private developer in
conjunction with the City of Aspen, the Applicant is also requesting review as a Major Public
Project. In addition to the reviews for rezoning the property and Planned Development, the
Proposed Project will also require approval through the following reviews:
§ Rezoning
§ Planned Development
§ Growth Management Quota System (for Affordable Housing development standards)
§ Transportation and Parking
§ Residential Design Standards (Multifamily)
The application also addresses the proposed approach to school land dedication and impact fees
along with any other standards or related review requirements within the Code.
A signed letter from the City of Aspen Attorney, disclosing the Ownership of the property
as the City of Aspen and giving the right to the Applicant to apply for the development review on
P62
VI.A.
2
its behalf is included as Exhibit 3 in Appendix A. A signed letter by the Applicant, authorizing
Method Planning + Development to represent the Applicant in the application development,
submittal and proceedings of the land use review is provided as Exhibit 4 in Appendix A. The
Land Use Application Form, the Agreement for Fee Payment Form, the Dimensional
Requirement Form, and signed HOA Compliance are also provided in Appendix A as Exhibits 5-
8 respectively. As the Proposed Project is being developed in partnership with the City of Aspen,
the Applicant is requesting a fifty percent (50%) waiver for Community Development review
fees as allowed for under the Code for any City Projects that are Non-General Fund Projects
(Exhibit 9, Appendix A). The application deposit will be provided at the point of determination
that the application is complete. Lastly, as the Proposed Project will be reviewed before the
Planning and Zoning Commission (the “P&Z”) and the City Council (the “Council”), a signed
and notarized Affidavit of Public Notice Form will be furnished, along with an accompanying
list of all property, mineral rights owners and government agencies to be noticed by mail, at the
point of posting, publishing and mailing of the required noticing pursuant to Chapter 26.310 of
the Code.
This application packet is organized in sections to provide the reviewer(s) with easy
reference to the requested material included in the following sections:
§ History and Existing Conditions on the property and any previous approvals as well as
the documentation of any correspondence that has occurred between the Applicant and
the Community Development Department and other City Departments;
§ Proposed Project Description outlining the scope of the proposed development and how
the requested rezoning relates to the surrounding neighborhood and all supporting
descriptions, calculations and illustrations relevant to the application review; and
§ Regulatory Review Requirements identifying how the rezoning and development
proposed through this application are compliant with the relevant Chapters of the Code,
and that satisfy the Public Project review before P&Z and Council.
Where otherwise not embedded in the body of this application, all related material, site and
design documents for the reviews are included in appendices at the back of this packet.
Specifically, the proposed Planned Development Plan Set, including the draft PD Survey Plat in
accordance with Section 26.490.040, Approval Documents Content and Form of the Code, are
located in Appendix C of this application.
P63
VI.A.
3
II. PROPERTY HISTORY & EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. History and Background
Situated at the northwest corner of the West Main and 7th Street intersection of the “s-
curves” entrance to Aspen, the 802 Main Street Property was originally developed in 1954,
with the most recent improvements to the Property completed in 1973. In 2007 the City of
Aspen acquired the Property with funds from the Housing Fund for the purpose of
developing affordable housing. Since purchasing the Property, the City has gone through
numerous studies and conducted extensive outreach in order to assess the needs and type of
affordable housing that would ultimately be best suited for the Property. Specific to this
initial outreach, the community was presented with three (3) comparative development
scenarios entailing twelve (12) units, ten (10) units and eight (8) units – all 1-bedroom
rental apartments of 700 square feet each. There was also consideration for the inclusion of
2-bedroom units of 900 square feet each into the program mix. The overall feedback
received was mixed. Whereas the higher density scenarios were generally more supported
by the overall public, neighbors who live in close proximity to the Property had concerns
with any of the development scenarios presented.
In 2016, the takeaways from these studies and outreach efforts culminated with the
City’s issuance of a request for proposals (RFPs) from qualified developers for the
planning, design and construction of the Property into affordable rental housing. The RFP
noted that a request for re-zoning should include information for use by City Council,
which would provide an understanding of the increased amount of residential floor area and
quantity of dwelling units above the maximum allowed under the Property’s current
zoning. In addition to the rezoning considerations, the RFP required the presentation of a
thoughtful design that would allow the 802 West Main Street Property to be utilized for a
high level of taxpayer value, while also addressing the concerns of nearby neighbors by
complementing the fabric of the existing neighborhood. The proposals were also
encouraged to demonstrate considerations related to increased neighborhood density, such
as access, parking, transportation and any other impacts. The Applicant’s proposal and
project team were selected first by an RFP committee and then approved by City Council to
P64
VI.A.
4
enter into the outreach and planning phases for carrying out the development of the
Property into affordable rental housing in partnership with the City of Aspen.
B. Existing Approvals
There are no prior approvals associated with the Property that require consideration
for the purposes of this application review.
C. Existing Property Conditions
The 802 West Main Street property is currently zoned R-15, Moderate-Density
Residential. The existing single-family residence is approximately 1,750 sq. ft. of total
floor area according to a Pitkin County Assessor’s Existing Conditions Report for the
Property. The Property is 9,000 square feet of total land area and with its location at the
busy corner of Colorado State Highway 82 (“Highway 82”), access to and from the
Property is challenged, with a right turn only restriction exiting from the alley onto 7th
Street and from the West Main Street intersection with the Highway 82. The existing
topography of the site lacks any topographic features, but slopes from south to north,
dropping approximately three (3) feet in elevation from West Main Street to the alley. The
front yard facing West Main Street has an informal transition between the Property and the
street edge. The fenced area to the rear of the structure abuts the Property line at the alley,
with unmaintained vegetation extending approximately eight feet (8’) into the alley right-
of-way. A detached sidewalk runs the length of the property line on the 7th Street frontage
of the Property, with a pioneer Blue Spruce tree anchoring the hard corner of 7th and West
Main Streets.
The Geotechnical Engineering Report conducted by H-P/Kumar and provided as
Exhibit 4 in Appendix B, concludes that the soil structure and percolation qualities of the
existing soil composition at the Property are adequate for development. The Report also
provides recommendations for structural design and civil engineering design based on the
current design and building location of the Proposed Project. The Phase I Environmental
Assessment conducted by H-P Kumar and provided as Exhibit 5 in Appendix B, concludes
P65
VI.A.
5
that the assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (REC) in
connection with the Property.
The context of the surrounding residential neighborhood is a mix of affordable
multifamily housing and free-market multifamily residential uses. Section III.F of this
application includes a Neighborhood Zoning and Land Use Context map that presents both
the extensive amount of multifamily residential uses that surround the Property. The
immediately adjacent uses surrounding the Property to the west and north are comprised of
the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Planned Development, including the original
Bavarian Inn facing 7th Street. Diagonally across the West Main and 7th Street intersection
at 719 West Main Street, is the affordable housing facility known as “7th and Main”, which
is a three-story condominium complex facility. Other multifamily properties in the
neighborhood to the west are commonly known as the Villas of Aspen and West Bleeker
Street Townhomes. A multifamily triplex also exists at northwest corner of the 800 block
between West Main and West Bleeker Streets.
D. Public and Neighborhood Outreach
Prior to the submittal of this land use application, the Applicant has conducted a
public outreach campaign over the previous six (6) months. As the 802 West Main Street
project is one (1) of three (3) affordable housing projects being proposed by the Applicant,
the open houses addressed the other two (2) properties as well. The Outreach Process,
Goals and Schedule area attached as Exhibit 1 in Appendix B of this application (note:
although the outreach process was followed and completed in its entirety per the attached
Exhibit, certain dates adjusted as well as additional meetings before City Council in work
session format occurred above and beyond the process and schedule outlined).
In summary, and pursuant to Section 26.304.035 of the Code, the project team hosted
four (4) informational meetings and open houses with the community at large, which were
advertised in local papers, on public radio and byway of Grassroots broadcasting. Posters
and flyers were also hung around town and flyers distributed announcing the events. The
outreach entailed a real-time informational website that was updated throughout the process
and allowed visitors to provided comment, feedback or contact the project team directly by
P66
VI.A.
6
email of phone. Mailings and notices were furnished to all neighbors within proximity to
the project sites. In total, over 500 participants attended the community wide open houses.
Intermittently and as requested, the team also hosted breakout meetings and site visits with
key neighborhood stakeholders associated with each of the properties. Specific to the 802
West Main project, extensive meetings and material exchanges were held with the key
neighbors and HOA representative in the neighborhood. These efforts entailed site visits,
individual and/or small group meetings and large group meetings with residents of the
respective neighboring properties. As the amount of presentation material and various
means by which it was provided are significant, the Applicant, upon request by the
reviewers of this application, can furnish any/all of said material.
Following each major milestone of the outreach process, the project team, along with
a representative from City staff, presented the findings to City Council during work
sessions. The presentations included the data gathered from the various events and
meetings, and an analysis of the takeaways and findings. City Council then provided the
project team and City staff with specific direction for next steps in the outreach process in
advance of the development and submittal of this land use application. As the amount of
data and reporting documentation is significant, the Applicant, upon request by the
reviewers of this application, can furnish any/all said material.
P67
VI.A.
7
III. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section of the application presents and describes all aspects of the Proposed Project
as it relates to the relevant Code standards and requirements, including the scope of the proposed
development and how the requested rezoning relates to the surrounding neighborhood, as well as
all supporting descriptions, calculations and illustrations relevant to the application review.
A. General Project Summary
The Proposed Affordable Housing Project at 802 West Main Street is a ten (10)-unit
deed restricted apartment complex that is to be financed and operated under the federal
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (“LIHTC”) program. The Project is to be developed
under a joint Public Private Partnership (the “PPP”) between the City of Aspen, the Owner,
and the private development entity, Aspen Housing Partners LLC, the Applicant. The
Applicant will form an entity to develop and operate the project (the “Development
Entity”) that will be funded with equity that is sourced through the Federal Affordable
Housing Tax Credit program, as well as all required construction and permanent debt. The
City of Aspen, through its affordable housing fund, will supply any gap funding necessary
as a subordinate loan to the Development Entity. The Development Entity will be
responsible for constructing, leasing – in a to be determined partnership with APCHA –
operating and maintaining the Project for 15 years. During that time, members of the
Applicant will provide all necessary financing guarantees as well as all cost over-runs /
operating shortfalls. In addition, all units that are set aside as tax credit units will be
restricted to tenants making no more than 60% of the Pitkin County median income. After
this initial period, the City has the right to reestablish the LIHTC financing through an
extension of the PPP, initiate the right reserved to operate the facility solely under the
Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (the “APCHA”) guidelines, or initiate the right
reserved to convert the units to deed restricted condominium units for sale to qualified
purchasers under the APCHA guidelines. The deed restriction regarding affordability will
be a perpetual and will not be affected by the options outlined above.
The City and the Applicant will establish all deed restrictions and categorical
designations at a point following land use reviews, approvals and the issuance of a
P68
VI.A.
8
development order. The details of the deed restriction and categorical designations will be
memorialized through the Planned Development Agreement between the City and the
Applicant in accordance with Section 26.490.050, Development Agreements, of the Code.
To accomplish the development of the Proposed Project, the R-15 zoned Property
will need to be rezoned to a zone district that allows for a multifamily land use. The
following subsections of this application section present and describe the details of the
Proposed Project in accordance with the applicable standards, guideline and calculations as
provided for in the Code. In turn, and following review and approval, the project details
proposed herein will become the governing development standards and limits for the
Property as established through the Planned Development review and adoption. Lastly, the
final subsection of this application section presents and describes how the proposed details
and resulting multifamily project are compatible with surrounding land use patterns, zone
districts and neighborhood characteristics, ultimately providing the basis for rezoning the
Property to Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD).
B. Site Planning and Landscape Design
The 802 West Main Street Property lends itself to an efficient and neighborhood
compatible multifamily site design. The rectilinear corner lot provides an opportunity for
orienting a multifamily building in manner that anchors the significant corner location,
responding to the character at the entrance to Aspen and the busy context to the east along
Highway 82. This organization and location of the building also respectfully complements
the multifamily residential neighborhood to the west. As indicated in the Property
Improvement Survey (provided in Exhibit 1 of Appendix C) the existing topography of the
site lacks any topographic features, but slopes from south to north, dropping approximately
three (3) feet in elevation from West Main Street to the alley. A curb cut off of West Main
Street provides current vehicular access, while no sidewalk on the West Main Street
frontage exists and an insufficient sidewalk separates the Property from 7th Street.
Extensive overgrowth of vegetation to the rear of the Property extends approximately eight
(8) feet into the ally right-of-way.
P69
VI.A.
9
The new site design provides opportunity to improve each of the deficiencies and
bring the Property into a more compliant site design – both on the Property and within the
public right-of-way. An illustrative site plan and technical site plan for the Proposed
Project are provided for reference in Exhibits 2 and 3 of Appendix C of this application
respectively.
1. Site and Landscape Design
Guided by the Code standards for typical multifamily projects, along with the
patterns of development and character found in the West Main Street neighborhood,
the building footprint is oriented towards the street frontage property boundaries
along West Main and 7th Streets. Two and one-half foot (2.5’) front and east side yard
setbacks are proposed from both the West Main and 7th Street property lines. It
should be noted that this setback dimension is necessary to accommodate the
overhangs from second level decks and entry canopies that extend more than eighteen
(18”) inches beyond the building façades. The actual building line along these
property boundaries is approximately five feet (5’). With the design intent and
supporting feedback from the public outreach process, the building’s orientation tight
to the prominent corner provides for an anchoring quality at the primary corner of the
block/neighborhood to the west, while giving way to extensive open space within the
inner portion of the site, and reduced building mass adjacent to the neighboring
properties and uses within the block. These setbacks also allow for a two (2)-story
building to be achieved, rather than requiring a third story to accommodate the
equivalent proposed density. The streetscape design of both of these primary
frontages addresses the bustling “s-curve” intersection byway of reduced front yards,
while creating an appropriate relationship between the building façades, enhanced
landscaping, and the new ADA sidewalks and tree-planting strips. The vegetation
along the sidewalks is a combination of sod and native climate-adaptive perennial
mix, which will provide visual interest, while also reducing water requirements with
the native mix within the planting strip buffer. The setbacks and site design also
protect the existing pioneer spruce tree at the corner of the intersection.
P70
VI.A.
10
Further to the west of the Property, along the western-shared property boundary
with the multifamily affordable Bavarian Inn Condominiums, a three and one-half
foot (3.5’) side yard setback is proposed. A key consideration of the site design along
the western property boundary is that the side yard setback of the actual building
aligns with the footprint of the building to the west, while the proposed site area
further to the north along this property line is comprised of significant open space and
natural landscaping, matching the open space and various improvements of the
Bavarian condominiums to the west. It is important to note that this matching
orientation, specifically the open space along this property line to the north, was a
critical design consideration expressed through the neighborhood outreach process
that proceed this application submittal during the prior six (6) months. The design of
the open space is intentionally porous with the improvements to the west, lacking any
buffering or fencing to enhance a direct connectivity between these two site areas of
the neighboring properties. At the northernmost extent of this western side yard, the
Proposed Project’s trash and recycling enclosure is located adjacent to the alley,
aligning this structure with the approved location of the trash and recycling enclosure
for the Bavarian Inn condominiums pursuant to that property’s approved PUD Plan
Set. Currently that area is used as parking stalls for the Bavarian condominiums. This
proposed location creates an open connection with the common areas of both
properties, while providing appropriate trash and recycling service access from the
alley.
To the rear of the Property, along the northern property line that abuts the alley, a
rear yard setback of ten feet (10’) is proposed. This proposed dimension matches that
of the preexisting R-15 zone district standard for rear yard setback. The
improvements in this area of the site design were uniquely born out of the extensive
neighborhood outreach process that occurred throughout the six (6) months prior to
the submittal of this application. This outreach process established a heightened
concern regarding the overuse and highly conflicted and congested nature of the alley
of this block. As the block is comprised entirely of multifamily uses, the majority of
which are family oriented, the alley is used extensively for multiple purposes beyond
vehicular access, including a pedestrian corridor, a child activity area as well as
P71
VI.A.
11
various utility services such as trash, recycling and snowplowing. As a result, rather
than parking the Proposed Project from the alley, the Project’s parking is
accommodated in the West Main Street right-of-way to the south of the Property. The
details of this arrangement and the associated planning and design is described in
Section III.E and presented in Exhibit 6, 7 and 8 of Appendix B and Exhibits 2 and 3
of Appendix C of this application. As depicted in the illustrative site plan in Exhibit
2 of Appendix C, the first ten (10) parking stalls adjacent to the Property will be the
responsibility of the Applicant and assigned specifically to the Project’s residents.
The remaining seven (7) stalls to the west of the block will be the responsibility of the
City and serve as residential zone public parking spaces. Alternative to locating
parking along the Property’s northern property line, a common area is proposed that
benefits both the residents of the building as well as the surrounding neighbors. A key
takeaway that came out of the neighborhood outreach process was to establish a
relationship between the rear of the Property with existing uses and activities in the
alley to the north and west – the goal being to effectively create a backyard condition
of the Property rather and parking area. This goal is achieved through the proposed
soft-scape elements along the alley property line, including natural vegetation, a
raised vegetable planting bed and an undivided engagement of the rear of the
Property with the alley to the north and west. The interior of the site design includes
an open courtyard with natural vegetation and design elements that further blur the
division between the public realm of the alley and the property to the west with the
internal character of the proposed site design. The described site planning and design
of this area of the Proposed Project are provided in Exhibit 2 of Appendix C of this
application.
2. Site Calculations
As noted, the overall site area of the Property is 9,000 sq. ft. To provide detail to
the proposed AH/PD development standards, the following calculations have been
established in accordance with the Code.
Pursuant to Section 26.575.020.G, the Site Coverage of the Project is 3,821 sq. ft.
which is approximately 42%. As the project is at a conceptual design level for the
P72
VI.A.
12
purposes of land use reviews, this application is requesting that a ten percent (10%)
increase be allowed and memorialized as the maximum limit for Site Coverage. As a
result, the requested Site Coverage is proposed at 4,203 sq. ft. or 47% of the total site
area.
Establishing a standard for the amount of Open Space to be provided, as part of
the Proposed Project’s AH/PD development standards, is also required. In accordance
with the definition of Open Space in Section 26.104.100 of the Code, the current
conceptual site design results in approximately 5,029 sq. ft. of Open Space, or 56% of
the site area. Similar to and for the same reasons as the above request for Site
Coverage flexibility, the Applicant is requesting that the Open Space area is
established at an amount 10% less than currently calculated at this conceptual level.
The resulting Open Space area to be proposed as part of the AH/PD development
standards is 4,526 sq. ft. or 50% of the total site area.
3. Site and Exterior Lighting
Minimal site lighting is proposed in accordance with the requirements in the
City’s lighting code. With the intent to respect the current experiences of the
neighboring properties, the Proposed Project strongly complies with the City’s night
sky initiatives. Positioned at the prominent corner at the entrance to Aspen, a minimal
amount of building and site lighting have been introduced in order to meet code-
minimum requirements for building and pathway lighting. The exterior lighting plan
is provided in Exhibit 2 of Appendix C.
The building is outfitted with minimal wall sconce down lighting, all of which
meet Code compliant standards, which are integrated into the building’s architecture
for the purposes of providing convenience lighting at areas of function, circulation
and building entry. Within the site design, two (2) bollard lights are proposed to
define the access point off of the West Main Street sidewalk, serving the dual purpose
of safety and adequate pedestrian way finding. Additional pathway down lighting is
proposed within the courtyard to the rear of the property for the primary purpose of
providing safety and defining the courtyard circulation. Down lit strip lighting is also
proposed on the inside of the vegetable garden planter at the rear of the site for the
P73
VI.A.
13
same purposes of safety and pathway way finding. The two locations for this site
down lighting are located at the exterior stair on the southern side of the building, and
at the low retaining wall on the southeast corner of the building.
C. Civil Engineering Design
The Project’s Civil Engineer has completed preliminary utility assessments, obtained
letters to serve where applicable, and has completed a preliminary drainage report,
engineering report and design in accordance with City of Aspen Engineering standards and
Land Use Code requirements. The following section describes the takeaways of the reports
provided as Exhibit 2 and 3 of Appendix B and the Engineering Plan set provided as
Exhibit 3 in Appendix C.
1. Utilities
The Property currently has a water service connection from the ductile iron water
main in Main St. At this preliminary point, the Project Civil Engineer understands
that the existing waterline connecting from the West Main Street right-of-way may
not be adequate for accommodating the demands of the proposed multifamily project
and a new service tap may be required. This will be determined during the
construction and permitting documentation phase of the Project. No additional offsite
water infrastructure upgrades are understood to be necessary at this point. If
determined that any upgrades to the water utility are required, the Applicant will take
responsibility for those upgrades at its sole cost. Individual meters and shutoff valves
will be installed for each unit per the energy conservation goals of this project.
A currently installed sewer service line currently exists on the Property, and a new
service line, if required, can be tied into the sewer main line in the alley. If
determined that any upgrades, line extensions or existing secondary line upgrades are
necessary to provide service to the Proposed Project, the Applicant will take
responsibility for those upgrades at its sole cost.
In terms of electrical service, a transformer is located west of the Property, and a
new service line will have to be installed from this transformer to the Property. The
P74
VI.A.
14
Project Civil Engineer has considered that the transformer may not have adequate
capacity to service the proposed multifamily project and that it may need to be
upgraded. Communications are located behind the Property in the alley and can be
common trenched to the Property. A gas main line is located under the alley and gas
service can be tied into the Property from the service main. If confirmed that any
upgrades to these utilities are required, the Applicant will take responsibility for those
upgrades at its sole cost. Individual gas meters and shutoff valves will be installed for
each unit per the energy conservation goals of this Project.
2. Stormwater and Drainage
The Proposed Project will disturb more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the
Property and is therefore categorized as a Major Project in the URMP. The City of
Aspen Engineering Department requires WQCV for the entire site and detention is
provided on site for the 10-year and 100-year storm to accommodate a release rate to
pre-developed conditions. The runoff will have to be detained in drywells, and gravel
bed structures beneath pervious pavers. Due to the size of the Property, drywells will
likely be the most applicable, but alternative designs will be applied if possible. The
use of pervious pavers, grass buffers, and infiltration beds will likely be applied to the
design.
3. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter
As previously described, a new detached five foot (5’) sidewalk, tree planting
strip and curb and gutter will be installed along the Property’s West Main Street
property boundary as per section 4.5.2 of the City of Aspen Engineering Design
Standards. This installation, along with other considerations in the right-of-way, will
require a redesign of the corner ramp and bulb-out at the intersection of Main and 7th
to accommodate the related improvements. The alignment of the new curb and gutter,
tree planting strip and sidewalk will match that of the alignment further to the west on
800 block of West Main Street. This alignment will also establish the reconfiguration
of the parking on the north side of the street from parallel to ninety- (90) degree head-
in parking as described in greater detail below in Section III.E of this application and
presented in the Engineering Site plan in Exhibit 3 of Appendix C. Also previously
P75
VI.A.
15
described, it is expected that the Proposed Project will be replacing the sidewalk and
vegetative strip along North 7th Street, tying into existing top back of curb.
Due to uneven surfaces on West Main Street, the preliminary design is indicating
that a large offsite basin will need to be drained onto the site. A low point at the
intersection of West Main and North 7th Street collects water, as there is no drainage
infrastructure here. This will require additions to the right of way to collect this
stormwater. There are multiple options to repair this conflict. The option of
lengthening the City of Aspen Storm System to include this block would be ideal,
however unreasonably extensive, as the system would need to be lengthened by
approximately 600 feet. This approach would result in the Project only being required
to detain WQCV as it could connect to the storm system. A potentially more
reasonable and equally effective option includes the installation of a large drywell or
alternative collection system to accommodate this preexisting conflict.
D. Building and Architectural Design
The building and architectural design of the Proposed Affordable Housing Project has
been guided by the existing site conditions, the neighborhood-wide context and the
character of the immediate properties surrounding the Property. The proposed building
consists of ten (10) one-bedroom residential units, along with storage, circulation and
mechanical areas. This program is spread across a two (2)-story above grade “L” shaped
building configuration, pulled tight the primary corner of the Property at West Main and 7th
Streets. The primary storage and mechanical areas of the building are below grade. As
described in the above Section II.C of this application, the surrounding area is comprised
primarily of both market rate and deed restricted affordable multifamily uses. The
architectural character of the surrounding area is varied, consisting of a mix of era
architectural styles in the neighborhood to the west, and a variety of styles to the east with
historical character and land patterns found within the westernmost portion of the Main
Street Historic District. All building and architectural design material is provided as Exhibit
4 in Appendix C. The following subsections describe the building layout and the
architectural style of the Proposed Project.
P76
VI.A.
16
1. Sustainability
The Proposed Project will achieve a high-level of sustainable design and obtain
recognition through a variety of potential accreditation programs. Included in the
general design approach, along with the commitment the project team is making
during the detailed design and construction phases, the site and building designs will
take advantage of any/all multimodal design best practices, passive design
opportunities, and include as appropriate any high efficiency and non-fossil fuel
mechanical systems, low VOC paint and materials, photovoltaic arrays and any other
sustainable building practices that can be implemented. The project team will work
closely with the City of Aspen Building Department during construction and permit
document preparation in order to select the most appropriate and preferable systems
designs, implementation and respective programs to follow.
2. Main Level
The Main Level of the Proposed Project, which is on grade with the West Main
and 7th Street public right-of-ways, is oriented towards the two primary streets and
serves as the “front door” of the Project. Common pedestrian access off the West
Main and 7th Street sidewalks occurs at multiple locations. The primary common
access to the building is from West Main Street, accessing the vertical circulation area
of the building as well as the courtyard and site areas internal to the building
footprint. The vertical circulation area contains stairs up to the Upper Level and down
to the lower storage and mechanical level. A lift is also provided in this area from the
Main Level to the Lower Level for convenience and ADA accessibility. A secondary
common access to the building is proposed along 7th Street, providing access to the
courtyard and northern portion of the Property.
The remaining balance of the Main Level consists of five (5), approximately 700
sq. ft. one-bedroom residential units. Two (2) units facing West Main and 7th Street
have a front entry area that addresses the streetscape public realm. Each of these
units also has a secondary entrance from the courtyard internal to the Proposed
Project, creating a backdoor condition for secondary access. The remaining corner
unit on this level is accessed via a single entry off of the proposed courtyard in order
P77
VI.A.
17
to minimize the impact of the busy corner condition. As depicted in Exhibit 4 of
Appendix C, the interior design of each of the individual Main Level units are
designed with open floor plans, taking advantage of the two well-fenestrated exterior
walls to maximize day-lighting and ventilation in the primary living areas of the units.
Designed with generous bedroom layouts, one (1) bathroom, mud/laundry rooms and
ample in-unit storage, these units will provide the residents with exceptional living
experiences, which is a key tenet and guiding principle of the Proposed Project.
The floor areas for the Main Level consist of 3,375 sq. ft. of net livable area and a
total floor area of 3,663 sq. ft. spread between the interior building uses of this level
and applicable to the floor area definition pursuant to Section 26.104.100 of the Code.
A more detailed floor area summary is provided in the below subsection III.D.5 of
this application.
3. Lower Level
The Lower Level of the Proposed Project is entirely below grade in order to
provide storage and mechanical area for the Proposed Project. No Net Livable Floor
Area exists on this level. As presented in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C, the Lower Level
total floor area is 1,328 sq. ft. divided between 930 sq. ft. of non-unit storage equally
serving each of the residential units, and 398 sq. ft. of building mechanical area.
4. Upper Level
Similar to the Main Level of the Proposed Project, the Upper Level consists of
five (5) approximately 700 sq. ft. 1-bedroom units. The entry of each unit is
connected by a generous walkway, offering a deck-like condition at the front door of
each of the units internal to the site. Decks accessed off of the units’ primary living
areas, are provided for each unit along the respective street frontages. As depicted in
Exhibit 4 of Appendix C, the interior design of each of the individual Upper Level
units are designed with open floor plans, taking advantage of the two well-fenestrated
exterior walls to maximize day-lighting and ventilation for the bedroom and primary
living areas. Designed with generous bedroom layouts, one (1) bathroom,
mud/laundry rooms and ample in-unit storage, these units will provide a high quality
P78
VI.A.
18
of life for the residents, which is a key tenet and guiding principle of the Proposed
Project.
The floor areas for the Upper Level consist of 3,375 sq. ft. of net livable area and
a total floor area of 3,658 sq. ft. spread between the interior building uses of this level
and applicable to the floor area calculation definition pursuant to Section 26.104.100
of the Code. A more detailed floor area summary is provided in the below subsection
III.D.5 of this application.
5. Floor Area Calculations
The following floor area calculations for the Proposed Project are based on the
current architectural floor plans provided in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C. The floor area
diagrams in this Exhibit for determining floor area ratio (FAR) and net livable area
(NLA) are based on the measurement methodologies provided in Sections
26.575.020.D and 26.575.020.I of the Code respectively. The FAR calculations will
be used to establish the maximum residential floor area allowed under the proposed
Planned Development. The NLA calculations are provided to establish a basis for the
amount of non-mitigation affordable housing full time equivalents (FTEs) that will be
created out of the Proposed Project. As the project is at a conceptual design level for
the purposes of land use reviews, this application is requesting that a ten percent
(10%) increase be allowed and memorialized as the maximum limit for both FAR and
NLA floor area. The request is made due to the conceptual level of the current design
and the fact that any final and detailed determinations of floor area applicable to FAR
calculations have yet to be determined beyond a conceptual level. It should be noted
that the 110% request for floor area would still render those amounts significantly
below the allowed FAR for the Property under the AH/PD zoning standards.
As described above, a summary of the total building floor area calculations
broken out across the three (3) levels of the Proposed Project, pursuant to the
definition of floor area in Section 26.104.100 of the Code, are as follows:
P79
VI.A.
19
¥ Lower Level (subgrade) Building Floor Area: 1,328 sq. ft.
¥ Main Level Building Floor Area: 3,663 sq. ft.
¥ Upper Level Building Floor Area: 3,658 sq. ft.
¥ Total Building Floor Area: 8,649 sq. ft.
These calculations are measured from the outside of any exterior wall of the building
and contain all floor area within each of the three (3) levels. As described above, this
application is requesting an approval for a floor area amount ten percent (10%) above
this current conceptual level calculation. Although not specifically a standard under
the proposed AH/PD, the relative building floor area of the Proposed Project would
not exceed 9,514 sq. ft.
The total allowable floor area is limited by the prescribed FAR of 1.1:1 under the
AH/PD zone district standards. With a gross/net site area of 9,000 sq. ft., the
respective allowable floor area for the Property is 9,900 sq. ft. The following floor
area summary is broken out by building use and takes into account the methodology
for calculating the Project’s applicable allowable floor area pursuant Section
26.575.020.D of the Code:
¥ Affordable Housing Unit Floor Area: 7,321 sq. ft.
¥ Storage Floor Area: 0 sq. ft.
¥ Mechanical Floor Area: 0 sq. ft.
¥ Area of Overhangs beyond 4’: 492 sq. ft.
¥ Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches: 0 sq. ft.
¥ Total Floor Area Applicable to FAR: 7,813 sq. ft.
As described above, this application is requesting an approval for an allowable floor
area that is ten percent (10%) above this current conceptual level calculation. It is
therefore requested that the allowable floor area of the Proposed Project’s AH/PD be
limited to 8,594 sq. ft. or a FAR of 0.95:1. The following Table 01 provides a detailed
calculation summary of the respective building floor area and allowable FAR floor
area calculations for the Proposed Project.
P80
VI.A.
20
Table 01. Proposed Floor Area Calculations
Proposed Zoning: AH/PD
Property Zoning & Existing Conditions Total Area (sq. ft.)
Site Area 9,000
Allowable Overall FAR (1.1:1)9,900
Percentage of exposed Lower Level Area 0%
15% of FAR floor area for decks, balconies, exterior stairs & porches 1,485
Building Levels Building Use Sq. Feet
Basement (Lower Level)AH Residential 0
Storage 930
Mechanical 398
Overhangs beyond 4' 0
Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches 106
Lower Level Building Floor Area 1,328
Level # 1 Floor Area including exteror elements 1,434
Level #1 (Main Level)AH Residential 3,663
Storage 0
Mechanical 0
Overhangs beyond 4'214
Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches 70
Level # 1 Building Floor Area 3,663
Level # 2 Floor Area including exteror elements 3,947
Level # 2 (Upper Level)AH Residential 3,658
Storage 0
Mechanical 0
Overhangs beyond 4'278
Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches 1,113
Level # 2 Building Floor Area 3,658
Level # 3 Floor Area including exteror elements 5,049
Total Building Floor Area 8,649
Total Area of Overangs beyond 4'492
Total Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches 1,289
Total Floor Area 10,430
Building Floor Area Summary*Use Floor Area
(sq. ft.)
Percentage of
Total
Affordable Housing Residential Floor Area 7,321 85%
Storage Floor Area 930 11%
Mechanical Floor Area 398 5%
Total Building Floor Area 8,649 100%
Total Gross Floor Area + 10%9,514 110%
*does not adjust for partial subgrade FAR reduction or 15% for exterior areas
Applicable Floor Area Summary for FAR Use Floor Area
(sq. ft.)
Percentage of
Total
Affordable Housing Residential Floor Area**7,321 94%
Storage Floor Area**0 0%
Mechanical Floor Area**0 0%
Area of Overhangs beyond 4'492 6%
Applicable Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches***0 0%
Total FAR Floor Area 7,813 100%
Total FAR Floor Area + 10%8,594 110%
**includes reduction of each respective Level #1 floor areas based on % of subgrade condition
***the total floor area for these elements does not exceed 15% of allowable FAR and therefore does not apply
P81
VI.A.
21
The Net Livable Area for the Proposed Project is based on the methodology for
calculating NLA pursuant to Section 26.575.020.I of the Code. The following
summary provides the NLA for each of the three (3) levels of the Proposed Project:
¥ Lower Level (subgrade) Net Livable Area: 0 sq. ft.
¥ Main Level Net Livable Area: 3,375 sq. ft.
¥ Upper Level Net Livable Area: 3,375 sq. ft.
¥ Total Net Livable Area: 6,750 sq. ft.
As described above, this application is requesting an approval for a net livable floor
area that is ten percent (10%) above this current conceptual level calculation. It is
therefore requested that the allowable floor area of the Proposed Project’s AH/PD be
limited to 7,425 sq. ft.
For determining the total FTE count that this project would have the ability to
offset for any applicable new development, the conversion factor of 400 sq. ft. per
FTE is used:
At Current Conceptual Level: 6,750 sq. ft. / 400 sq. ft. = 16.9 FTEs
With 10% Increase: 7,425 sq. ft. / 400 sq. ft. = 18.6 FTEs
6. Building Mass, Scale and Architectural Character
The Proposed Project’s building mass, scale and architectural character have been
developed to be compatible with neighborhood and area contexts, while achieving the
communitywide goal of creating new affordable housing in areas that have
appropriate land uses and zoning patterns for such developments. Specific to the
Property’s immediate surrounding influences, the massing and architecture have been
designed to complement the multifamily residential character of the neighborhood to
the west, as well as make reference to the historic influences to the east within the
Main Street Historic District.
As described in previous sections, the existing site topography and location of the
Property present a streetscape design opportunity to anchor the corner and the block
at the Property’s prominent “s-curve” intersection. As a consistent two-story building
P82
VI.A.
22
design, the “L” shaped foot print provides appropriately scaled façade lines down
West Main and 7th Streets, complementing the properties in all directions in terms of
scale and form, while also achieving a pedestrian scale as the building engages the
public realms of the two right-of –ways.
The design approach allows the West Main and 7th Street elevation of the building
to be limited to twenty-eight feet (28’) from the perspective of the primary public
realm adjacent to the Property. Although three-story multifamily buildings that face
the intersection are present elsewhere in the neighborhood, a key consideration with
the design is to complement the streetscape height of the neighboring two-story
residences to the west and further into the Main Street Historic District to the east.
The rear facing two-story form that surrounds the interior courtyard steps down to
twenty-five feet (25’) in height from the perspective of the heavily used alley internal
to the block. Both of these heights are based on the measurement methodology
prescribed in Section 26.575.020.F of the Code, and elevation studies of the entire
building are provided in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C as part of this application.
The street-facing façades of the building are broken up in both the horizontal and
vertical planes from the street perspectives in order to create interest and movement
in the architectural design of the otherwise uniform two-story building. Horizontally
(in plan view), the building has proud and recessed elements of front entry stoops on
the main level and cantilevered decks on the second level. Street-facing gable forms
have been introduced into the flat two-story form in order to break up the linear
vertical mass of the building, while also referencing the existing character
surrounding the Property. A main circulation entry area further breaks up the West
Main Street façade, providing access to the interior circulation and courtyard beyond.
The north and west facing rear and side elevations have the same movement in
both the horizontal and vertical planes as the building steps down to a flat massing as
it engages the courtyard. Entry porches on the main level and an extensive second
level deck and circulation walkway create articulation in the horizontal plane an break
up the vertical façades of the rear of the building. Architectural wall screens have also
P83
VI.A.
23
been introduced to further break up the two-story form, while also creating visual
interest and screening for the units from this perspective.
The character of the area surrounding the Property’s location is a wide-ranging
mix of architectural styles. With the intent to complement the form and style of the
building’s design, while also introducing a vernacular that is residential in nature and
cohesive with the area properties, yet doesn’t mimic the historic character to the east
along Main Street, a more modern interpretation of building materials has been
envisioned for the Proposed Project. The primary material comprising the West Main
and 7th Street building façades is a composite paneling system of a warm gray natural
tone. The paneled veneer is exclusive to the primary vertical gable elements of these
two primary building elevations, with the pattern of the paneling seamlessly
transitioning to the roof the gabled forms. Adding depth, while also breaking up the
verticality of these primary elements, upper level decks cantilever out from the
building plane. The decks are offset with a treatment of horizontal clapboard siding
that is lighter in tone from the paneling beyond.
Recessed from the vertical gable elements of these building elevations, flat
secondary elements interconnect each façade line, breaking up height and depth
uniformity, while also creating rhythm and variation across the long building lines.
These secondary elements are treated with a vertical geolaminate material that is
natural in character and color, yet retains the durability of a manufactured product.
The assembly of this veneer is a rain screen, with dark brick material providing the
backing for the system and filling the negative space between the vertical
components. Entrances to the units off of these primary street frontages are located
within these secondary forms, enhancing the human scale of the building and
providing visual interest across these building façades.
To the rear of the building design, the vertical gable forms bookend the “L” shape
of the massing from the perspective neighboring properties of the block and the
shared alley. As the architecture transitions to the interior of the courtyard area, the
façade treatment is a mix of clap board siding and wire balustrades, with punched
P84
VI.A.
24
opening defining the unit entrances and fenestration patterns of these interior
elevations. This horizontal veneer expresses the residential character of this portion of
the building, relating to the residential uses and character internal to the 800 West
Main and Bleeker Street block.
E. Transportation and Parking Management
The 802 West Main Street Property is required to complete a Minor Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA), as well as a Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Access
Permit review, due to the proximity to Highway 82. The Project’s Traffic Engineering
consultant has worked with the project team to produce a Multimodal/Mobility Plan
(Exhibit 2 in Appendix C), and a Traffic Impact Analysis and detailed calculations (Exhibit
6 of Appendix B) that in combination satisfy all requirements from the TIA Guidelines and
Chapter 26.515 of the Code. In addition, and in response to heightened concerns regarding
traffic impact and parking within the neighborhood to the west, the Project’s Traffic
Engineer has conducted further analyses related to traffic flow and parking above and
beyond the requirements of a Minor TIA. The results and conclusions of these analyses and
studies are discussed in the following sections, and address the neighborhood impact
concerns and parking scheme that came out of the neighborhood outreach process,
meetings with relevant City Departments and check-ins with City Council. These results
are provided as Exhibit 7 in Appendix B as a Traffic Impact Study (“TIS”) that satisfies the
CDOT requirement for the Access Permit application, and Exhibit 8 in Appendix B, a
detailed parking study for the area surrounding the Property.
1. Proposed Parking Plan and Management
The Proposed Project includes the creation of ten (10) new parking stalls, one per
each of the ten (10) units, within the West Main Street right-of-way along with
improvements to existing on-street parking and pedestrian areas along the northern
block of 800 West Main Street. As illustrated in the Landscape and Engineering Site
Plans in Exhibit 2 and 3 of Appendix C respectively, the right-of-way adjacent to the
Property is improved to accommodate the ten (10) ninety- (90) degree head-in
parking stalls for the Proposed Project, while the remaining length of the block is
redesigned in the same configuration, providing an additional seven (7) parking stalls
P85
VI.A.
25
for neighborhood residential use. It is important to note that the first ten (10) parking
stalls will be the responsibility of the Applicant and then assigned to the residents of
the Project, while the remain seven (7) parking stalls to the west will be the
responsibility of the City and will be residential zoned public parking spaces for the
neighborhood. The net result of the new right-of-way parking scheme increases the
overall public parking units along the northern block of 800 West Main Street, while
making other pedestrian, parking an traffic enhancements to the public streetscape in
the area. Pursuant to Section 26.515.040 of the Code, the Proposed Project is required
to provide the ten (10) parking units onsite in order to accommodate one (1) unit per
each of the one-bedroom units. As provided for in Table 26.515-2 of the Code, the
ability to reduce the number of parking units by the provision of one (1) additional
TIA credit would reduce the required parking units to nine (9). The proposed ten (10)
parking stalls accommodate one hundred percent (100%) of the required parking units
for the Project byway of the proposed improvements within the right-of-way. The
application is requesting for the ten (10) on-street parking stalls to satisfy all parking
requirements, and for a waiver of any cash-in-lieu fee that may otherwise be required.
The basis for the request is a combination of the affordable nature of the Project,
other parking precedents for similar type projects that have been approved in the City,
and most importantly the very unique and area-specific parking and traffic patterns
that exist within the neighborhood to the west, which established the need for the on-
street parking scenario as proposed.
As noted elsewhere in this application, this parking solution was born out of
extensive input from the neighborhood during the public outreach process during the
six (6) months prior to the submission of this application. The predominant concern
that resulted in the proposed design is the intensive use of the alley for activities
outside of vehicular and service access, including child play, pedestrian access and
other constraints that would be exacerbated by additional vehicular trips in and out of
the alley. Also described and reported in the TIS in Exhibit 7 of Appendix B, the new
parking configuration has no impact on traffic patterns and flow within the
neighborhood, and that the ninety (90) -degree head-in configurations complies with
traffic engineering standards as an acceptable arrangement within the context of the
P86
VI.A.
26
West Main Street area. The current plan presented in the Landscape and Engineering
Plan Sets was reviewed and endorsed by the key neighborhoods groups, and also
reviewed by relevant City Departments as well as City Council during public work
sessions. Additionally, the proposed design has retained the area to the rear of the
Property adjacent to the alley as programed open space, which could be reconfigured
relatively easily to relocate the parking to an off-street condition and accessed from
the alley. This consideration is to accommodate any potential future higher and better
use of the improved area of the West Main Street right-of-way, in order to maintain
adequate parking for the Proposed Project. Further supporting the proposed parking
arrangement, extensive multimodal and TDM strategies have been designed into the
on and off site improvements. With a surplus of 24.13 TIA Credits as detailed in the
following section, there is a strong likelihood that the residents of the Proposed
Project will utilize the myriad options for non-vehicular alternative transportation.
Lastly, other parking considerations were studied in response to the concerns over
parking availability posed by the residents of the West Main Street neighborhood.
The West Main Street Traffic and Parking Analyses provided by the project’s
Transportation Engineer as Exhibit 7 and 8 in Appendix B establish that a surplus of
parking exists within the neighborhood relative to the day-to-day use patterns in the
surrounding area and that:
¥ The proposed parking on West Main Street accommodates safe traffic
movements within the neighborhood, while avoiding added traffic to the
alley.
¥ The proposed ninety- (90) degree right-of-way parking functions well with
the anticipated traffic volume on West Main Street, with peak-season
flows/volumes less than twenty-eight (28) vehicles per hour or one car
every two (2) minutes. This volume allows time for the parked cars to
maneuver without impeding West Main Street traffic.
¥ The parking study shows adequate parking in the neighborhood, which
should be further improved with the new management techniques as well
P87
VI.A.
27
as the addition of seven (7) public parking spaces proposed on West Main
Street.
2. Transportation Management
As illustrated in the Multimodal/Mobility plan presented in Exhibit 2 of Appendix
C, the site design implements Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and
Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) strategies to offset the Project’s anticipated
trip generation. Specific to applicable design elements of the site design, the five foot
(5’) detached sidewalk and tree planting strip from the west of the Property to the
corner of 7th Street, and the replacement of the existing noncompliant 7th Street
sidewalk, maintain a slope of less than five percent (5%). The sidewalk design
increases vehicular and pedestrian visibility at the busy intersection, while also
increase connectivity and ADA accessibility by the creation ramping and a cross walk
across 7th Street. The vegetation along the sidewalk is a combination of sod and
native climate-adaptive perennial mix, which will provide visual interest, while also
reducing water requirements with the native mix. One (1) connection point from both
the West Main Street and 7th Street sidewalks provide pedestrian access to the
building. The Property is in close proximity to two (2) stops along the Hwy 82 bus
route. Transit system information will be provided in the primary circulation area of
the building. Exterior bike racks are proposed in anticipation of a very active tenant
demographic and as an attempt to minimize vehicular traffic.
The Proposed Project is anticipated to add a small amount of traffic and trip
generation volumes to the neighborhood, as calculated utilizing the City of Aspen’s
Trip Generation methodology and presented in Exhibit 6 of Appendix B of this
application. Through this methodology, the proposed development is anticipated to
generate an additional eight (8)-vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and nine
(9) vehicle trips during the evening peak hour. To offset these vehicle trips in the
form of Credits, the following strategies have been implemented into the
Multimodal/Mobility Plan:
P88
VI.A.
28
a. TDM Strategies
¥ Installation of signage and a bench for a new bus stop at the 7th Street
RFTA bus stop
¥ Provision for the use of one (1) of the additionally created parking stalls
along the northern block of 800 West Main Street by the City’s CAR TO
GO car sharing program
b. MMLOS Strategies
¥ Removal of an existing site driveway to West Main Street
¥ Enhanced pedestrian crosswalk and ADA ramps
¥ Enhanced and formalized curb bumpout and possible raised pedestrian
crossing on the northwest corner of West Main Street and North 7th Street
¥ On site bicycle parking
Per the Traffic Report and City of Aspen calculations, the proposed TDM and
MMLOS Strategies mitigate 33.13 vehicle trips. This mitigation is in excess of 24.13
TIA Credits beyond the nine (9) trips per hour that the project will generate during
daily peak hour.
Other Traffic Management considerations were studied in part due to the Project’s
requirement for a CDOT TIS and also in response to the concerns raised over
increased traffic impact by the residents of the West Main Street neighborhood. It is
important to note that CDOT’s methodology for assessing trip generation differs
slightly from that of the City of Aspen’s, and therefore some of the values differ
between the two reports. The summary provided in the Transportation Engineer’s
cover letter to the TIS in Exhibit 7 of Appendix B concludes that:
¥ The Proposed Project is anticipated to generate an additional seven (7)
vehicle trips during the evening peak hour and at peak season. The traffic-
flow pattern of these added vehicle trips within the neighborhood are split
nearly equal between vehicles: arriving from down valley; departing
towards down valley; arriving from downtown Aspen; and departing
towards downtown Aspen per hour.
P89
VI.A.
29
¥ The net traffic increase equates to an average of one (1) vehicle every
eight and one-half (8.5) minutes.
¥ The right-of-way improvements at the West Main Street intersection
should function to dissuade drivers from entering a smaller, local street,
improve and reduce the pedestrian crossing distance in the crosswalk, and
beautify the intersection from the Main Street perspective approaching
from the east.
F. Area Land Use and Property Rezoning
The 802 West Main Street Property is currently zoned R-15, Moderate Density
Residential. As described in the proceeding sections of this application, a significant
and consistent land use pattern exists in the surrounding area, comprised of a mix of
affordable and free-market multifamily residential uses. This prevailing pattern
provides the basis of compatibility for the Proposed Project’s site, landscape and
architectural designs, with that of the surrounding zone districts, land uses and
neighborhood characteristics. The Neighborhood Zoning and Land Use Context map
provided on the following page illustrates the area land uses and highlights the
significant amount of multifamily residential properties that surround the Property.
The remaining properties of the shared 800 block of the West Main Street
neighborhood are exclusively multifamily uses. The Bavarian Inn affordable project
is zoned R-15 with a LP-PD overlay and the Shadow Mountain View townhomes is a
mixed free-market and affordable complex with a base zoning of R/MF. Further to
the west and north of the neighborhood, the Villas of Aspen and Aspen Villas
(commonly known as West Bleeker Place Townhomes) are both multifamily uses
with R/MF zoning, while the former also has a PD overlay.
To the east of the Property, across 7th Street, begins the western edge of the Main
Street Historic District consisting of property uses and base zoning that are Mixed
Use (MU zone district). To the south of the Property across West Main Street, exists a
more residential pattern of single family and duplex uses with R-15 base zoning.
P90
VI.A.
30
Within a quarter (¼) mile radius from the Property are numerous properties with
multifamily uses including the following:
¥ Red House Enclave – Affordable Multifamily with R/MF base zoning
¥ Sagewood Condominiums – Free-Market Multifamily with R/MF base
zoning and a PD overlay
¥ Poppy’s Property – approved Affordable Multifamily with MU base
zoning
¥ 7th + Main AH Project – Affordable Multifamily with /PD zoning
¥ West Hopkins AH Project – Affordable Multifamily with AH/PD zoning
¥ Little Ajax AH Project – Affordable Multifamily with R/MF base zoning
and a PD overlay.
P91
VI.A.
31
Selec%on(of(Neighborhood(Mul%family(Proper%es(802(West(Main(Street(>(Neighborhood(Zoning(and(Land(Use(Context(Map(P92
VI.A.
32
In accordance with the review requirements for a property’s rezoning under
Chapter 26.310 of the Code, the compliance for which is presented in Section IV.B of
this application, the rezoning of the Property to accommodate the Proposed Project is
compatible with surrounding zone districts, land uses and neighborhood
characteristics. In addition to the compatibility of the proposed multifamily use of the
Property from an area zoning and land use pattern standpoint, the other primary
development standards for consideration include but are not limited to density, floor
area, FAR, height, and parking requirements. Specific to the multifamily uses in the
surrounding area – both free-market and deed restricted affordable – the proposed
standards related to density, floor area, FAR and parking are in line and compatible
with the characteristics found elsewhere in the neighborhood and surrounding area.
The following Table 02 presents a comparison of existing multifamily residential
properties in the West Main Street neighborhood area with the Proposed Project at
802 West Main Street.
The above table concludes that the metrics for assessing density, floor area and
parking ratios of the Proposed Project are similar and within the low and high limits
of the sampling of multifamily properties in the surrounding area. The below Table
03 provides the proposed standards and limits for the rezoning of the Property to
AH/PD in order to accommodate the Proposed Project.
Table 02. West Main Street Area Multifamily Density Metrics
Area Multifamily Residential Properties Units per
Acre
Bedrooms
per Acre
FTEs
per Acre
Floor Area
per Acre
Parking
per Unit
Parking
per BR
Aspen&Villas&(FM)14.9 43.7 44.0 20,794 1.5 0.5
Villas&of&Aspen&(FM)14.7 41.2 42.0 28,300 1.2 0.4
Shadow&Mountain&View&Townhomes&(FM)15.0 35.0 26.3 28,705 2.0 0.9
Bavarian&(AH)23.2 48.3 53.7 24,149 1.6 0.8
Red&House&Enclave&(AH)21.4 32.1 43.8 16,761 1.2 0.8
7th&and&Main&(AH)60.0 60.0 105.0 36,760 1.0 1.0
518&West&Main&/&Fornell&Condos&(AH)63.7 119.9 131.7 53,796 0.9 0.5
301&West&Hyman/Ajax&Apartments&(AH)98.4 98.4 172.2 48,696 0.9 0.9
Average of Area Multifamily Properties 38.9 59.8 77.3 32,245 1.3 0.71
802 West Main Street 48.4 48.4 84.7 41,861 1.0 1.00
P93
VI.A.
33
Table 03. 802 West Main Street - Rezoning Comparison and Proposed AH/PD Development Standards
Underlying Zoning: Similar Use Zoning: Proposed Rezoning:
R-15 RMF AH/PD
#AH/PD Zoning Dimensional
Requirements Standard/Dimension Standard/Dimension Standard/Dimension
1 Minimum Gross Lot Area (sq. ft.)15,000 6,000 9,000
2 Minimum Net Lot Area per Unit (sq.ft.)n/a n/a 900
3 Maximum Allowable Density (# of units)2 n/a 10
4 Maximum Density (units per acre)n/a n/a 48.4
5 Minimum Lot Width 75 feet 60 feet 75 feet
6 Minimum Front Yard Setback 25 feet 5 feet 2.5 feet
7 Minimum East Side Yard Setback 10 feet 5 feet 2.5 feet
8 Minimum West Side Yard Setback 10 feet 5 feet 3.5 feet
9 Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 feet 5 feet 10 feet
10 Maximum Site Coverage n/a n/a 47%
11 Maximum Height 25 feet 32 feet 28 feet
12 Public Amenity Space n/a n/a n/a
13 Minimum Distance between Buildings 10'n/a n/a
14 Minimum Percent Open Space n/a n/a 50%
15 Minimum Trash Access Area (sq. ft.)n/a n/a 150
16 Allowable Floor Area (FAR) sq. ft.*4,500 11,250 9,900
17 Proposed Floor Area (FAR) sq. ft.*n/a n/a 8,594
18 Proposed Maximum FAR 0.50 1.25 0.95
19 Proposed Net Livable Area sq. ft.n/a n/a 7,425
20 Minimum on-street parking stalls 2 10 10
21 Maximum Unit Size sq. ft.FAR dependent 2,500 770
*Based on standared in 26.710.090.D.10.d.
P94
VI.A.
34
G. School Land Dedication and Impact Fees
As the Proposed Project is residential development that adds additional floor area
beyond the existing amount associated with the Property, the net increase would typically
require in-kind contributions or impact fee payments related to School Land Dedication,
Parks and TDM/Air Quality. However, as an affordable housing development, Section
26.610.100 provides for the ability for City Council to waive said impact fees as follows:
Whenever the City Council determines that any part of a proposed development
constitutes an affordable housing development or an essential public facility, as defined
by this Title, and wishes to subsidize the construction, the City Council may exempt that
part of the development from the application of the impact fees or may reduce by any
amount the fees imposed by this Chapter.
As descried in the introduction of this application, the development and construction of
affordable housing on the Property at 802 West Main Street is being carried out and
financed through a public private partnership between the City of Aspen and the Applicant,
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC.
The final funding subsidy from the City of Aspen for the development of the
Proposed Project will be derived from the LIHTC financing described in the Introduction
of this application. As the origination of this financing will not occur until 2018, it is
currently undeterminable what any fee exemption would entail in terms of percent of
project cost or calculable real dollars. In accordance with the above referenced Code
language, this application is requesting an exemption from the School Land Dedication fee,
and the Parks and TDM/Air Quality impact fees, on a pro rata basis derived from the final
cost allocations between the City of Aspen and Aspen Housing Partnership, LLC. In other
words, this application is requesting that School Land Dedication and Parks and TDM/Air
Quality impact fees be assessed exclusively on the equivalent proportionate costs
contributed by the Applicant and that all equivalent subsidized costs provided by the City
be exempted from the final pro rata cost analysis for determining the said impact fees.
The Applicant is not intending to provide any lands dedications to meet the standards
of the School Land Dedication requirement, but is rather committing to utilizing the fee
schedules pursuant to Chapter 26.610 that are current at the point of this land use
P95
VI.A.
35
application submittal. The final impact fees will be based on the pertinent floor areas
provided at the point of building permit submittal, at which point a determined pro rata cost
contribution between the City of Aspen and Applicant will have been determined and
memorialized.
P96
VI.A.
36
IV. REGULATORY REVIEW REQUIREMENTS
As an affordable housing project developed by the City in conjunction with a private
developer, this application is requesting review as a Major Public Project, pursuant to Chapter
26.500. In accordance with Subsection 26.304.060.B.1 of the Code, and as determined by the
Community Development Director, the review material for this Major Public Project is
combined and submitted as one (1) application, including the following reviews: Public Projects;
Rezoning; Planned Development; Growth Management; Transportation and Parking; and
Multifamily Residential Design Standards.
A. Public Projects Review (Chapter 26.500)
1. Major Public Project Review (26.500.040.C)
Pursuant to Subsection 26.500.040.C of the Code, the Community Development
Director has determined that this Proposed Project meets the criteria of a Major
Public Project and shall be reviewed accordingly. The proposed Major Public Project
requires two (2) public hearings – one at the Planning & Zoning Commission and one
at City Council – rather than a typical three (3)-step review process, finishing with
P&Z, which would otherwise be required under a Major Planned Development
review.
2. General Review Standards (26.500.070)
The Proposed Project meets all of the following review standards as required.
c. The Proposed Project complies with the zone district limitations, or is
otherwise compatible with neighborhood context
The Proposed Project is being considered as a Planned Development and is
consistent with the surrounding zoning, land use patterns and character of the
surrounding neighborhood context. As described in the above section III.F of this
application, the majority of the surrounding land uses consist of multifamily
projects. As such, this Proposed Project has managed all standards and design
considerations that are to be compatible with the limits of the surrounding
property zone districts. Furthermore, great care has been taken to mitigate any
impacts with surrounding land uses within the unique contexts and patterns of the
surrounding neighborhood.
d. The Proposed Project supports stated community goals
P97
VI.A.
37
As affordable housing is one of, if not the highest priority stated community
goal generally and specifically in the AACP, this project supports this goal.
e. The Proposed Project complies with all other applicable requirements of
the Land Use Code
All applicable and relevant requirements for the review of this project under
the Code are consolidated and presented for compliance within this application. It
is the opinion of the Applicant’s representative and project team that the Proposed
Project complies with regulations under the Code.
f. The Proposed Project receives all development allotments required by
Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System
As an affordable housing project not being developed for mitigation or
certificate purposes, no development allotments are required.
B. Amendments to Official Zone District Map – Rezoning (Chapter 26.310)
The Property is currently zoned R-15 with no other governing approvals affecting the
development of the Property. To develop the affordable housing project, the zoning will
need to be amended to a zone district allows for multifamily residential use. Through
conference with Community Development, rezoning the project to AH/PD will both
accommodate the multifamily affordable housing and lock-in the approval standards
specific to the project being proposed through this application.
1. Rezoning – Procedure for amendment (26.310.060)
As provided for in Section 26.310.060 of the Code, the City of Aspen, as
ownership of more than 50% of the property, is initiating an amendment to the
Official Zone District Map (Rezoning) for the Property to AH/PD. Under Public
Project Review, Rezoning will be a two-step process – first a public hearing before
the P&Z and then before City Council. The review standards are as follows:
2. Rezoning - Standards of review (26.310.090)
The Proposed Project meets each of the following standards of review for
consideration, and as presented in Section III of this application and through other
review criteria:
a. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood
characteristics.
P98
VI.A.
38
As presented in Section III of this application and presented in response to
other review standards herein, the proposed rezoning of the property to AH/PD is
appropriate based on the surrounding neighborhood zone districts, land use
patterns and neighborhood characteristics. In all directions from the Property on
West Main Street, the majority of properties in the area are of a multifamily land
use type and varying between RMF and AH/PD, both of which accommodate the
properties’ respective multifamily uses. The proposed design for this development
also provides for an architectural vernacular that is neighborhood appropriate and
references the existing character of the West Main Street area, with a two (2)-
story form from the pedestrian and vehicular perspective.
b. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the
proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities
including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities.
As evidenced through letters to serve furnished from all utility providers
(Exhibits 2, Appendix B), and all other public facility demands, as assessed
through other review standards and reports provided as part of this application,
the added demand of this Proposed Project would not exceed the respective
capacities nor would the demand be out of line with the character of the
neighborhood and area development patterns otherwise.
c. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment.
The proposed rezoning and respective Proposed Project would not result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. The Proposed Project
associated with the rezoning request has maintained, to the greatest degree
possible, the existing flat topography of the Property. Any vegetation removal
will be replaced or enhanced at least at a 1:1 ratio as required for tree mitigation.
Great care will be taken to protect the pioneer spruce tree at the corner of West
Main and 7th Streets.
d. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City and in harmony with the public interest
and the intent of this Title.
As an affordable housing project that meets the criteria and design goals
described in this section of and throughout the overall application, the requested
zoning amendment is consistent and compatible with the character of the
neighborhood and larger community as well as in harmony with the public
interest, AACP, City Council goals and the intent of the Code.
P99
VI.A.
39
C. Planned Development (Chapter 26.445)
The subject Property is current zoned R-15. In order to rezone the property to AH/PD,
a Planned Development must be approved and adopted pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of the
Code. The Planned Development Agreement and Plat will establish and memorialize the
new development rights and dimensional standards associated with this Proposed Project.
The requirements for both the Project Review and Detailed Review are submitted
concurrently in this application. Likewise, both the Project and Detailed Reviews will
occur over a two-step process, first before the P&Z and lastly before the City Council.
1. Project Review Standards (26.445.050)
The Proposed Project is compliant with each of the following standards as
required by the Planned Development Review Standards:
a. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development
complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans.
The Proposed Project complies with all related adopted regulatory plans. The
project accommodates the residential design standards for integration and
appropriate scale and orientation into the surrounding neighborhood and historical
contexts – namely the presence of historic scales and architectural characters
associated with West Main Street and the surrounding multifamily residential
neighborhood.
Most relevant is the Proposed Project’s compliance with numerous criteria of
the Aspen Area Community Plan. As an affordable housing development, the
Proposed Project responds satisfies perhaps the most critical goal in the AACP
along with other stated goals and priorities of the City of Aspen. Furthermore, the
project is financed as a PPP through the federal LIHTC program, providing for
subsidized funding to reduce the cost, liability and responsibility to the City.
b. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits
development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or
man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow,
debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock
slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow
slide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made
hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the
community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development
if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are
proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards.
Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this
P100
VI.A.
40
standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation
techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the
Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement.
As noted previously and as provided for in the HP Kumar Geotechnical
Report, Phase I ESA and Geologic Hazards Review (Exhibits 4 and 5, Appendix
B) there is no expectation for the presence any hazards that would warrant the
flat, in-town site as unsuitable for development Property. These reports also
concluded that no other natural or man-made hazards impact the site, nor should
any be present that harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. As
prescribed by HP Kumar, provided for in this Code criterion and within the
Engineering Standards, all measures will be taken, and any mitigation techniques
employed during construction.
c. Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual
character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria
shall be used:
i) The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical
constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural
or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or
enhance said features.
The Site Plan provided as Exhibit 2 in Appendix C is compatible with the
area context, visual character and general goals of outlined in this Code and
other adopted regulatory plans related to site planning and design.
ii) The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation,
and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual,
or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town.
The Proposed Project accommodates a development that preserves, to the
greatest degree possible, the existing topography, mature vegetation –
specifically the pioneer spruce true in proximity to the southeast corner of the
Property – as well as an interface with the pubic realm that maintains the
streetscape character and pattern in this area of town. No existing structures
exist on the Property that warrants preservation for historical or cultural
reasons.
iii) Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the
neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow
effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access.
The site plan of the Proposed Project ensures that the building and access
to the building is oriented towards the street, enhancing the context of the
neighborhood, and maintaining the orthogonal organization of the town grid
in all directions around this important intersection at the entrance to Aspen
from the west. The building footprint is pulled towards the front lot lines of
P101
VI.A.
41
the primary corner of the Property, matching the pattern of the mixed
residential neighborhood. The site plan design follows best practices in
pedestrian oriented neighborhood design, expressing the building at the
human pedestrian scale, rather than the vehicular scale. The parking for the
Proposed Project, as described elsewhere throughout this application, is
provided in the West Main Street right-of-way in order to overcome existing
neighborhood pressures and constraints, while also enhancing the relationship
of the residential roadway with the pattern of development in the
neighborhood. The site design and proposed parking arrangement provides
appropriate access to all areas of the site for emergency vehicles, along with
service and maintenance vehicles such as trash/recycling removal and snow
plowing.
d. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be
established during the Project Review. A development application may
request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In
meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following
criteria:
i) There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such
variations.
Affordable housing development is a significant community goal.
Designed to best conform to the architectural style of the West Main Street
area, the proposed variations in dimensional standards associated with the
Proposed Project accommodate a high quality living experience for the
residents, while also complementing the mass, scale and general character of
the neighborhood.
ii) The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and
indicative of the primary uses of the project.
As noted above and represented in the site planning and architectural
material in Appendix C, the proposed dimensions represent a character, style,
massing and scale that is indicative of the primary multifamily use of the
project, while also anchoring the important corner of the West Main and 7th
Street intersection.
iii) The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or
distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development
patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or
cultural resources.
The pattern of development in and around West Main Street neighborhood
is a mix of uses, including a significant amount of free-market and affordable
multifamily uses. As noted above and represented in the site planning and
architectural material in Appendix C, the Proposed Project complements the
P102
VI.A.
42
mass, scale and general character of the neighborhood. Specifically, the
perspective of the building from the public realm at the West Main and 7th
Street intersection is a strong two-story mass and a height that complements
the neighboring properties. The building is pulled tight the property
boundaries, enhancing the sidewalk pedestrian relationship with the ground
level entry porches of the building.
iv) The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on
the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed
development and the nature of the proposed uses. The availability of
public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for
pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile
disincentive techniques in the proposed development, and the potential
for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a
parking requirement.
With only one (1)-bedroom units proposed for the project, parking is
provided to accommodate one (1) vehicle per unit. The Property is located in
an area with extensive multimodal opportunities, including a bus stop, We-
cycle station, and within close proximity to the downtown core. The proposed
sidewalk improvements will enhance pedestrian connectivity for the residents
and, neighborhood and larger community to these facilities as well as
downtown Aspen. Biking racking and storage will also be provided on site to
further reduce the reliance on vehicle usage. The Mobility Plan and TIA
results provided for in the appendices of this application conclude the extent
to which alternative transportation means are accommodated in the design of
the Proposed Project. The TIA calculations provide an excess of over 24 TIA
Credits. These described results along with the opinion of the Project’s
transportation engineer provide the basis that the number of parking spaces is
appropriate for the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the
proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. Lastly, as a rental
housing facility, the property will be managed to ensure that only one car is
permitted per residential unit.
v) The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include
specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review
and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment
procedures of Section 26.445.110 – Amendments.
As a Major Public Project, this application is consolidated to include both
Project Review and Detailed Review material. The application does request a
ten percent (10%) increase to all proposed floor area and site area calculation
standards to be implemented under the AH/PD zoning. It should be noted that
at this point of conceptual design that the requested 110% of dimensional
P103
VI.A.
43
increases are well within the governing and related zoning standards for the
Property.
e. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible
with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this
standard, the following criteria shall be used:
i) The design complies with applicable design standards, including those
outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter
26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic
Preservation.
The Proposed Project is exclusively multifamily in use and not historic or
within a historic district. It therefore conforms to the Residential Design
Standards for multifamily development. The site and architectural designs
meet all of the criteria of these standards. The compliance with these
standards can be found in Section IV.F of this application. Furthermore, and
in addition to these standards, the project design takes cues and guidance from
the character and context of the surrounding neighborhood, unique site
conditions and other best practices that are applicable to this Proposed Project,
on this site, and in the West Main Street neighborhood.
ii) The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any
applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the
immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed
Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or
conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials
during Project Review.
As described previously and presented in the architectural plan set
provided in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C, the cladding material and architectural
character of the Proposed Project references the historic character of the West
Main Street Area, while also acknowledging a modern application of the style.
Aside from the historic references with the design and material selections, the
mass and scale of the proposed design also reflect the character and style
indicative of the West Main Street neighborhood.
f. Pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. The development improves
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and
improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and
improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize
impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities.
The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and
implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and
documented within a Development Agreement.
The proposed design improves pedestrian, bicycle and access to transit
facilities. The project will construct a new sidewalk and curb and gutter at the
P104
VI.A.
44
both the West Main and 7th Street right of ways as required, the former of which
is currently non-existent. The alignment of the sidewalk will seamlessly tie into
the sidewalks fronting the properties to the west and north.
The existing curb-cut off of West Main Street for current vehicular access to
the property will be abandoned and replaced with a detached sidewalk and curb
and gutter condition the length of the West Main property boundary. This change
will further enhance pedestrian and bicycle ease of use and connectivity for the
Property and the neighborhood to the west.
The Proposed Project is designed with ample storage for residents’ material
items, including bike storage, in order to encourage bicycle transit rather than
vehicular use. Additional considerations related to multi-modal aspects of the
project are presented in Section IV.E, Transportation and Parking, of this
application as well as the Transportation Impact Analysis in Exhibit 6 of
Appendix B.
g. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of
engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development
of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal
Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen
Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may
require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation
timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented
within a Development Agreement.
The engineering design and mitigation techniques of the Proposed Project
associated with this planned development will comply with the requirements of
Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen
URMP. As provided for in this application respectively as Exhibits 2 and 3 of
Appendix B, a Preliminary Engineering Report for the Property as well as a
Preliminary Drainage Report, identifying how grading drainage and stormwater
will be designed and managed per the URMP have been completed. Any
additional and specific designs, mitigation techniques and implementation
timelines required by the City Engineer will be defined and documented within
the final Development Agreement for the Proposed Project. The Engineering Plan
set provided as Exhibit 3 in Appendix C provides full design detail of all Engineer
and URMP standards.
h. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development
shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the
project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City
Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and
implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and
documented within a Development Agreement.
P105
VI.A.
45
Letters to serve (located in Exhibit 2 of Appendix B) have been furnished by
each of the utility providers pertinent to the site and the scope of this proposed
development, acknowledging that the adequate capacity is available within each
of the respective systems to service the project. Any localized improvements or
localized upgrades to public infrastructure and facilities in order to gain service
access to the property will be at the sole cost of the developer.
i. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual
unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned
Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public
way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development
retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to
ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates
across access points and driveways are prohibited.
As described in Section III.E of this application, vehicular parking will be
provided in the West Main Street right-of-way. However, the Proposed Project
will retain unobstructed legal vehicular access, byway of abandoning the currently
existing curb cut off of West Main Street and preserving the future ability to
provide vehicular access to the Property via the alley. This location, the layout
and dimensions meet the Engineering Department as well as the Fire Department
standards to ensure adequate emergency access. There are no streets or security
gates associated with this proposed Planned Development.
2. Detailed Review Standards (26.445.070)
The Proposed Project is compliant with each of the following standards as
required by the Planned Development Detailed Review Standards:
a. Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development,
including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review
approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and
direction received during the Project Review.
As a Major Public Project, both the Project Review and Detailed Review are
consolidated and consistent throughout this one (1) application for review by the
P&Z and City Council.
b. Growth Management. The proposed development has received all
required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments.
As an affordable housing project not being developed for mitigation or
certificate purposes, no development allotments are required as there is no annual
limit on affordable housing allotments.
c. Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible
with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this
standard, the following criteria shall be used:
P106
VI.A.
46
i) The landscape plan Exhibits a well-designed treatment of exterior
spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample
quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen
area climate. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall
be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space.
The Proposed Project accommodates a development that preserves, to the
greatest degree possible, the existing topography, mature vegetation –
specifically the pioneer spruce true in proximity to the southeast corner of the
Property – as well as an interface with the pubic realm that maintains the
streetscape character and pattern in this area of town. Any mature vegetation
that must be removed will be replaced in equal amounts or exceed the
replacement mitigation requirement. A new detached sidewalk along the
extent of the southern property line is proposed. The landscape and planting
plan also introduces ample quantity and variety of plant species that are
suitable to the climate as well as appropriately introduced to this Property and
the surrounding context of the neighborhood.
ii) Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and
minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project
meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act
and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service
vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated.
As previously described and depicted in the design drawing sets in
Appendix C, the existing flat, but slightly sloping site and proposed grading
plan provides on-grade access to all ground level units at all areas around the
building. All access to these units exceeds ADA requirements and has been
initially reviewed by the Building Department for compliance. As streets front
the Property on two sides and an alley in the rear, emergency and service
access is more than adequate and meets any requirements. Open space off the
alley provides ample area for any onsite snow storage.
iii) Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the
landscape in a manner that enhances the site.
No energy or production features are present within the site plan and
landscape design. It has been contemplated that energy systems infrastructure
such as photovoltaic panels will be introduced into the building architecture of
the Proposed Project. If such systems are incorporated during mechanical
design, any surface or building mounted elements will be integrated and/or
screened in to the respective designs to ensure enhancement and visual
appropriateness.
iv) All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous
interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior
lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards.
P107
VI.A.
47
All lighting will meet the City’s outdoor lighting standards, and screening
from other properties has been considered in the site plan and landscape
designs to mitigate any fugitive light. The compliant lighting plan is presented
as part of the site planning and landscape design documents in Exhibit 2 of
Appendix C.
v) Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in
compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and shall not
negatively impact surrounding properties.
All site drainage stormwater will be accommodated entirely on the
Property, as reported in the Preliminary Drainage Report, meeting
Engineering Design Standards and the City’s URMP.
d. Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details
emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this
standard, the following criteria shall be used:
i) The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates
present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community’s
past without attempting to mimic history.
As described previously and presented in the architectural plan set
provided as Exhibit 4 in Appendix C, the architectural design and character of
the Proposed Project references the context of Aspen present in this area of
town, while not mimicking actual history. The design includes present-day
detailing and features to enhance the performance, function and livability of
the building to the greatest degree possible. In addition to respecting the
community and the neighborhood’s past character, the mass and scale of the
proposed design also reflect the current character and style indicative of the
West Main Street neighborhood.
ii) Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with
applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410,
Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design
Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation.
As described previously and presented in the architectural plan set
provided in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C, the cladding material and architectural
character of the Proposed Project references the historic character of the West
Main Street Area, while also acknowledging a modern application of the style.
All materials are of high quality and durability. Aside from the historic
references with the design and modern material selections, the mass and scale
of the proposed design also reflect the character and style indicative of the
West Main Street neighborhood. The proposed design also conforms to the
Residential Design Standards for multifamily development. The site and
architectural designs meet all of the criteria of these standards.
P108
VI.A.
48
iii) Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow
shedding effects.
All building and unit entrances are design to minimize icing and snow
shedding at primary access and circulation areas.
iv) Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures
in a manner that enhances the architecture.
No energy or production features are present within the site plan and
landscape design. It has been contemplated that energy systems infrastructure
such as photovoltaic panels will be introduced into the building architecture of
the Proposed Project. If such systems are incorporated during mechanical
design, any surface or building mounted elements will be integrated and/or
screened in to the respective designs to ensure enhancement and visual
appropriateness.
v) All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or
hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All
exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards.
All lighting will meet the City’s outdoor lighting standards, and light
fixture locations and screening have been considered in the site plan,
landscape design and building design to mitigate any fugitive light upon
surrounding properties and streets. The compliant lighting plan is presented as
part of the site planning and landscape design documents in Exhibit 2 of
Appendix C.
e. Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the
proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation
areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded
in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the Planned
Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement
for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future
development is required.
Onsite open space will be provided, but will not be prorated between
residential units at this point, as the units are rental and will not be identified as
individual legal real property interests. The maintenance and upkeep of open
space and common elements will be the responsibility of the property
management entity, as required by the Development Entity under the LIHTC
program. This program further requires annual audits for operating and
maintenance reserves and the diligent use of those respective funds. The
Operations and Maintenance letter furnished by the Applicant as Exhibit 9 in
Appendix B details the required maintenance protocols for the Property under the
LIHTC program.
P109
VI.A.
49
f. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and
improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and
improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on
existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities.
Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines
as required during Project Review comply with the applicable
requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the
Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if
the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the
requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety
requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents.
As addressed in the Project Review response to this standard, the proposed
design improves pedestrian, bicycle and access to transit facilities. The project
will construct a new sidewalk and curb and gutter at the West Main Street right of
way, which is currently non-existent. The alignment of the sidewalk will tie into
that fronting the property to the west.
No curb cuts are proposed for the Property, in fact the existing curb cut will be
vacated, reducing the impact and usage of vehicular transit.
The Proposed Project is designed with ample storage for residents’ material
items, including bike storage, in order to encourage bicycle transit rather than
vehicular use. Additional considerations related to multi-modal aspects of the
project are presented in Section IV.E, Transportation and Parking, of this
application as well as the Transportation Impact Analysis in Exhibit 6 of
Appendix B.
g. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of
engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development
of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements
of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City
of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP).
Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines
as required during Project Review comply with the applicable
requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards
and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These
plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or
mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do
not need to be detailed construction documents.
The engineering design and mitigation techniques of the Proposed Project
associated with this planned development will comply with the requirements of
Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen
URMP. As provided for in this application respectively as Exhibits 2 and 3 of
P110
VI.A.
50
Appendix B, a Preliminary Engineering Report for the Property as well as a
Preliminary Drainage Report, identifying how grading drainage and stormwater
will be designed and managed per the URMP have been completed. Any
additional and specific designs, mitigation techniques and implementation
timelines required by the City Engineer will be defined and documented within
the final Development Agreement for the Proposed Project. The Engineering Plan
set provided as Exhibit 3 in Appendix C provides full design detail of all Engineer
and URMP standards.
h. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development
shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the
project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer.
Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines
as required during Project Review comply with the applicable
requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards
and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These
plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or
mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do
not need to be detailed construction documents.
Letters to serve (Exhibit 2, Appendix B) have been furnished by each of the
utility providers pertinent to the site and the scope of this proposed development,
acknowledging that the adequate capacity is available within each of the
respective systems to service the project. As noted above is Section III.C of this
application, the Project Engineer has confirmed that all utilities are available and
reasonable proximity to the site. At this point, there is no expectation for a need to
upgrade utility infrastructure beyond the localized improvements to get respective
service to the Property. If determined necessary, any localized improvements or
localized upgrades to public infrastructure and facilities in order to gain service
access to the property will be at the sole cost of the developer.
The engineering design and mitigation techniques of the Proposed Project
associated with this planned development will comply with the requirements of
Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen
URMP. As provided for in this application as Exhibits 2 and 3 of Appendix B, a
Preliminary Engineering Report for the Property as well as a Preliminary
Drainage Report, identifying how grading drainage and stormwater will be
designed and managed per the URMP have been completed. Any additional and
specific designs, mitigation techniques and implementation timelines required by
the City Engineer will be defined and documented within the final Development
Agreement for the Proposed Project.
i. Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is
proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete
P111
VI.A.
51
development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall
insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the
construction of later phases. All necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu,
construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned
Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any
mitigation measures.
No phasing is contemplated for the Proposed Projected associated with this
Planned Development.
D. Growth Management Quota System (Chapter 26.470)
The Proposed Project at 802 West Main Street consists entirely of affordable housing.
As such, the Proposed Project does not require the allocation of allotments as there is no
annual limit for affordable housing development pursuant to Section 26.470.040.B of the
Code. Certain Sections of Chapter 26.470 are required for review with respect to the
development of affordable housing. Those pertinent Chapter 26.470 Sections are addressed
as follows:
1. General Review Standards (26.470.080)
As noted above, only certain standards of this Chapter are applicable to the review
for affordable housing development. The Proposed Project is compliant with each of
the standards in this Section 26.470.080, which are either not applicable to the project
as an affordable housing project, or are addressed elsewhere in this application. One
subsection standard in this Section does require specific addressing as follows:
a. Affordable Housing Mitigation (26.470.080.D.7.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
All of the affordable units provided as part of this Proposed Project are
designed such that fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit’s net livable area is at
or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher.
2. Planning and Zoning Commission applications (26.470.100)
The Proposed Project is a newly built affordable housing facility that is not for the
purposes of mitigation or the creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit.
P112
VI.A.
52
Therefore the only applicable standards within 26.470.100 are found in subsection D
of the Code as follows:
a. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-
restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority Guidelines 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.
i) The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and
transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to
select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications,
with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The
deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as
defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended.
The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to
rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal
instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent
affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units
required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the
lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge.
Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of
Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal
agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision.
The Proposed Project is in partnership with the City of Aspen and
financed using the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit program. As such,
the project will be deed restricted and rented to renters qualified under both
the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines and the federal LIHTC guidelines
for income levels and respective rental rates.
E. Transportation and Parking (Chapter 26.515)
As described in greater detail in Sections III.E, Transportation and Parking, and IV.C,
Planned Development, of this application, transportation and parking provisions are being
requested for review as part of the Planned Development. A Minor Transportation Impact
Analysis (TIA) has been completed for the Proposed Project and is included as part of the
Mobility Plan, each of which are provided for as Exhibit 6 of Appendix C and Exhibit 2 of
Appendix C. A CDOT Transportation Impact Study and separate parking assessment were
P113
VI.A.
53
also conducted by the Project’s Transportation Engineer, the results of which are provided
as Exhibits 7 and 8 in Appendix B of this application. The responses to the standards of
this Chapter are included to provide a baseline requirement and justification for any
variations from those requirements to be approved through the Planned Development.
1. Parking Requirements (26.515.040)
a. General requirements. All development shall accommodate its projected
parking impacts as provided in this Chapter.
The Proposed Project accommodates the projected parking impact and needs
of the use, management considerations and other mitigating factors such as
location, access to multimodal transportation options and other on-site factors.
b. Parking Requirement Minimums and Maximums.
Through the proposed Planned Development, this application is requesting
approval for a number of parking units that meets the Code requirements in terms
of quantity of units created, and is not below the minimum or above the
maximum, as prescribed in Table 26.515-1 of this Section. The parking units are
provided off-site as described in Section III.E above and presented in Exhibits 2
and 3 in Appendix C of this application.
c. Parking Requirement Calculation. Parking Requirements shall be met
for each use according to Table 26.515-1, where requirements are
calculated as Parking Units (defined in Section 26.515.010.B):
Table 26.515-1 of this Section prescribe the accommodation of fifteen (10)
Parking Units by way of the following calculation:
10 – one-bedroom units * 1 Parking Unit
– 0 – parking unit reduction for TIA Credits
= 10 Parking Units
d. Parking Requirement when Fractional Requirement Computed. When
any calculation of Parking Requirements results in a fractional unit, that
fractional unit may be paid through a cash-in-lieu payment, or satisfied
through one whole additional on-site parking or mobility commitment
credit.
There is no fractional unit that results in the required parking calculation for
this Proposed Project.
2. Meeting Parking Requirements (26.515.050).
In accordance with the criteria of this Code Section, the Proposed Project’s
Parking Requirement is subject to establishment of a Planned Development final
P114
VI.A.
54
development plan, and therefore the review is subject to Chapter 26.445, Planned
Development, of the Code. Through the Planned Development Review, Parking
Requirements will be satisfied through the following provisions:
a. Cash-in-lieu. Cash-in-lieu payments may be made to satisfy Parking
Requirements as outlined by zone district in Table 26.515-2, and
according to Section 26.515.090.
No Cash-in-lieu payments are requested for any parking deficit associated
with the Proposed Project.
b. On-Site Parking. May be provided on-site in applicable zone districts,
with Reserved and Accessory spaces not to exceed the Parking
Maximums outlined below in Table 26.515-1. Shared parking may be
counted provided that a Shared Parking Agreement and a shared-
parking analysis, as approved by the Community Development Director,
is executed.
The Proposed Project is not providing on-site parking as a result of constraints
and other impacts within the neighborhood, as described in greater detail in
Section III.E above. Through the extensive public outreach process, and byway of
regular check-ins and reviews with City Council at work sessions during the
public outreach process, it was concluded that making improvements in the West
main Street right-of-way to accommodate the Project’s parking was the best
solution for the Property and the surrounding neighborhood.
The provision of ten (10) on-street parking spaces equates to one-hundred
percent (100%) of the Requirement, which is allowed for in the Property’s
location pursuant to Table 26.515-2 of this Section. It is also important to note
that open space along the alley frontage at the rear of the Property is proposed to
remain modestly improved with landscape features to accommodate a future need
or requirement to locate the ten (10) parking spaces from the West Main Street
right-of-way to a head-in condition off of the alley and entirely on-site.
c. Off-Site Parking. Off-site parking may be counted toward the
requirement, provided that a Shared Parking Agreement and a shared-
parking analysis, as approved by the Community Development Director,
is executed.
Off-site parking in the form of on street parking in the West Main Street right-
of-way is proposed to accommodate the parking requirements for the Project. As
described elsewhere, this parking solution has been vetted through public
outreach, extensive neighborhood stakeholder meetings and has been addressed
by the Project’s Transportation Engineer in terms of function and safety. The
takeaways from these efforts have also been reviewed by the City of Aspen
Engineering and Parking Departments, as well as presented to City Council
P115
VI.A.
55
during the public outreach process as described in Section II.D above and in
Exhibit 1 of Appendix B of this application. The off-site parking is not shared
parking per se, however replacement parking has been accommodated as
described and presented in Section III.E above and Exhibits 2 and 3 in Appendix
C of this application. The West Main Street right-of-way improvements proposed
to accommodate the on street parking associated with the Proposed Project have
actually created a net increase in public parking and formalized the parking layout
in the area of the neighborhood adjacent to the Property.
d. Mobility Commitments. Mobility Commitments, as defined in Section
26.515.010.B, may be provided, as follows:
i) Where projects are TIA exempt, pre-approved alternative mobility
measures may be provided to satisfy Parking Units as outlined by zone
district in Table 26.515-2.
This project is not TIA exempt.
ii) Where projects are TIA subject, pre-approved alternative mobility
measures generated over minimum requirements may be provided to
satisfy Parking Units as outlined by zone district in Table 26.515-2.
The TIA provided as Exhibit 6 in Appendix B presents the generation of
33.13 total points resulting from MMLOS and TDM strategies as described in
Section III.F of this application. The Project only required 9 (9) points,
resulting in a surplus of 24.13 points, or TIA Credits. It request that this
significant surplus of Credits be considered along with the other factors and
constraints born out of the neighborhood outreach process for the proposed
on-street parking to satisfy all parking requirements associated with the
Proposed Project.
3. Off-Street Parking Requirements (26.515.070)
a. Applicability. Where off-street parking spaces are provided as part of a
Mobility Plan, the regulations in Sections 26.515.070.(B – I) apply.
As the Proposed Project is subject to establishment by adoption of a Planned
Development final development plan pursuant to Chapter 26.445, Planned
Development, any variations to the following off-street parking requirements as
described below will be addressed through the Planned Development Review.
b. General. Each off-street parking space shall consist of an open area
measuring eight and one half (8½) feet wide by eighteen (18) feet long and
seven (7) feet high with a maximum longitudinal slope of twelve percent
(12%) and a maximum cross slope of five percent (5%). Each parking
space, except those provided for detached residential dwellings and
duplex dwellings, shall have an unobstructed access to a street or alley.
Off-street parking provided for multi-family dwellings which do not
share a common parking area may be exempted from the unobstructed
P116
VI.A.
56
access requirement subject to special review pursuant to Chapter 26.430,
Special review and the standards set forth at Section 26.515.040, Special
review standards, below. Off-street parking must be paved with all-
weather surfacing or be covered with gravel. For residential
development, a grass ring or grass-paver-type surface may be used. All
parking shall be maintained in a usable condition at all times. All
development or redevelopment must be in conformance with, or bring
existing parking into conformance with, Engineering Design Standards,
including but not limited to the access requirements outlined in Chapter 4
Transportation Design.
The parking spaces provided as part of the Proposed Project, in the form of
on-street parking in the West Main Street right-of-way, satisfy each of the above
standards for park space dimensions, clearances and slopes. Each of the parking
spaces provided has unobstructed access to a street. The parking surface will be
outfitted with all-weather surfacing and will be maintained in a usable condition
at all times. The development will be in compliance with all Engineering Design
Standards including but not limited to the access requirements outlined in Chapter
4, Transportation Design, or will have been approved by Engineering under the
considerations of a Planned Development review.
c. Use of off-street parking. Parking spaces shall be used for the parking of
vehicles and shall not be used for non-auto related uses such as storage
units or trash containers. No off-street parking area shall be used for the
sale, repair, dismantling or servicing of any vehicles, equipment,
materials or supplies, nor shall any such activity adjacent to off-street
parking spaces obstruct required access to off-street parking areas.
The proposed on-street parking spaces will be exclusively used for parking of
vehicles and no other uses or activities at all times. If for any reason and at any
time, the City requires the parking spaces to be relocated to the rear of the
Property adjacent to the alley, these same use requirements will be upheld and in
compliance.
d. Location of off-street parking. Off-street parking shall be located on the
same parcel as the principal use or an adjacent parcel under the same
ownership as the lot occupied by the principal use. For all uses, parking
shall be accessed from an alley or secondary road, where one exists unless
otherwise established according to this Chapter.
The parking units are proposed as on-street parking spaces in the West Main
Street right-of-way. If at any point the City requires the parking spaces to be
relocated to the rear of the Property adjacent toe the alley, then at that point all
off-street parking will be located on the same parcel as the principal use with
access from the only road with adjacency to the Property.
e. Detached and duplex residential dwelling parking. Off-street parking
provided for detached residential dwellings and duplex dwellings is not
P117
VI.A.
57
required to have unobstructed access to a street or alley, but shall not
block access of emergency apparatus to the property or to structures
located on the property. This allows for "stacking" of vehicles where a
vehicle is parked directly behind another.
As the Proposed Project is not a detached or duplex residential use, but rather
multi-family, this standards is not applicable.
f. State Highway 82 off-street parking. All parking required for uses
fronting State Highway 82 shall, if an alley exists, be accessed from the
alley and shall not enter from or exit onto State Highway 82.
Although the Property is adjacent to Highway 82, West Main Street serves as
the frontage of the Property per the Code definition of front lot line. No parking
is accessed directly from State Highway 82, but rather from the right-of-way on
West Main Street. All engineered offsets and site lines from this intersection have
been incorporated into the site plans in Exhibits 2 and 3 of Appendix C and are
addressed in the TIA provided as Exhibit 6 of Appendix B. If at any point the City
requires the parking spaces to be relocated to the rear of the Property adjacent toe
the alley, then at that point all off-street parking will be compliant with this Code
standard.
g. Surface parking. Surface parking is prohibited or requires conditional
use review as a principal use of a lot or parcel in some Zone Districts (See
Chapter 26-710). Where surface parking is permitted and eight (8) or
more spaces are provided, the parking area shall include one (1) tree with
a planter area of twenty (20) square feet for each four (4) parking spaces.
Planter areas may be combined, but shall be proximate to the parking
spaces. The Planning and Zoning Commission may waive or modify this
requirement on a per case basis. Parking within structures is exempt
from this landscaping provision.
The parking units are proposed as on-street surface parking spaces in the West
Main Street right-of-way. To accommodate the one (1) tree and twenty (20)
square foot planter area per every four parking spaces, significantly more trees
and planted area will be located in proximity to the parking area and soften the
transition of the parking area to the surrounding landscaped areas and sidewalk to
the north. This design is presented in Exhibit 2 of Appendix C of this application
and will be reviewed under the Planned Development review. If at any point the
City requires the parking spaces to be relocated to the rear of the Property
adjacent toe the alley, this standard will also be upheld to accommodate that
surface parking condition.
h. Restrictions on drainage, grading and traffic impact. Off-street parking
spaces shall be graded to ensure drainage does not create any flooding or
water quality impacts and shall be provided with entrances and exits so
as to minimize traffic congestion and traffic hazards.
P118
VI.A.
58
The on-street parking spaces proposed will be graded and meet all
Engineering Design Standards to ensure drainage does not result in flooding or
other water quality impacts. The layout of the on-street parking spaces have been
engineered to ensure no conflicts or congestion with West Main Street traffic flow
as described in the TIA provided as Exhibit 6 in Appendix B of this application.
If at any point the City requires the parking spaces to be relocated to the rear of
the Property adjacent toe the alley, this standard will also be upheld to
accommodate that surface parking condition.
i. Restrictions on lighting. Lighting facilities for off-street parking spaces, if
provided, shall be arranged and shielded so that lights neither
unreasonably disturb occupants of adjacent residential dwellings nor
interfere with driver vision. All outdoor lighting shall comply with the
outdoor lighting regulations, Section 26.575.150.
There is no proposed lighting facilities associated with the proposed on-street
parking spaces, beyond what may be required by the City Engineering
Department.
F. Residential Design Standards – Multi-family (Chapter 26.410)
The Proposed Project sufficiently responds to the intent and purpose of the Multi-
family Residential Design Standards (26.410.040) of this Chapter. A completed Residential
Design Standards Checklist is provided as Exhibit 10 of Appendix A in this application.
Specific and detailed responses to each standard provided for in the RSD Checklist, along
with the Code Standards provided for in Section 26.410.040 are as follows:
1. Building Orientation (Flexible)
The building orientation of the Proposed Project satisfies the intent and
requirements of this standard. The Property is located on a significant corner lot at the
southern entrance to Aspen “s curve” at the corner of West Main and 7th Streets. The
building is oriented with the street-facing facades parallel lot line, creating an
engaging streetscape between the building and the public realm. As depicted in the
site plan and landscape material in Exhibit 2 of Appendix C, the front façades face the
street with the entrances and fenestration on the ground level that engage the street
and sidewalk at a pedestrian scale. As a result the proposed design fulfills this
standard by achieving Strong Orientation with the front façade of the building
oriented parallel to the streets at the hard corner.
P119
VI.A.
59
2. Garage Access (Non-Flexible)
This standard is not applicable to the Proposed Project, as the Property does not
provide vehicular access from an alley or private street, nor does it provide any onsite
parking.
3. Garage Placement (Non-Flexible)
This standard is not applicable to the Proposed Project, as the Property does not
provide vehicular access from a public street, nor does it provide any onsite parking.
4. Entry Connection (Non-Flexible)
The building design and site design reinforce a strong connection between ground
level entrances with the West Main and 7th Street sidewalks and streets, achieving the
intent and design purpose of this standard. Furthermore, the building and site designs
achieve both options for fulfilling this standard with all ground level entrances being
Street Oriented Entrances, as well as all of the ground level entrances opening to the
street-facing site design with identifiable entry stoops.
5. Principle Window (Flexible)
The intent of this standard is achieved through fenestration patterns of the West
Main and 7th Street building façade that contain multiple windows and groupings of
windows associated with each of the street facing units. Specifically, each unit on the
ground and upper levels present a Street-Facing Principle Window and/or a Window
Group that exceed the required dimensional minimums.
P120
VI.A.
P121
VI.A.
A
APPENDIX A – APPLICATION DOCUMENTS
Exhibit 1. Property Vicinity Map
Exhibit 2. Pre-Application Conference Summary from 07.19.2017
Exhibit 3. Disclosure of Ownership (Letter from City Attorney)
Exhibit 4. Letter to Represent
Exhibit 5. Land Use Application
Exhibit 6. Application Fee Payment Agreement Form
Exhibit 7. Dimensional Requirements Form
Exhibit 8. HOA Compliance Form
Exhibit 9. Community Development Fee Waiver Request Form
Exhibit 10. Multifamily Residential Design Standards Checklist
P122
VI.A.
802 West Main Street – Vicinity Map
P123
VI.A.
ASLU
802 W. Main Street
Major Public Project
Parcel ID 273707401016
1
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Jennifer Phelan, 970.429.2759 DATE: 7.19.17
PROJECT: 802 W. Main
REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Everson, Adan Roy
DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is composed of Lots Q, R, and S, Block 12, City and Townsite of Aspen and is commonly
known as 802 W. Main Street. A single family residence is currently located on the property. The lot is within the
Infill Area and underlying zoning is Moderate-Density Residential (R-15). Surrounding zone districts include
Residential Multi-Family, Medium Density Residential, Mixed-Use, and Affordable Housing PD.
The applicant is proposing to develop the site with affordable housing. As an affordable housing project developed
by the City in conjunction with a private developer, the applicant is requesting review as a Major Public Project,
pursuant to Chapter 26.500, Public Projects. Major Public Project review requires two public hearings, one at the
Planning & Zoning Commission and one at City Council. The applicant shall respond to the review standards for
Public Projects, as well as the other reviews listed below to ensure a robust consideration of the proposal and to
meet one of the general review standards for Public Projects (26.500.070 (3)). The review criteria include all
sections of the Land Use Code that would otherwise be applicable to the project in a standard review process,
which are listed below. The following reviews will be combined into a two-step process, with a recommendation
from the Planning and Zoning Commission and final decision at City Council.
Planned Development/Rezoning
The applicant would like to rezone the property to Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD). Rezoning
to AH/PD requires the adoption of a Final PD Development Plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.445, Planned
Development, which includes both Project Review and Detailed Review. For AH/PD, the dimensional allowances
for this property are established through the PD review process, with suggested dimensions related to unit density
and FAR noted in Section 26.710.110.D., Dimensional requirements. The applicant will be required to respond to
the review standards in Sections 26.310.090, 26.445.050, and 26.445.070 as part of the application.
Growth Management
The development of affordable housing requires Growth Management Review, pursuant to Section 26.470.100.D.
Each unit is required to provide 50% or more of the unit’s net livable area at or above grade. This requirement may
be varied through Special Review, pursuant to Chapter 26.430.
Parking & Transportation
The parking impact requirement for this property is 1 space per unit. The requirement may be satisfied through a
variety of options outlined in Section 26.515.040. A reduction in the number of required spaces may be reviewed
through the Planned Development process. The applicant is also required to submit a Transportation Impact
Analysis (TIA), pursuant to Section 26.515.030. All proposed TIA and parking impact mitigation shall be included
in a complete Mobility Plan.
P124
VI.A.
2
Residential Design Standards
Affordable housing is subject to the multi-family design standards located in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design
Standards. Any requested variations from the standards should be included within the application.
Additional Requirements/Limitations
This project will require Neighborhood Outreach, in addition to traditional public noticing requirements.
Pursuant to Chapter 26.600, redevelopment will require compliance with all adopted Impact Fees, including
School Lands, Parks, and TDM/Air Quality, as well as the trash and recycle requirements from Municipal Code
Section 12.10.
This project is not eligible to receive Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits pursuant to Chapter 26.540, as it
will be developed in conjunction with a public entity. Section 26.540.030 expressly prohibits Certificates from
being established when the City of Aspen or other public entities develop affordable housing.
REVIEW PROCESS (ASSUMING COMBINED REVIEWS)
Step One (Planning & Zoning Commission)
Major Public Project Review recommendation, combined following reviews:
• Planned Development
• Rezoning
• Growth Management
• Residential Design Standards
• Optional: Special Review
Step Two (City Council)
Major Public Project Review approval, combined following reviews:
• Planned Development Review
• Rezoning
• Growth Management
• Residential Design Standards
• Optional: Special Review
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.310 Rezoning
26.340.035 Neighborhood Outreach
26.410 Residential Design Standards
26.430 Special Review
26.445 Planned Development
26.470.100.D GMQS – Affordable Housing
26.480.090.E Plat vacation
26.490 Approval Documents
26.515 Transportation and Parking Management
26.575.020 Calculations & Measurements
26.600 Impact Fees
26.710.110 Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD)
And Municipal Code
12.10 Space Allotment for Trash and Recycling Storage
P125
VI.A.
3
Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience:
Land Use App:
Land Use Application
Below is Land Use Code:
Land Use Code
Review by: Staff for complete application
DRC
P&Z for recommendation to Council
City Council for approval
Public Hearing: Yes, at P&Z and City Council
Planning Fees: $10,400 Deposit for 32 hours of staff time (additional hours are billed at a rate of
$325/hour).
Referral Fees: $1,625 flat fee each for APCHA, Parks, Environmental Health
$325 deposit for 1 hour Engineering (additional hours are billed at a rate of
$325/hour).
Total Deposit: $15,600 (50% = $7,800)
(Note that as a city project, this project qualifies for a 50% fee waiver, which should be
included as part of the application)
To apply, please submit one copy of the completed 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 (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 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.
P126
VI.A.
4
¨ 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.
¨ An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
¨ A draft plat, meeting the plat requirements of Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents.
¨ A description, and depiction as necessary, of the proposed development including a statement of the
objectives to be achieved by the Planned Development and a description of the proposed land uses,
densities, natural features, traffic and pedestrian circulation, parking, open space areas, landscaping,
and infrastructure improvements.
¨ An architectural character plan showing the use, massing, scale and orientation of the proposed
buildings, and outlining the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the
building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, and
other attributes which may significantly represent the proposed development.
¨ A grading and drainage plan showing all grading and how drainage and stormwater is accommodated,
and that meets the Conceptual Drainage Plan and Report requirements in the Urban Runoff
Management Plan (URMP).
¨ For development subject to 8040 greenline review, a plan of the proposed development which shall
depict at a minimum the following information:
o The boundary of the property
o Existing and proposed improvements
o Significant natural features
o Existing and proposed grades at two-foot contours, with five-foot intervals for grades over ten
percent (10%)
o Proposed elevations of the development
o A description of proposed construction techniques to be used
¨ A statement specifying the method of maintaining any proposed common areas on the site, including
but not limited to common parking areas, walkways, landscaped areas and recreational facilities and
what specific assurances will be made to ensure the continual maintenance of said areas.
¨ A description of any proposed project phasing detailing the specific improvements within each phase.
¨ “Ability-to-serve” letters from public and private utility providers that will service the proposed
subdivision with potable water, natural gas, electricity, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and roads stating
they can service the proposed subdivision. Ability-to-Serve letters shall be substantially in the
following format:
The [utility provider] has reviewed the proposed [subdivision name and date of application]
subdivision and has adequate capacity to serve proposed development, subject to compliance
with the following adopted design standards [reference] and subject to the following adopted tap
fee or impact mitigation requirements [reference].
¨ A statement prepared by a Colorado registered Professional Engineer, and depiction or mapping as
necessary, regarding the presence of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including
P127
VI.A.
5
flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides,
mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in excess of 30%,
and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare
of the community. Areas with slopes in excess of 30% shall require a slope stability study reviewed by
the Colorado Geologic Survey. Also see Chapter 29 – Engineering Design Standards regarding
identification and mitigation of natural hazards.
¨ A narrative prepared by a Colorado registered Professional Engineer, and depiction or mapping as
necessary, describing the potential infrastructure upgrades, alignment, design, and mitigation
techniques that may be necessary for development of the site to be served by public infrastructure,
achieve compliance with Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards, and achieve
compliance with the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP).
¨ A statement regarding School Land Dedication requirements of Section 26.620.060 and a description
of any lands to be dedicated to meet the standard.
¨ A complete Mobility Plan, including proposed parking impact mitigation and 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.
¨ If a residential project only: Completed copy of the Residential Design Standard Checklist:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/businessnav/BuildorRemodel/RDS%20Application%20Pac
ket.pdf
If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:
¨ One additional copy of the entire application packet.
¨ Total deposit for review of the application.
¨ A digital copy of all application materials provided in pdf file format.
¨ A 3D model will be required for the public hearing.
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.
P128
VI.A.
P129
VI.A.
July 13, 2017
Jessica Garrow
Director of Community Development
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 802 West Main Street – Affordable Housing Planned Development
Dear Ms. Garrow:
This letter is to serve as authorization for Method Planning + Development to represent Aspen
Housing Partners, LLC with the application submission and subsequent proceedings for the Land
Use Reviews associated with the development of the property at 802 West Main Street, Aspen,
CO 81611. The legal description of the subject property is described as:
LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF
PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC is serving as the Applicant on this matter on behalf of the City of
Aspen, the Owner of the subject property, as authorized by the accompanying letter from the
City Attorney of the City of Aspen.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions regarding this authorizing
letter.
Sincerely yours,
Jason Bradshaw, Manager
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
970.319.9298
P130
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
March, 2017 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
ATTACHMENT 2 – LAND USE APPLICATION
PROJECT:
Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Location:_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)
APPLICANT:
Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone #:
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone#:
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Please check all that apply):
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
PROPOSAL: (Description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ ______________
Pre‐Application Conference Summary
Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement
Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form
Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements – including Written Responses to Review Standards
3‐D Model for large project
All plans that are larger than 8.5” X 11” must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be
submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3‐D model. Your pre‐application conference
summary will indicate if you must submit a 3‐D model.
GMQS Exemption Conceptual PUD Temporary Use
GMQS Allotment Final PUD (& PUD Amendment)
Special Review Subdivision
Conceptual SPA
ESA – 8040 Greenline, Stream Subdivision Exemption (includes
Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Condominiumization)
Mountain View Plane Final SPA (&SPA
Commercial Design Review Lot Split Amendment)
Residential Design Variance Lot Line Adjustment Small Lodge Conversion/
Expansion
Conditional Use Other:
P131
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
March, 2017 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and
Property Phone No.:
Owner (“I”): Email:
Address of Billing
Property: Address:
(Subject of (send bills here)
application)
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment
of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that
I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are
non‐refundable.
$.___________flat fee for __________________. $.____________ flat fee for _____________________________
$.___________ flat fee for __________________. $._____________ flat fee for _____________________________
For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not
possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional
costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete
processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project
consideration, unless invoices are paid in full.
The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to
the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of
an invoice by the City for such services.
I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no‐payment. I agree to pay
the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not
render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I
agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly
rates hereinafter stated.
$________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
$________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
City of Aspen: Property Owner:
________________________________ _______________________________________________
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director Name:
_______________________________________________
Title:
_______________________________________________
City Use:
Fees Due: $____Received $_______
P132
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
March, 2017 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
ATTACHMENT 3
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM
Project: ______________________________________________________________________________
Applicant: ______________________________________________________________________________
Location: ______________________________________________________________________________
Zone District: ______________________________________________________________________________
Lot Size: _______________________________________________________________________________
Lot Area: _______________________________________________________________________________
(For the purpose of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high‐water
mark, easement, 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: _________________________________
Number of bedrooms: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _________________________________
Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): ______________
DIMENSIONS:
Floor Area: Existing: _____________ Allowable: ___________Proposed ____________
Principal bldg. height: Existing: _____________ Allowable: ___________Proposed____________
Access. Bldg. height: 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 F/F: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________
Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed _____________
Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________
Combined Sides: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________
Distance between Bldgs. Existing: _____________ Required: ___________ Proposed _____________
Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed: _____________
Existing non‐conformities or encroachments: __________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested: _____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
P133
VI.A.
P134
VI.A.
Fee Waiver Request Form
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
This form must be submitted to the Community Development Director. You will be notified when a decision has been made.
For what fees are you requesting waiver? BUILDING PLANNING
Applicant Name: Contact Ph.#
Department or Mailing address:
E-mail address:
Project address:
Project description:
Fee Breakdown:
BUILDING & PLANNING FEES
Fee Description Fee Amount Requested
Waiver Fee Description Fee Amount Requested
Waiver
Energy Code Fee REMP Fee
Excavation Foundation Fee Zoning Review Fee
Inspection Fee Planning Application Fee
Permit Fee HPC Application Fee
Plan Check Other:
Total of Request: $
Reason for Waiver:
City General Fund Department – 100% waiver
City Capital or Other Department – 50% waiver
Waived or decreased by City Council (please provide documentation)
Other – Please explain with attached letter of request
Applicant Signature Date
For office use only:
APPROVED DISAPPROVED Total fees waived: $
Community Development Director Date
P135
VI.A.
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist - Multi-family Development
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
B.1.Building Orientation
(Flexible)
B.2.Garage Access
(Non-flexible)
B.3.Garage Placement
(Non-flexible)
B.4.Entry Connection
(Non-flexible)
B.5Principle Window
(Flexible)
Instructions: Please fill out the checklist below, marking whether the proposed design complies with the applicable standard as written or is requesting Alternative Compliance (only
permitted for Flexible standards). Also include the sheet #(s) demonstrating the applicable standard. If a standard does not apply, please mark N/A and include in the Notes section why
it does not apply. If Alternative Compliance is requested for a Flexible standard, include in the Notes section how the proposed design meets the intent of the standard(s). Additional
sheets/graphics may be attached.
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Address:
Parcel ID:
Zone District/PD:
Representative:
Email:
Phone:
Page 1 of 1P136 VI.A.
B
APPENDIX B – REPORTS, STUDIES & LETTERS
Exhibit 1. Public Outreach Process, Goals and Schedule Summary
Exhibit 2. Engineering Report
Exhibit 3. Drainage Report
Exhibit 4. Geotechnical Engineering Report
Exhibit 5. Phase I ESA (report only; appendices provided upon request)
Exhibit 6. Mobility Plan/Transportation Impact Analysis – Minor
Exhibit 7. CDOT Transportation Impact Study
Exhibit 8. Parking Assessment and Analysis Report
Exhibit 9. Property Operations and Maintenance Protocol Letter
P137
VI.A.
Aspen Housing Partners and City of Aspen PPP for the Development of Affordable
Housing – Community and Stakeholder Outreach Process,
Organization and Goals
The following outline describes the various processes and tools that will be utilized
throughout the public outreach process for the development of affordable housing on
the thee City owned subject properties – 802 Main Street, 517 Park Circle and 488
Castle Creek Road. The projected timeframe for the public outreach process is
estimated to be approximately three (3) months, commencing in early January 2017 and
completing in March 2017.
I. Initial Community Wide Open House
A. Dates: January 5, 2017 from 3 to 7 pm;
January 11, 2017 from 11 – 1 pm and 4 to 6 pm.
B. Venue: Limelight Hotel Conference Room
C. Details: Food and beverages will be served to participants on behalf of
Aspen Housing Partners
D. Purpose, Goals and Intended Outcome:
The purpose of the initial community wide open house is to reintroduce
the public the efforts made and data collected thus far and to solicit input on
the scope of the designs for each of the three properties at this point in the
process. The intended outcome is to establish general awareness and to
obtain critical feedback on the project concepts established throughout the
RFP and partnership establishment process to date, including but not limited
to objective data as well as subjective input on such items as appropriateness
to neighborhood context, mass, height, density, scale, parking, architectural,
style, character, landscape site improvements and unit mix.
The takeaways will inform the next round of design and programming
modifications and then be used to present to key neighborhood stakeholders
in more intimate breakout meetings and settings.
E. Venue Setup and Process
The organization of the initial community wide open house will be to
provide extensive education on the background of the effort to date and the
community input that has formed the basis for the establishment of the PPP
to develop affordable rental housing. Additionally, the initial open house will
present the background and education on each of the three sites – both
what was pubic input to date on the three sites and specifically what the
vision is for each of the three sites in greater detail.
P138
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 2
The conference room at the Limelight Hotel will be organized into
multiple stations where participants can casually gain whatever level of
education/information they would like to learn as well as provide
anonymous and objective feedback and/or very detailed input and
commentary regarding the current conceptual designs and processes being
undertaken.
1. Background and History
An informational station will be devoted to providing background on
the history of prior public outreach on the matter and the purpose and
functioning of the PPP. It will cover all matters related but not limited to
the background, process, team, LIHTCs, timeline, entitlement process,
construction, property management, etc. Specifically, this station will
provide information on:
a. Charts, tables and graphs - showing the historic public outreach data
on the topic of developing new affordable housing.
b. Organizational chart – highlighting the structure and purpose of the
PPP and related team members.
c. Broad timeline – identifying the key phases from partnership
establishment through lease-up and operation.
d. LIHTC background – describing the program, how it works, and how
the PPP relationship benefits the City.
e. Guiding principles – the key principles and commitments the
development team in partnership with the City has made in seeing
the projects through completion as outlined in the original RFP
proposal material and providing additional description.
2. Site Specific Material and Information (x3)
Each of the three (3) properties will have its own station to highlight
the history of the site under consideration for affordable housing
development, through the current design concepts that have been
established for each. The material at each property’s station will start
from a broad look at the proposed development within the context of
town and the surrounding area and continue through a detailed look at
planning, site, and building design details.
The material presented will be done so in a manner to be able to
obtain objective data and input from the participants as well as
subjective thoughts, comments and opinions of the material presented.
This input will then be used to further refine and adjust the design
concepts as the process moves forward.
P139
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 3
a. Background and Prior Input – each station will have a board/material
showing the considerations to date that established the current
concepts, support by previously obtained data and input.
b. Area context and surrounding precedent – each station will have a
board/material showing the surrounding context and character
including use-types, zoning, architectural and site design character,
parking and traffic patterns, etc.
c. Site plan and surrounding site pressures – each station will have a
board/material highlighting the current design concept as well as
design considerations made to alleviate and site pressures such as
neighboring property relationships, views, access, parking, screening,
etc.
d. Architectural character studies – each station will have a
board/material depicting a variety of architectural character both
present in the surrounding area as well as appropriate to the area
context and greater history of the neighborhood and greater
community.
e. Building design and proposed architectural character – each station
will have a board(s)/material that highlights the following as it relates
to the design of the buildings:
i. Massing
ii. Height
iii. Architectural style
iv. Material character
This information will be communicated through architectural
renderings and perspectives of the buildings within the context of the
sites and surrounding and neighboring areas and buildings.
f. Building floor plans, typical unit plans and unit mixes – each station
will generally show each floor plan to highlight unit layouts,
amenities, non-unit area, decks, etc. typical units and the related mix
of units sizes will also be represented for each property.
II. Neighborhood-wide and Individual Key Stakeholder Meetings
A. Dates: as required from mid-January to end of February 2017.
B. Venue: casual settings such as at the respective properties, meeting
rooms, living rooms or cafes.
P140
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 4
C. Details: the needs and expectations of the neighborhood stakeholder will
determine the details such as coffee meetings, smaller group presentations
and discussions, etc.
D. Purpose, Goals and Intended Outcome:
The purpose of the neighborhood and key individual stakeholder
meetings is to solicit specific input and individual concerns regarding the
design of the three projects as they relate to surrounding neighbors,
properties, roads, alleys, etc. Participants will be contacted via mailings, sign-
ups from other prior events, emails, website and known and identified
stakeholders surrounding each of the three properties.
The goals of the neighborhood and stakeholder meetings will be to
discuss individuals’ concerns in a smaller intimate setting – whether that be
over coffee at a coffee shop with a table full of neighbors, on-site to look and
review specific concerns, or one-on-one meetings with immediate
surrounding homeowners.
The intended outcome of this phase of public outreach will be to
specifically address design considerations, traffic/parking concerns or any
other factors that are most critical and concerning to the most vested
community stakeholders. Achieving any amount of greater neighborhood
buy-in will be the ultimate outcome goal from the neighborhood stakeholder
engagement.
E. Venue Setup and Process
The venue setup and engagement process will be very organic in nature,
depending on the needs and desires of the neighborhood residents and key
stakeholders. The expectation is a mix of meetings, consisting of larger
group settings in a casual atmosphere to discuss questions and concerns that
may be prevalent throughout the neighborhood. This phase of public
outreach will also offer key stakeholders the opportunity to meet with
members of the development team to specifically discuss questions and
concerns on an individual level.
III. First City Council Work Session Check-In and Presentation
A. Dates: February 14, 2017
Following the Community-wide and Neighborhood-wide stakeholder public
outreach phases, the project team will reconvene with City Council at a work
session to present the findings and takeaways at this point in the process. This
check-in will give Council the ability to review and provide any direction deemed
appropriate based on the public feedback received and documented.
P141
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 5
IV. Final Community Wide Open House
B. Dates: March 2, 2017 from 3 to 7 pm;
March 8, 2017 from 11 – 1 pm and 4 to 6 pm.
C. Venue: Limelight Hotel Conference Room
D. Details: Food and beverages will be served to participants on behalf of
Aspen Housing Partners
E. Purpose, Goals and Intended Outcome:
The final community-wide open house will be a consolidated version of
the initial open house, with the intent of focusing on the refined design
details for each of the three properties. The purpose will be to present the
design modifications that have come about from the input and data gathered
from the prior two phases of the public outreach process.
The takeaways will further inform the final round of design and
programming modifications that will provide the basis for the land use
application material and process.
F. Venue Setup and Process
The organization of the final community wide open house will be to
present and obtain final feedback from the community on the more detailed
site and building designs for each of the three properties.
The conference room at the Limelight Hotel will be organized into
multiple stations where participants can casually gain whatever level of
education/information they would like to learn as well as provide
anonymous and objective feedback and/or very detailed input and
commentary regarding the final designs leading into the land use review
process.
1. Background and History
To accommodate any new attendees to the open house, a
consolidated version of the initial open house informational station will
be devoted to providing background on the history of prior public
outreach on the matter and the purpose and functioning of the PPP. It
will cover all matters related but not limited to the background, process,
team, LIHTCs, timeline, entitlement process, construction, property
management, etc. Specifically, this station will provide information on:
a. Charts, tables and graphs - showing the historic public outreach data
on the topic of developing new affordable housing.
b. Organizational chart – highlighting the structure and purpose of the
PPP and related team members.
P142
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 6
c. Broad timeline – identifying the key phases from partnership
establishment through lease-up and operation.
d. LIHTC background – describing the program, how it works, and how
the PPP relationship benefits the City.
e. Guiding principles – the key principles and commitments the
development team in partnership with the City has made in seeing
the projects through completion as outlined in the original RFP
proposal material and providing additional description.
2. Site Specific Material and Information (x3)
Each of the three (3) properties will have its own station to highlight
the history of the site under consideration for affordable housing
development, through the current design concepts that have been
established for each. The material at each property’s station will start
from a broad look at the proposed development within the context of
town and the surrounding area and continue through a detailed look at
planning, site, and building design details.
The material presented will be done so in a manner to be able to
obtain objective data and input from the participants as well as
subjective thoughts, comments and opinions of the material presented.
This input will then be used to further refine and adjust the design
concepts as the process moves forward.
a. Background and Prior Input – each station will have a board/material
showing the considerations to date that established the current
concepts, support by previously obtained data and input.
Additionally, the background will identify the modifications that have
been made to each of the properties throughout this public outreach
process.
b. Area context and surrounding precedent – each station will have a
board/material showing the surrounding context and character
including use-types, zoning, architectural and site design character,
parking and traffic patterns, etc.
c. Site plan and surrounding site pressures – each station will have a
board/material highlighting the refined site designs as well as design
considerations made to alleviate and site pressures such as
neighboring property relationships, views, access, parking, screening,
etc.
d. Architectural character studies – each station will have a
board/material depicting the architectural character and precedent
P143
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 7
imagery that was informed and refined throughout the public
outreach process. Opposed to presenting character variations and
options at the initial public open house, this study for the final open
house will show the character and styles that the design team arrived
at through public and stakeholder input.
e. Building design and proposed architectural character – each station
will have a board(s)/material that highlights the following as it relates
to the design of the buildings as revised throughout the public
outreach process:
i. Massing
ii. Height
iii. Architectural style
iv. Material character
This information will be communicated through architectural
renderings and perspectives of the buildings within the context of the
sites and surrounding and neighboring areas and buildings.
f. Building floor plans, typical unit plans and unit mixes – each station
will more specifically show each floor plan to highlight unit layouts,
amenities, non-unit area, decks, etc. typical units and the related mix
of unit sizes will also be represented for each property. This
presentation will show greater detail and more firmed up layouts
following the incorporation of public input.
V. Final City Council Work Session Check-In and Presentation
A. Dates: March 28, 2017
Following the last Community-wide open house, the project team will reconvene
with City Council at a work session to present the final findings and takeaways
leading into the land use application development and review process. Council
will have the opportunity to review the revisions made throughout the process
and make any final recommendations leading into the land use process.
VI. Additional Tools and Process for Public Input
To complement the open houses and direct stakeholder engagements that will
be undertaken, the project team will also implement the following tools for
soliciting and obtaining additional public and community input:
B. Website – a user-friendly public engagement website platform similar to the
Aspen Community Voice site. The team may also utilize the Aspen
Community Voice website exclusively for the online outreach effort or in
addition to a standalone website for these specific projects. The website will
P144
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 8
function to provide additional material and information, post details such as
event dates, and most importantly solicit, track and capture input data from
subscribers to supplement the input and data captured through the various
public outreach events and meetings.
C. Email Blasts – informational email blasts to key lists of community members
and employees of significant employers such as area school districts, ACRA,
City of Aspen, SkiCo, Aspen Valley Hospital, valley non-profits, hotels, etc.
The email blasts will primarily foucs on announcements such as event dates
and details and any information related to the website or alternatives means
for asking questions and providing input.
D. Mailings – informative mailings will be sent out to all residents within the
most appropriately determined radius from each of the project sites. The
mailings will function similar to email blasts for informing neighbors of key
events, and opportunities to ask questions, set up meetings and/or ask
provide critical input to the project designs.
E. Key Technical Stakeholder Meetings and Interviews – meetings with
government and agency stakeholders that have technical insights and
considerations with the development of each of the three properties.
F. Newspaper and Radio Informational Ads – periodic newspaper and radio
ads providing information on events and updates throughout the public
outreach process.
P145
VI.A.
Community Outreach - Organization and Goals Outline (11-23-2016).docx 9
P146
VI.A.
Preliminary Engineering Report
MAIN STREET AFFORDABLE HOUSING
802 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, CO
July 26, 2017
Prepared by
Danny Stewart, P.E.
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO
P147
VI.A.
P148
VI.A.
Main Street Affordable Housing ii
Preliminary Engineering Report
Table of Contents
1.0 General ................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Existing Site ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Proposed Conditions ......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Potable Water ......................................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Existing ............................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Proposed ........................................................................................................................................... 2
3.0 Sanitary Sewer ........................................................................................................................................ 2
3.1 Existing ............................................................................................................................................. 2
3.2 Proposed ........................................................................................................................................... 2
4.0 Electric.................................................................................................................................................... 3
4.1 Existing ............................................................................................................................................. 3
4.2 Proposed ........................................................................................................................................... 3
5.0 Gas .......................................................................................................................................................... 3
5.1 Existing ............................................................................................................................................. 3
5.2 Proposed ........................................................................................................................................... 3
6.0 Communications ..................................................................................................................................... 3
6.1 Existing ............................................................................................................................................. 3
6.2 Proposed ........................................................................................................................................... 3
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Ability to Serve Letters
P149
VI.A.
Main Street Affordable Housing 1
Preliminary Engineering Report
1.0 General
1.1 Existing Site
802 West Main Street is currently owned by the City of Aspen. The 9,000 square foot property is
currently occupied by a single-story wood framed house with an attached garage and associated patios
and landscaping. The site is bordered by Highway 82 to the East, West Main Street to the South, 814 W
Main Street to the West and an alley to the North. The site is located at an approximate elevation of 7928
feet and located within a residential area.
All major utilities except for water are located within the alley to the North of the site and currently serve
the site. The water main that currently serves the property is located on the North side of West Main
Street to the South of the site. Utility providers have issued ‘ability to serve letters’ or have notified
Roaring Fork Engineering that one was not necessary due to past service connections for the site. Ability
to Serve Letters are provided for water, gas, electric and sanitary sewer, included in Appendix A.
1.2 Proposed Conditions
The site will consist of a proposed two-level structure of one to three-bedroom condominiums. The
structure will have at grade ADA access from Main Street and from 7th Street. The main level will have
egress access to a courtyard located behind the site that will allow access to the alley and trash
receptacles. The upper levels of the structure will have no direct egress to at grade levels. Parking will
be provided along the north side of West Main Street within the street right-of-way.
New sidewalks along West Main Street and Highway 82 will meet the current Engineering Standard for
construction in the public right-of-way and master plan design for development in this area. Sidewalk
cross-slopes meet the American Disabilities Act (ADA) maximum of two percent, curbs ramp meet the
ADA maximum of 8.33 percent, and all access needed for ADA compliance into the building is under
five percent.
P150
VI.A.
Main Street Affordable Housing 2
Preliminary Engineering Report
Improvements to the site will include on-site and off-site storm water treatment and infrastructure. As part
of the parking improvements along West Main Street a new curb inlet and drywell will be installed along
the north side of West Main Street. This drywell will be sized to capture and treat the WQCV for West
Main Street and a small portion of 802 West Main’s runoff. Overflow from this drywell will be routed
down 7th street to the east via curb and gutter. This drywell will greatly improve the current drainage
along West Main Street and lessen storm water impacts to the property while providing treatment.
Onsite storm water infrastructure will include a series of trench drains and area inlets that will capture
surface runoff from impervious areas and from the roofs of the structures. These drains will be conveyed
through a piped system to a drywell that is sized to treat the required WQCV. A small portion of runoff
from the site along 7th Street will no be captured by an onsite system but will be conveyed through green
space along 7th Street before entering the curb and cutter to be conveyed to existing storm water systems
down 7th Street to the north. This volume of runoff will not exceed the historic runoff rates from the site.
Pervious pavers and other infiltrating hard surfaces will be used in accordance with the Low Impact
Design criteria provided in the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan.
2.0 Potable Water
2.1 Existing
Within West Main Street, there is a 12-inch ductile iron water line running in the street. The line is owned
and operated by the Aspen Water Department. The location, size, and depth have not been confirmed by
potholing, but will be done prior to final design. The City of Aspen Water Department has also indicated
that an existing service line has provided water to the site in the past.
2.2 Proposed
The proposed water service to the new structure would connect to the existing 12-inch ductile iron water
line in Main Street, the older service line will be abandoned. Preliminary sizing of the service line
indicates that a 2-inch or 4-inch ductile iron water service will be sufficient for the multi-family housing
building demands. This line sizing would include fire flows required for an in-building sprinkler system.
The fire flows have not been calculated but will be done prior to final design. An ability to serve letter is
not necessary due to the site having a water service already provided.
3.0 Sanitary Sewer
3.1 Existing
The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District own a sanitary sewer main in the alley to the north of the site.
The site is currently served by a four-inch PVC service. The sanitation department is unclear of the
condition of this existing service due to demolition activity at the site.
3.2 Proposed
A new six-inch SDR 35 sewer tap is proposed. The connection will be main the alley to the north of the
site. A will serve letter from the Sanitation Department is attached in Appendix A.
P151
VI.A.
Main Street Affordable Housing 3
Preliminary Engineering Report
4.0 Electric
4.1 Existing
An existing electric service is provided to the proposed site. It is unclear at this time if the service will be
adequate for the site. If the service insufficient it will be abandoned.
4.2 Proposed
There is an existing transformer located approximately 200 feet west of the site along 8th Street. A new
electrical service will be installed from this location to service the site if it is found the existing service is
undersized. A will serve letter from the City is unnecessary due to service being provided to this site
previously. A memo from Aspen Utilities is provided is in Appendix A.
5.0 Gas
5.1 Existing
Black Hills Energy owns and operates a 2-inch steel gas main in the alley to the north of the site. This
utility has not been potholed to verify size but will be prior to final design.
5.2 Proposed
A service connection has previously been installed to the site and will be used for the proposed structure
provided the size is adequate. If the existing service is undersized a new gas service will be tapped in the
alley. A will serve letter from Black Hills Energy is attached in Appendix A.
6.0 Communications
6.1 Existing
Cable and telephone pedestals are located on the north side of the alley across from 802 West Main. Both
cable and telephone currently service the site.
6.2 Proposed
Cable and telephone services will be intercepted onsite and routed properly to the new buildings. If this
cannot be accomplished new lines will be installed form the existing pedestals across the alley to the site.
P152
VI.A.
Main Street Affordable Housing
Preliminary Engineering Report
Appendix A – Ability to Serve Letters
P153
VI.A.
1
Danny Stewart
From:Tyler Christoff <Tyler.Christoff@cityofaspen.com>
Sent:Monday, July 10, 2017 9:00 AM
To:Danny Stewart
Subject:RE: Main Street Will Serve Letter
Danny,
As this property has existing service a “will serve” letter is not necessary. Keep in mind that this in no way guarantees
the existence or condition of each individual property’s water/electric service line, which, in accordance with the City of
Aspen Municipal Code, is the property and responsibility of the property owner. Additionally, since scale of this project
is unknown we are unable to guarantee capacity within existing water mains or transformers to serve the development.
The Developer may be required to upsize mains or transformers as necessary to serve this project.
Tyler Christoff, PE, CFM, PMP
Deputy Director of Utilities
City of Aspen
tyler.christoff@cityofaspen.com
(970) 920‐5118
From: Danny Stewart [mailto:dannys@rfeng.biz]
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 8:47 AM
To: Tyler Christoff <Tyler.Christoff@cityofaspen.com>
Subject: Main Street Will Serve Letter
Tyler,
See attached vicinity for another Ability to Serve Letter request from the water department for a new 10 unit affordable
housing development at the “S” curves in Aspen. This is the last I’ll need for these affordable housing projects, thanks
for your help on getting these to me. This maybe a scenario like Park Circle where there is already an existing service
but it will need upsized for this building. If you need any more clarification on the project or have any questions please
feel free to call or email me.
Thanks,
Danny Stewart, PE
Principal
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
Office: 970.340.4130
Mobile: 970.629.5876
Fax: 866.876.5873
P154
VI.A.
P155
VI.A.
P156
VI.A.
Preliminary Drainage Report
MAIN STREET AFFORDABLE HOUSING
802 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, CO
July 26, 2017
Prepared by
Danny Stewart, P.E.
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO
P157
VI.A.
P158
VI.A.
802 West Main Street ii
Preliminary Drainage Report
Table of Contents
1.0 General ................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Existing Site ........................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Proposed Conditions ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Previous Drainage Studies .................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Offsite Drainage & Constraints ........................................................................................................... 2
2.0 Proposed Drainage Basins and Sub-basins ............................................................................................. 3
2.1 Developed Drainage Basins ................................................................................................................ 3
2.2 Peak Discharge Calculations ............................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Low Impact Site Design ......................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Principles ............................................................................................................................................. 5
4.0 Hydrological Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 6
4.1 Storm Recurrence and Rainfall ........................................................................................................... 6
4.2 Peak Runoff and Storage Volume Methodology ................................................................................ 6
5.0 Proposed Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 6
5.1 Proposed Bio Treatment...................................................................................................................... 6
5.2 Proposed Inlets .................................................................................................................................... 7
5.3 Pervious Pavers ................................................................................................................................... 7
6.0 Operation and Maintenance .................................................................................................................... 7
6.1 Bioswales ............................................................................................................................................ 7
6.2 Pervious Pavers ................................................................................................................................... 7
6.3 Pervious Pavers ................................................................................................................................... 8
6.4 Drywells .............................................................................................................................................. 8
P159
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 1
Preliminary Drainage Report
1.0 General
1.1 Existing Site
The property under evaluation is located at 802 West Main Street in Aspen, Colorado. Existing
development on the site includes a single-story wood framed house with an attached garage along with
associated landscaping, patios and utility service lines. The site is bordered by Highway 82 to East, West
Main Street to the South, 814 W Main Street to the West and an alley to the North.
There is currently concrete curb and gutter along Highway 82 (7th Street) that conveys runoff from the
property and street to the north. The flow in this curb and gutter is conveyed two blocks down to an inlet
located where the highway begins heading to the west. On West Main Street, curb and gutter exists to the
west of the property but does not currently exist in front of the subject property. A valley pan runs down
the alley to the north of the property, it collects storm water from the entire length of the alley and
conveys it to a drywell located in the valley pan approximately in the middle of the site.
Runoff generated on site generally infiltrates, what does not sheet flows away from the house in all
directions. Runoff on the North portion of the property flows towards the alley and into the existing
drywell. Runoff to the east flows towards the curb and gutter on Highway 82, while Runoff on the West
flows into a grassed swale on the adjacent property and into a series of inlets. Runoff on the South of the
property flows towards West Main Street where it pools along the road and infiltrates into the soil on the
north side of West Main Street.
The geotechnical report completed by HP Kumar on March 14, 2017 observed that the underlying soil is
silty, sandy gravel with cobbles and small boulders. A sieve analysis of this material indicated between
eleven and fifteen percent passing the number 200 sieve. Ground water was not encountered in the
geotechnical borings.
P160
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 2
Preliminary Drainage Report
1.2 Proposed Conditions
This project is classified as a ‘Major Project’ as per Table 1.1 of the City of Aspen Urban Runoff
Management Plan (URMP). The proposed development is over 1,000 sf and disturbs an area of
approximately 15,000 square feet. 9,000 square feet of disturbance is on property and 6,000 square feet
of disturbance is within the public right of way and alley. The disturbance in the public right of way
consists of new sidewalks and green space, new parking along Main Street and some asphalt paving in the
alley. The intent of this report is to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the City of Aspen
URMP. The Low Impact Design (LID) Principles in the introduction of the manual were used as a guide
throughout the design process.
The site will consist of a proposed two-level structure of one to three-bedroom condominiums. The
structure will have at grade ADA access from Main Street and from 7th Street. The main level will have
egress access to a courtyard located behind the site that will allow access to the alley and trash
receptacles. The upper level of the structure will have no direct egress to at grade levels. Parking will be
provided along the north side of West Main Street within the street right-of-way. The team has met with
the City of Aspen Engineering Department to discuss Low Impact Design (LID) strategies early in the
design process. Many of the proposed patios and access walk ways around the structure will be pervious
pavers.
Improvements to the site will include on-site and off-site storm water treatment and infrastructure. As part
of the parking improvements along West Main Street a new curb inlet and drywell will be installed along
the north side of West Main Street. This drywell will be sized to capture and treat the WQCV for West
Main Street and a small portion of 802 West Main’s runoff. Overflow from this drywell will be routed
down 7th street to the east via curb and gutter. This drywell will greatly improve the current drainage
along West Main Street and lessen storm water impacts to the property while providing treatment.
Onsite storm water infrastructure will include a series of trench drains and area inlets that will capture
surface runoff from impervious areas and from the roofs of the structures. These drains will be conveyed
through a piped system to a drywell that is sized to treat the WQCV for basin 1. A small portion of runoff
from the site along 7th Street will not be captured by an onsite system but will be conveyed through green
space along 7th Street before entering the curb and cutter to be conveyed to existing storm water systems
down 7th Street to the north. This volume of runoff will not exceed the historic runoff rates from the site.
1.3 Previous Drainage Studies
The parcel is located within the City of Aspen Drainage Master Plan area. The site is located within the
Aspen Mountain drainage basin but there are no nearby city storm system improvements to convey flow
from the site. No previous drainage studies have been found for this site. If a previous drainage study is
discovered prior to final drainage report its finding will be analyzed and included in the final drainage
report.
1.4 Offsite Drainage & Constraints
Due to parking improvements along West Main Street there will be off site drainage improvements.
Connection will be made between existing curb and gutter along West Main Street and 7th Street.
P161
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 3
Preliminary Drainage Report
Currently there is a void in the curb and gutter along the southern portion of the site. In this void parking
will be added and asphalt and curb and gutter will be connected to existing infrastructure. As part of
these improvements, a new drywell served by a curb inlet in the new parking area will be installed to
capture runoff from West Main Street and sections of grass and sidewalk along the north side of West
Main Street. This drywell is being sized for the WQCV for the drainage area it serves in Main Street and
adjacent properties. Overflow from this drywell will be conveyed through curb and gutter out to 7th Street
and to the north to existing drainage systems.
2.0 Proposed Drainage Basins and Sub‐basins
2.1 Developed Drainage Basins
The site is composed of 4 major drainage basins. Basin 1 drains most hard surfaces and roofs on the site.
Basin 1 is served by a drywell designed to treat the WQCV. Basin 2 comprises runoff in West Main
Street and adjacent portions of sidewalk and green space along the north side of the street. Basin 2 is
served by a water quality drywell in the new parking area. Basins 3 and 4 are primarily made up of
pervious pavers and vegetation. Basin 3 sheet flows to the alley on the north of the property and basin 4
sheet flows into the curb and gutter along 7th Street.
2.2 Peak Discharge Calculations
The peak flows were calculated for each Major Basin for 10-year and 100-year storm events. Rainfall
intensity was calculated using a Time of Concentration (Td) of 5 minutes. Actual Time of Concentration
on the site is significantly less than 5 minutes, but according to the City of Aspen URMP, equations used
to calculate rainfall intensity are only valid for a Time of Concentration of greater than 5 minutes so the
smallest valid Time of Concentration value was used. The 1 hour Rainfall depth (P1), given in Table 2.2
as 0.77 inches for a 10-year event and 1.23 inches for a 100-year event. Equation 2.1 was referenced
when solving for the Rainfall Intensity (I).
I = 88.8P1/(10+Td )1.052
Runoff Coefficients (C), a function of the Soil Group (in this case C) and the percentage of impervious
area within each sub basin were developed using Figure 3.2. The Runoff Coefficient (C) was then
multiplied by the Rainfall Intensity (I) and the acreage of each Major Basin (A) to determine the peak
discharge for each Major Basin.
Qp = CIA
Qp = Peak Discharge (cfs)
A = Area (Acres)
I = Rainfall intensity (inches per hour)
C = Runoff Coefficient
P162
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 4
Preliminary Drainage Report
These peak flow values are used to calculate the size of the proposed detention and conveyance
structures, such as drywells, inlets and piping. The tables below contain the peak flows for developed and
undeveloped conditions for 10-year, and 100-year storm events.
10 Year Peak Discharge Developed Calculations
1 Hour(P1)0.77
Return Period 10
Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
1 4676.00 3719.00 79.53% 0.580 5 3.96 0.25
2 12506.00 10306.00 82.41% 0.630 5 3.96 0.72
3 3316.00 2055.00 61.97% 0.480 5 3.96 0.14
4 2870.00 1981.00 69.02% 0.500 5 3.96 0.13
10 Year Peak Discharge Pre Development Calculations
1 Hour(P1)0.77
Return Period 10
Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
1 4676.00 0.00 0.00% 0.150 5 3.96 0.06
2 12506.00 0.00 0.00% 0.150 5 3.96 0.17
3 3316.00 0.00 0.00% 0.150 5 3.96 0.05
4 2870.00 0.00 0.00% 0.150 5 3.96 0.04
100 Year Peak Discharge Developed Calculations
1 Hour(P1)1.23
Return Period 100
Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
1 4676.00 3719.00 79.53% 0.650 5 6.33 0.44
2 12506.00 10306.00 82.41% 0.700 5 6.33 1.27
3 3316.00 2055.00 61.97% 0.570 5 6.33 0.27
4 2870.00 1981.00 69.02% 0.590 5 6.33 0.25
100 Year Peak Discharge Pre Development Calculations
1 Hour(P1)1.23
Return Period 100
Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
1 4676.00 0.00 0.00% 0.350 5 6.33 0.24
2 12506.00 0.00 0.00% 0.350 5 6.33 0.64
3 3316.00 0.00 0.00% 0.350 5 6.33 0.17
4 2870.00 0.00 0.00% 0.350 5 6.33 0.15
P163
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 5
Preliminary Drainage Report
3.0 Low Impact Site Design
Low Impact Development (LID) aims to mimic the natural pre-development hydrologic pattern. The goal
is to manage storm water as close to its source as is possible. By using bioswales and pervious pavement,
storm water will be infiltrated to the maximum extent feasible.
3.1 Principles
Principle 1: Consider storm water quality needs early in the design process.
An initial meeting with Engineering took place at the beginning of civil design to discuss storm water
concepts. The grading and drainage design is being coordinated between the architect, landscape architect
and civil engineering teams throughout the process.
Principle 2: Use the entire site when planning for storm water quality treatment.
The site design has planting boxes used to treat and detain stormwater as well as water quality treatment
units and drywells to detain and infiltrate runoff.
Principle 3: Avoid unnecessary impervious area.
Pervious pavers and landscaped areas will be implemented where possible.
Principle 4: Reduce runoff rates and volumes to more closely match natural conditions.
All pervious runoff from the site will be conveyed and infiltrated on site.
Principle 5: Integrate storm water quality management and flood control.
Lanscaped areas will act as bio treatment from runoff as well as CDS units for areas of vehicular traffic.
Principle 6: Develop storm water quality facilities that enhance the site, the community and the
environment.
Landscape areas that double as water quality treatment will greatly enhance the site aesthetically.
Principle 7: Use treatment train approach.
All pervious runoff areas that are not associated with the access drive or parking lot first convey through
vegetated areas before entering the storm system. All site runoff is treated by two CDS units prior to
infiltration.
Principle 8: Design sustainable facilities that can be safely maintained.
All facilities have at grade access in convenient locations with low slope angles.
Principle 9: Design and maintain facilities with public safety in mind.
The drop off from the sidewalk will not exceed more than a standard 6” curb. All area drains are outside
of walking paths and grates used for trench drains meet all pedestrian standards.
P164
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 6
Preliminary Drainage Report
4.0 Hydrological Criteria
4.1 Storm Recurrence and Rainfall
The property is not in the commercial core and will not be served by the City Storm System. There is the
possibility of offsite drainage from west main street being conveyed into the city storm system. Due to
this the site shall meet the conveyance requirements of the 10 and 100-year storm events.
The 1 hour Rainfall depth (P1) is given in Table 2.2 as 0.77 inch for the 10-year event and 1.23 inches for
the 100-year event. The Intensity in inches per hour for different storm duration (Td) is calculated using
the Equation 2.1 from the Aspen URMP.
4.2 Peak Runoff and Storage Volume Methodology
The storage requirements for this site were calculated using the total impervious area along with the
historic and developed peak runoff rates that were established in section 2.2. Based on the requirements in
the URMP for this development, the site does not need to store or detain the 100-year event and only
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) requirements need met. The table below shows the calculation
for the required WQCV for basins 1 and 2.
The storage requirements for all BMPs are shown in the table below.
5.0 Proposed Facilities
5.1 Proposed Bio Treatment
All site runoff not directed to a drywell (basins 3 and 4) will be routed through vegetation before entering
off site infrastructure. Slopes prior to these area drains do not exceed five percent along flow lines.
Planter boxes are flat to optimize treatment and infiltration.
Water Quality Capture Volume Storage
Basin Total Area Impervious Area Impervious WQCV Table Value WQCV Storage F.O.S. Required Storage BMP
(#) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)(in)(ft3)(ft3)
1 4676.00 3719.00 79.53% 0.161 62.74 1.5 94.1 Drywell 1
2 12506.00 10306.00 82.41% 0.171 178.21 1.5 267.3 Drywell 2
3 3316.00 2055.00 61.97% 0.117 32.33 1.5 48.5
4 2870.00 1981.00 69.02% 0.133 31.81 1.5 47.7
Drywell Storage
Drywell Basins Diameter Storage Depth Internal Volume External (18" of Screened Rock) Volume Total Capacity Required Capacity
(Name) (#) D (ft) H (ft)π*H*(D/2)2) (ft3)0.3*π*H*((D/2)+1.5)2 ‐ (D/2)2) (ft3)(ft3)(ft3)
Drywell 11 4 10 126 78 203 94.1
Drywell 22 5 10 196 92 288 267.3
P165
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 7
Preliminary Drainage Report
5.2 Proposed Inlets
Area drains in impervious walk ways and patios will be 8-12 inches in size with grated inlets at low
points. These inlets will capture any runoff from walkways and roofs within basin 1. Four-inch trench
drains along patios will capture runoff directed off-site at the property line and re-direct this runoff to
drywell 1. A standard curb inlet will capture all runoff from West Main Street. This inlet will sit on a
drywell.
5.3 Pervious Pavers
All walk ways within the courtyard that do not drain into structures delivered to drywell 1 will be
pervious pavers.
6.0 Operation and Maintenance
6.1 Bioswales
Bioswales are generally considered a low-maintenance stormwater management approach. Bioswales
should be vegetated with native grasses and plants to the extent possible. Plant maintenance will occur as
needed, including mowing, irrigation (if necessary), and pruning.
Required Action Maintenance Objectives Frequency
Inspections Inspect drywells to determine if the soil
is allowing acceptable infiltration.
Routine – Annual inspection of
hydraulic performance.
Lawn mowing and vegetative care Occasional mowing of grasses and
weed removal to limit unwanted
vegetation. Maintain irrigated turf grass
as 2 to 4 inches tall and non- irrigated
native turf grasses at 4 to
6i h
Routine – Depending on aesthetic
requirements.
Debris and litter removal Remove debris and litter from detention
area to minimize clogging of the sand
media.
Routine – Depending on aesthetic
requirements.
Landscaping removal and replacement The sandy loam turf and landscaping
layer will clog with time as materials
accumulate on it. This layer will need to
be removed and replaced to rehabilitate
infiltration rates, along with all turf and
other vegetation growing on the
surface.
Every 5 to 15 years, depending on
infiltration rates needed to drain the
WQCV in 12-hours or less. May need
to do it more frequently if exfiltration
rates are too low to achieve this goal.
6.2 Pervious Pavers
Annual inspection should occur to determine if the material between the joints has become clogged with
finer material and is no longer performing as expected. If paver have become clogged or damage it will be
reset in clean material.
P166
VI.A.
802 West Main Street 8
Preliminary Drainage Report
6.3 Pervious Pavers
6.4 Drywells
Drywells must be inspected and maintained quarterly to remove sediment and debris that has washed into
them. Minimum inspection and maintenance requirements include the following:
Inspect drywells at least four times a year and after every storm exceeding 0.5 inches.
Dispose of sediment, debris/trash, and any other waste material removed from a drywell at
suitable disposal sites and in compliance with local, State, and Federal waste regulations.
Routinely evaluate the drain-down time of the drywell to ensure the maximum time of 24 hours
is not being exceeded. If drain-down times are exceeding the maximum, drain the drywell via pumping
and clean out the percolation area (the percolation barrel may be jetted to remove sediment accumulated
in perforations. If slow drainage persists, the system may need to be replaced.
P167
VI.A.
P168VI.A.
P169VI.A.
P170VI.A.
P171VI.A.
P172VI.A.
P173VI.A.
P174VI.A.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Fax: (970) 945-8454
Phone: (970) 945-7988
Email: hpkglenwood@kumarusa.com
Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs Parker and Summit County, Colorado
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
LOTS Q, R & S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN SUBDIVISION
802 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
____________________________ ___________________________
Max Tyler, Environmental Scientist Jason A. Deem, Project Geologist
PREPARED FOR:
ASPEN HOUSING PARTNERS, LLC
ATTN: JASON BRADSHAW
228 EASTWOOD DRIVE
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
jebradshaw@mac.com
Project No. 17-7-169.01 May 22, 2017
P175
VI.A.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 1
PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................... 2
DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES .............................................................................................. 2
SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................... 3
LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS ............................................................................................... 3
SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 4
USER RELIANCE ......................................................................................................................... 4
SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 4
USER AND CURRENT OWNER PROVIDED INFORMATION .................................................... 5
RECORDS REVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 6
SITE RECONNAISSANCE ........................................................................................................... 6
FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................... 7
OPINION ....................................................................................................................................... 9
CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 10
CONTINUED VIABILTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT ..................................... 10
SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL ............................................................ 11
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCES
APPENDIX A-1 - TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
APPENDIX A-2 - AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX A-3 - PITKIN COUNTY ASSESSOR’S RECORDS
APPENDIX A-4 - FIRE INSURANCE MAP INFORMATION
APPENDIX A-5 - CITY DIRECTORY INFORMATION
APPENDIX B – AGREEMENT LETTER
APPENDIX C – RADIUS REPORT
APPENDIX D – SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
P176
VI.A.
1
H-P/Kumar
SUMMARY
This report presents the results of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted by
Kumar and Associates, Inc. (dba H-P/Kumar) of a property currently owned by the City of Aspen
at the time of our assessment. Specifically, the ‘Property’, hereinafter refers to the entire area
undergoing the assessment. The Property is comprised of a parcel of land that is 9,000 square
feet in area and is currently the site of a single-family residence. The Property and immediate
surrounding area were assessed for this report. This evaluation was initiated by Jason Bradshaw
of Aspen Housing Partners, LLC, who will hereinafter be referred to as the ‘User’, to investigate
potential environmental concerns at the Property. The site location is shown below.
P177
VI.A.
2
H-P/Kumar
This assessment, which was conducted in accordance with ASTM 1527-13, revealed no
evidence of potential recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property
and no additional review is recommended at this time.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this assessment is to identify, to the extent feasible pursuant to the scope of
services described below, any recognized environmental conditions (REC) in connection with the
Property. ASTM Standard E 1527-13 defines recognized environmental conditions as:
“the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at
a property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to
the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the
environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.”
This practice is intended for use on a voluntary basis by parties who wish to assess the
environmental condition of commercial real estate taking into account commonly known and
reasonably ascertainable information. While use of this practice is intended to constitute all
appropriate inquiries for purposes of the Landowner Liability Protection, it is not intended that its
use be limited to that purpose. This practice is intended primarily as an approach to conducting
an inquiry designed to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a property.
No implication is intended that a person must use this practice in order to be deemed to have
conducted inquiry in a commercially prudent or reasonable manner in any particular transaction.
Nevertheless, this practice is intended to reflect a commercially prudent and reasonable inquiry.
DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES
In an agreement dated November 30, 2016, Jason Bradshaw of Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
contracted with H-P/Kumar to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the Property.
H-P/Kumar performed the following services in accordance with our proposal.
Site Reconnaissance
Records Review of Federal and State Databases
Research of Current and Historical Records
Preparation of Report
H-P/Kumar performed the following scope of services in accordance with the ASTM E 1527-13
Phase I Standard and All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI). H-P/Kumar conducted a site visit to observe
the Property and adjacent land for current use. The records review consisted of reviewing the
P178
VI.A.
3
H-P/Kumar
history of the site using reasonably ascertainable property records, historical topographic maps,
directories and other information. In addition, commercially available aerial photographs were
reviewed for visual information on the historic development and usage of the site and adjacent
properties. Reasonably ascertainable records from federal, state and local agencies were also
reviewed to evaluate the compliance with regulations concerning the generation, storage,
treatment and disposal of hazardous materials or wastes at the site and adjacent properties,
records of spills, disposal activities and permit violations which could result in site contamination.
H-P/Kumar prepared this report which summarizes the data obtained and presents conclusions
concerning the potential for contamination as the result of previous or current site activities.
Copies of relevant documents obtained during the Phase I are presented in the report appendices.
SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS
It is assumed that the direction of surface water flow beneath the Property is generally in a
topographically down-gradient direction either west towards Castle Creek or northeast towards
the Roaring Fork River. This assumption is based on our observation of the surface topography
and review of available topographic maps. Localized geologic or other subsurface conditions
could alter the expected groundwater flow direction. Furthermore, we assume that previously
conducted environmental cleanups for which no further action (NFA) letters were issued were
conducted within current industry standards.
LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS
The information presented in this report is compiled from a variety of sources over which
H-P/Kumar has neither affiliation nor control. Although considered reliable, the accuracy and
completeness of the data obtained from these sources cannot be confirmed and is beyond the
scope of this report. H-P/Kumar makes no claim as to the authenticity, accuracy or completeness
of the data obtained from sources contacted or referenced in the preparation of this report or of
any warranties or guarantees, whether expressed or implied, derived from them.
In addition, as per the scope of this assessment, this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
does not include an assessment of the following: asbestos, radon, lead based paint, lead in
drinking water, regulatory compliance, ecological resources, endangered species, indoor and
outdoor air quality, cultural and historical resources, industrial hygiene, health and safety,
wetlands or analytical testing of the soil, groundwater or air.
Available historic resources date back to 1893. Physical setting sources are provided in Appendix
A. Historic topographic maps dated 2013, 1987, 1960, 1909 and 1893 are included in Appendix
P179
VI.A.
4
H-P/Kumar
A-1 and historic aerial photographs dated 2015, 2013, 2005, 1999, 1990, 1983, 1979, 1969, 1962,
1958 and 1951 are included in Appendix A-2. We also reviewed available Pitkin County
Assessor’s records. The information from the County is provided in Appendix A-3. There are two
available Fire Insurance Maps for the property dated 1904 and 1893, which are included in
Appendix A-4. City Directory information was also reviewed and is provided in Appendix A-5.
Historical use data from the large time gaps between when the aerial photographs were taken
and topographic maps were produced is not reasonably ascertainable because the information
does not exist.
Due to the large time gaps which exist in the standard historical sources we were not able to
determine the history of the site in five year intervals dating back to the first developed use. The
data gaps in the standard historical sources are significant but in our opinion did not affect our
ability to identify REC.
SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Our terms and conditions for performing the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment are
presented in our proposal to Aspen Housing Partners, LLC. A copy of the signed agreement letter
is provided in Appendix B.
USER RELIANCE
This report is prepared in accordance with generally accepted practices in the field of
environmental consulting, using the most current information available. H-P/Kumar is not
responsible for independent conclusions or recommendations made by others based on the data
presented in this report. In addition, reliance on this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
report is limited solely to the User.
SITE DESCRIPTION
LOCATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The Property consists of a parcel of land located at the intersection of West Main Street, North 7th
Street and South 7th Street in Aspen, Colorado. The Property is located within the Aspen,
Colorado USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. The Property location is indicated in the
Radius Report provided in Appendix C. According to the Pitkin County Assessor, the Property is
9,000 square feet in size. The Assessor has assigned Parcel Number 273512308005 to the
Property.
P180
VI.A.
5
H-P/Kumar
SITE AND VICINITY GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
Based on the most recent USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, the Property has an
average surface elevation approximately 7,940 feet above sea level. Based on review of FEMA
floodplain mapping the Property is located in a Zone X flood area on a map dated 1987. We also
reviewed US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Maps and no indication of
wetlands were found on the Property.
CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY
Based on Assessor’s records, there is a residential building on the Property consisting of 1,372
square feet of living area and a 375 square feet unfinished garage. The Assessor’s office lists an
actual year built of 1954 and an effective year built of 1973 for the structure. The exterior of the
structure consists of landscaped areas and a paved driveway.
CURRENT USES OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES
The Property is located within a residential area within the Aspen city limits. Properties in the
near vicinity consist of single and multi-family residential developments. No industrial uses were
observed in the immediate vicinity.
USER and CURRENT OWNER PROVIDED INFORMATION
TITLE RECORDS
The User did not provide H-P/Kumar with historical chain of title documentation for the Property;
however, it is our opinion that this did not inhibit our ability to identify RECs connected with the
Property.
ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS
We are unaware of any environmental liens or activity and use limitations connected to the
Property.
COMMONLY KNOWN OR REASONABLY ASCERTAINABLE INFORMATION
We are unaware of any commonly known reasonable ascertainable information within the local
community about the Property that is material to REC in connection with the Property.
VALUATION REDUCTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
We are unaware of any valuation reductions in the Property for any environmental related issues.
OWNER, PROPERTY MANAGER, AND OCCUPANT INFORMATION
The Property is currently owned by the City of Aspen according to current Assessor’s records.
The contact information for the Owner is provided below.
P181
VI.A.
6
H-P/Kumar
Owner: City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
REASON FOR PERFORMING THE PHASE I
The User requested that a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed in an effort to
identify and investigate any REC at the Property to satisfy the requirements of ASTM 1527-13
and AAI for use in association with the purchase and future development of the Property into an
affordable housing complex.
RECORDS REVIEW
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES
On May 8, 2017, H-P/Kumar requested a search of available Federal and State environmental
records from GeoSearch. The ASTM E 1527-13 Phase I standard minimum search distance
requirements were met or exceeded for the Property. The standard environmental records
sources applicable to the Property and researched by GeoSearch are shown in the Radius Report
in Appendix C. The Property was not listed in the Radius Report.
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCES
As previously mentioned, H-P/Kumar performed a site reconnaissance and reviewed USGS
topographic maps, aerial photographs, fire insurance maps and Pitkin County Assessor’s records
for the Property to determine the physical setting. Physical setting sources are provided in
Appendix A.
HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION ON THE PROPERTY and ADJOINING PROPERTIES
Based on review of available resources and our site reconnaissance, it appears as though the
Property has been vacant or residential land since at least 1951. The residential structure is first
readily visible in the 1979 aerial photograph. The area around the Property appears to have been
primarily developed with residential structures in the late 1960’s and 1970’s.
SITE RECONNAISSANCE
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
H-P/Kumar previously prepared a Subsoil Study for Foundation Design for the Property in a report
dated March 14, 2017, Project No. 17-7-169. Four feet of man-placed fill soils was encountered
in the borings completed for the study. We are unaware of the nature and source of the fill soils.
Uncontrolled fill of an unknown source has the potential for contamination; however, we are
P182
VI.A.
7
H-P/Kumar
unable to determine if contamination is present under the scope of this study. If the User is
concerned with potential contamination from uncontrolled fill, we can provide additional analysis.
METHODOLOGY AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
On May 16, 2017, a representative of H-P/Kumar conducted a site reconnaissance of the
Property. The site reconnaissance included a walkover and examination of the property and the
adjacent properties. Field reconnaissance is limited to physical and visual observations made
while observing the project site and the surrounding properties. The site photographs taken
during the site reconnaissance visits are presented in Appendix D.
EXTERIOR OBSERVATIONS OF THE PROPERTY
The Property consists of a generally flat lot with scattered aspen, pine grass and landscaped
areas. There is a one-story single family residence with an attached garage in the center of the
Property. Based on our site reconnaissance, no obvious signs of contamination were observed
that would constitute a REC in connection with the Property.
INTERIOR OBSERVATIONS OF THE PROPERTY
We were able to conduct a limited inspection of the interior of the residence on the Property.
Based on the residential use of the site and our limited interior observations. No obvious signs of
contamination were observed that would constitute a REC in connection with the Property.
FINDINGS
Based on our review of reasonable ascertainable information, our findings are discussed below.
The database findings were searched for us by GeoSearch. Ten individual sites were found within
a ½ mile radius of the Property with 15 individual database listings. Two additional sites and three
database listings were found within the ½ to 1 mile radius. The Radius Report provided by
GeoSearch is provided in Appendix C. Descriptions of individual sites are provided below with a
discussion of the potential impacts on the subject Property.
RCRANGR08 Site (Map ID#1) – City of Aspen Asset/Maintenance
Resource Conservation & Recovery Act – Non-Generator Sites (RCRANGR08) refer to sites that
have been associated with the generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of
hazardous waste. This listing is for sites that have been categorized as “non-generators.” There
are no violations listed for this site and there is no current activity associated with hazardous
waste at this site. The site is 0.1 miles from the Property and at a lower elevation. As a result,
the site does not constitute a REC in connection with the Property.
P183
VI.A.
8
H-P/Kumar
UST Site (Map ID#2) – Aspen Ranger Station
This Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST) listing refers to a gasoline storage tank with an
unknown capacity at this site. The tank status is listed as “Closed” and there are no violations
associated with the listing. The tank is 0.11 miles from the Property and at a lower elevation. The
site does not constitute a REC in connection with the Property.
VCRA Site (Map ID#3) – Little Ajax PUD
Voluntary Cleanup and Redevelopment Sites (VCRA) refers to contaminated properties that work
with the Colorado Division of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to facilitate redevelopment.
Due to the distance from the Property (0.16 miles) and lower elevation of the site, it does not
constitute a REC in connection with the Property.
MRDS Site (Map ID#4) – Holden and Mary B. Mine
Mineral Record Data Sites (MRDS) refer to a collection of reports describing metallic and non-
metallic resources throughout the world. The listed sites do not constitute a REC in connection
with the Property.
UST and AST Site (Map ID#5) – Dooger Diggins, City of Aspen Fleet Maintenance and City of
Aspen
Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST) and Aboveground Storage Tank Facilities (AST). The
UST at Dooger Diggins is a diesel tank with an unknown capacity and a tank status listed as
“Closed.” There are three AST listings for the City of Aspen – Fleet Maintenance. A 2,000 gallon
capacity diesel tank with a tank status listed as “Closed”, a 2,000 gallon capacity unleaded regular
gasoline tank listed as “Closed” and a 4,000 gallon capacity diesel/gas tank listed as “Open.”
There are three UST tanks listings for the City of Aspen for storage of gasoline and diesel, all with
a tank status listing of “Closed.” There are no violations associated with any of the tanks. The
site is 0.2 miles from the Property and lower in elevation. The site does not constitute a REC in
connection with the Property.
MRDS Sites (Map IDs#6-#9) – Red Spruce, Pride of Aspen and Homestake Mines
Mineral Record Data Sites (MRDS) refer to a collection of reports describing metallic and non-
metallic resources throughout the world. These mines are all listed as “past producers.” The
listed sites do not constitute a REC in connection with the Property.
P184
VI.A.
9
H-P/Kumar
LST Site (Map ID#10) – Aspen Valley Hospital
One leaking storage tank (LST) site was located within the search radius. The site is currently
listed as “Closed” by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment Division of Oil and
Public Safety. Based on the current status, these sites do not constitute a REC in connection
with the Property.
RCRAC Site (Map ID#11) – Cleaner Express
This Resource Conservation & Recovery Act – Corrective Action Facilities (RCRAC) listing refers
to a coin-operated laundromat and/or dry-cleaners. It is classified as a small quantity generator.
There are several violations associated with the site including soil, groundwater and indoor air
releases, however the most recent corrective action (CA) events state that the CA process is
complete and performance standards have been attained. The site is 0.71 miles from the Property
and lower in elevation. Based on the small quantity generator status, the completed CA status
and the lower elevation of the site, it does not currently constitute a REC in connection with the
Property.
SF and RODS (Map ID#12) – Smuggler Mountain
Page 35 through 39 of the radius report are dedicated to the Smuggler Mountain Site a former
Superfund Site (SF) and Record of Decision System (RODS) site, which is located approximately
0.83 miles east of the Property on the northeast side of Aspen. The Smuggler Mountain
Superfund site (on the western side of Smuggler Mountain) was covered in mining waste and was
placed on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ("EPA") National Priorities List for cleanup
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(better known as the Superfund law) in 1986. During the following years, EPA worked with local
officials and residents on a plan for remediation of the Smuggler Mountain site. A plan of action
was ultimately agreed upon and implemented for the site, which was deleted from the National
Priorities List in 1999 (www.aspenpitkin.com). Extensive studies have been performed on and
around the Smuggler site and institutional controls have been put in place for any excavation work
on the Smuggler site to minimize potential for lead exposure to human health and the
environment. Based on our assessment, the Smuggler Mountain site does not constitute a REC
in connection with the Property.
OPINION
Based on the results of the site reconnaissance and review of available resources, H-P/Kumar
found no significant evidence of present or historical recognized environmental conditions
associated with the Property. No additional testing or analysis is recommended at this time. This
P185
VI.A.
10
H-P/Kumar
opinion is based on the research and examination of available information, our site
reconnaissance and experience in the area.
CONCLUSIONS
H-P/Kumar performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope
and limitations of ASTM Practice E-1527-13 and AAI of the Property located in Aspen, Colorado.
Any exceptions to or deletions from this practice are described in the Limitations and Exceptions
section of this report. This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental
conditions (REC) in connection with the Property.
DEVIATIONS
The Phase I was conducted with no deviations from ASTM Practice E 1527-13 or AAI.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
No additional services were requested or provided for this Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment.
CONTINUED VIABILTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
In accordance with Section 4.6 of the Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments
(ASTM 1527-13) this report is subject to the continued viability requirements of the practice. This
environmental site assessment is considered valid if the assessment was completed less than
180 days prior to the date of acquisition of the property or the date the intended transaction is
presumed to be valid. If during this period the environmental site assessment will be relied upon
by a different user than the original user for whom the assessment was prepared, the new user
must satisfy the User Responsibilities in Section 6 of ASTM 1527-13. For a period of up to one
year prior to the date of acquisition of the property or for the date the intended transaction is
presumed to be valid this environmental site assessment is considered valid provided that the
following components were completed within 180 days of the date of purchase or the date of
intended transaction:
(i) searches for recorded environmental cleanup liens
(ii) reviews of federal, tribal, state and local government records;
(iii) visual inspection of the property and of adjoining properties; and
(iv) the declaration by the environmental professional responsible for the assessment or
update.
P186
VI.A.
11
H-P/Kumar
SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL
This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed in accordance with the generally
accepted practices in the field of environmental consulting. The analysis and recommendations
indicated in this report are based upon the best currently available information. H-P/KUMAR
assumes no liability for independent conclusions or recommendations made by others in
conjunction with the data presented in this report.
We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, the representative of H-
P/Kumar (Jason A. Deem, P.G.) that reviewed this report meets the definition of an Environmental
Professional as defined in section 312.10 of 40 CFR 312. Mr. Deem has the specific qualifications
based on education, training and experience to assess the nature, history and setting of the
subject property. We have developed and performed the appropriate inquiries in conformance
with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any further questions or need further
assistance.
P187
VI.A.
July 25, 2017
Mr. Jason Bradshaw
Aspen Housing Partners
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 802 West Main Street
Traffic Analysis Summary
Aspen, CO
Mr. Bradshaw:
Aspen Housing Partners is proposing to develop ten affordable housing apartments at 802 West Main
Street. The project site is located on the northwest corner of West Main Street and North 7th Street.
The site currently has one single‐family home that will be removed.
This project is anticipated to add a small amount of traffic to the neighborhood. Trip generation
volumes were calculated the City of Aspen’s Trip Generation spreadsheet. The proposed development is
anticipated to generate an additional eight vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and nine vehicle
trips per hour during the evening peak hour.
The applicant will implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Multimodal Level of
Service (MMLOS) strategies to offset the site’s anticipated trip generation. Refer to the attached
Traffic Report for detailed calculations utilizing the City of Aspen’s Transportation Impact Analysis
Guidelines.
TDM Strategies
1. Installation of a bench for the existing bus stop on North 7th Street.
2. The applicant is committed to improving six public parking spaces in the West Main Street ROW.
They are willing to offer one of these spaces to the City for use in the CAR TO GO carshare
program.
MMLOS Strategies
1. Removal of an existing site driveway to West Main Street.
2. Enhanced pedestrian crosswalk and ADA ramps.
3. Curb bumpout and possible raised pedestrian crossing on the northwest corner of West Main
Street and North 7th Street.
4. On site bicycle parking.
Per the Traffic Report and City of Aspen calculations, the proposed TDM and MMLOS Strategies mitigate
33.13 vehicle trips. This is an excess of the 9 trips per hour that the project will generate.
P188
VI.A.
As North 7th Street is State Highway 82, a revised State Highway Access Permit will be required for the
intersection of West Main Street and North 7th Street. The application and permit will need to be signed
by the City, as West Main Street is a public roadway. McDowell Engineering prepared a Transportation
Impact Study per CDOT’s traffic study requirements. The study shows that the impact to the adjacent
roadway network is negligible. No additional roadway improvements to State Highway 82 are required.
McDowell Engineering is looking forward to continued coordination with the City through the
entitlement process. Please call if you would like any additional information or have any questions
regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
McDowell Engineering
Kari McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
Professional Traffic Operations Engineer
Encl. 802 West Main Street Traffic Analysis, McDowell Engineering, July 2017.
P189
VI.A.
= input
= calculation
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
APPLICANT CONTACT
INFORMATION:
NAME, COMPANY,
ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL
Minor
Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total
Commercial (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Free‐Market Housing (Units) 0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Affordable Housing (Units) 10 Units 3.60 3.90 7.50 4.90 4.01 8.90
Lodging (Units) 0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Essential Public Facility (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.60 3.90 7.50 4.90 4.01 8.90
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?
802 West Main Street, Aspen
802 Main Street Affordable Housing
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.
Jason Bradshaw
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
228 Eastwood Drive Aspen, CO 81611
970‐319‐9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
Trip Generation
7/25/2017
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
for the project site and are improvements to the current condition.
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.
4. A glossary sheet is provided as an additional tab. Typical terms are defined within this glossary.
Transportation Impact Analysis
TIA Frequently Asked Questions
P190
VI.A.
= input
= calculation
33
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. Yes 5
5
11 Are existing driveways removed from the street?Yes 5
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.
Yes 5
15 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist
interaction with vehicles at driveway areas?No 0
10
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)?*Yes 10
10
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
25Pedestrian 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 ConsiderationsP191
VI.A.
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?Yes 3
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
3
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
3
Bicycles Total*
Transit Total*BicyclesModifications to Existing Bicycle PathsTransitBasic AmenitiesSubtotal
Subtotal
Enhanced AmenitiesSubtotal
Subtotal
P192
VI.A.
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?NA
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?Yes
What is the extent of access improvements? Within Project Only
7 Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented?No 0.00%
1.00%
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer
Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will there be participation in TOP?NA
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented?No
What percentage of employees are eligible?
What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)?
Is an employee parking cash‐out strategy being implemented?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?Yes
How many employee memberships have been purchased?<100
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?No
What percentage of employees/guests are eligible?
0.44%
1.00%
1.43%
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
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.00%
0.00%
Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category
Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2.00%
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.
P193
VI.A.
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
APPLICANT CONTACT
INFORMATION:
NAME, COMPANY,
ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL
Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated
PM 8.9 33 0.13 33.13 0.00
Project Description
In the space below provide a description of the proposed project.
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.
Jason Bradshaw
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
228 Eastwood Drive Aspen, CO 81611
970‐319‐9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
Summary and Narrative:
Narrative:
7/25/2017
802 Main Street Affordable Housing
802 West Main Street, Aspen
Trip Generation
SUMMARY
Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE
MITIGATED
Aspen Housing Partners is proposing the construction of 10 new affordable housing apartments. The site's existing single family home will be
removed.
MMLOS
Explain the proposed improved crosswalk and how this improvement benefits the pedestian experience and the site as a whole. An
improved crosswalk includes measures such as incorporating a corner bulb out or defining a crosswalk path with colored concrete. Simply
re‐striping a crosswalk will not recieve credit. This measure must be pre‐approved by City staff.
An improved pedestrian crosswalk will be constructed on the western leg of West Main Street. The northwest corner of this intersection will
incorporate a corner bulbout, shortening the length of the pedestrian crossing. In addition, the improvements will help differentiate the local
neighborhood street from the State Highway 82. ADA improvements will be included in the intersection construction.
Explain what driveways are removed and how this benefits the pedestrian experience.
The site currently has one curb cut to West Main Street. The existing house, driveway, and curb cut will be removed with the development of
the affordable housing apartments.
Describe the enhanced pedestrian access point(s). This measure is to improve pedestrian access to the site from the ROW. It includes
adding additional access points which prevent pedestrians and bicyclists from crossing a street, improvements to the project's ADA ramps
in the ROW, and improvements to existing access points.
P194
VI.A.
The site does not currently have a sidewalk within the West Main Street ROW. The proposed site plan proposes a new 6' sidewalk that is
detached from West Main Street for the length of the project site. The sidewalk will allow neighborhood pedestrians to access the bus stop
on North 7th Street without walking in the street. The sidewalk will be ADA compliant, with a cross slope of 2% or less and the construction
of ADA ramps at intersections.
Explain any planned traffic calming features below. All traffic calming features must be pre‐approved by the City. Features include islands,
medians, raised crosswalks, speed humps, and rapid flash.
An improved pedestrian crosswalk will be constructed on the western leg of West Main Street. The applicant would like to discuss the
possibility of making this a raised pedestrian crossing with City staff. In combination with a bulbout on the northwest corner of the
intersection, a raised pedestrian crossing will help differentiate the local neighborhood street from State Highway 82. Neighborhood
residents have complained about misguided motorists trying to avoid traffic on the State Highway 82 S‐curves by driving trough the local
streets. A visual distinction between the residential West Main Street and the S‐curve route into/out of town would help cut down on this
trafficDescribe the proposed seating/bench and the bench location for which existing bus stop.
There is an existing bus stop on the west side of North 7th Street, located 100 feet north of the West Main Street intersection. This bus stop
serves the neighborhood. The applicant is proposing to construct a bench for this bus stop. The bench will be located on the existing
concrete pad, adjacent to the existing street light and sidewalk.
Include any additional information that pertains to the MMLOS plan in the space provided below.
The proposed crosswalk improvements on the west leg of West Main Street at North 7th Street will connect the neighborhood to the City's
future multiuse path along the south side of West Main Street.
TDM
A transit access improvement strategy will be implemented. Provision of safe and comfortable access to transit service is important for
generating and maintaining transit ridership, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will improve pedestrian access to a transit
stop via formalization of trails, addition and/or improvement of sidewalk, installation of lighting and/or way finding or other
measures.Explain the proposed transit access improvement strategy below.
The site does not currently have a sidewalk on West Main Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a sidewalk that will connect the
neighborhood to the existing bus stop on North 7th Street. The sidewalk will be ADA compliant, with a cross slope of 2% or less.
Provide details in the space provided for the proposed carshare participation. Carshare programs have been linked to increased use of
alternative transportation modes and reduced SOV trips. The successful project will provide access to Aspen’s CAR TO GO carshare
program. Trip reduction potential will depend on the level to which the development participates. Car share memberships can be
provided to all employees or residents of new developments.
The applicant is committed to improving six public parking spaces in the West Main Street ROW. They are willing to offer one of these spaces
to the City for use in the CAR TO GO carshare program.
Include any additional information that pertains to the TDM plan in the space provided below.
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
Crosswalk Improvement(s)
Removed Driveway(s)
2% Slope at Pedestrian Driveway Crossings
Enhanced Pedestrian Access Point
Pedestrian Directness Factor (See callout number 9 on the MMLOS sheet for an example)
Traffic Calming Features
P195
VI.A.
Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures
The MMLOS measures (sidewalk construction, bumpout on the northwest corner of West Main Street and North 7th Street, painted
crosswalk, landscaping, and bus stop bench will be paid for by the applicant.
Enforcement and Financing
Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures.
Bicycle Parking
Bus Stop Seating/Bench
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.
Not applicable; as the mitigation measures are primarily hardscape and will be implemented per plan and confirmed upon issuance of
Certificate of Occupancy. We anticipate no further monitoring will be required.
Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures.
All MMLOS items will be completed during the construction phase of the project. They will be part of the plan set submitted to the City of
Aspen Building Department for Engineering review. The applicant understands that issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is contingent upon
satisfactory installation of the MMLOS improvements, as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. These items will be the
responsibility of the applicant.
P196
VI.A.
July 25, 2017
Mr. Jason Bradshaw
Aspen Housing Partners
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 802 West Main
CDOT Traffic Analysis Summary
Aspen, CO
Mr. Bradshaw:
Aspen Housing Partners is proposing to develop ten affordable housing units at 802 West Main Street.
The project site is located on the northwest corner of West Main Street and North 7th Street in Aspen.
The existing single‐family home will be removed and replaced with ten rental units.
This project is anticipated to add a small amount of traffic to the neighborhood. Trip generation
volumes were calculated using the industry standard Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip
Generation Manual. A multimodal reduction of ten percent was applied, given the direct access to
Aspen’s excellent pedestrian, bicycle, and transit routes. This reduction removed seven vehicle trips per
day from the site. The proposed development is anticipated to generate an additional seven vehicle
trips per hour during the evening peak hour. The net traffic increase equates to an average of one car
every eight and a half minutes.
This project will require approval of the traffic analysis from two agencies. The City of Aspen’s
Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines require that the anticipated traffic increase is mitigated in the
form of multimodal improvements such as sidewalk connectivity, trail accommodation, and transit stop
improvements. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) will require a revised State Highway
Access Permit for the project’s main access to North 7th Street (State Highway 82.) The project team has
prepared analyses per both agencies’ requirements.
The design team has held several public open houses to gain feedback from the community. Based
upon their responses, the project team has developed several alternative site configurations. The
proposed parking on West Main Street accommodates safe traffic movements within the neighborhood.
It also avoids adding traffic to the alley. The site plan proposes perpendicular site parking on the north
side of West Main Street. Ninety‐degree parking functions well on low volume, local streets. The
anticipated traffic volume on West Main Street is less than 28 vehicles per hour – one car every two
minutes. This low traffic volume allows time for the parked cars to maneuver without impeding West
Main Street traffic.
With the parking reconstruction, there is an opportunity to improve the safety of the West Main Street
and North 7th Street intersection. Residents have noted that non‐local drivers will sometimes try to cut
through the neighborhood to avoid traffic on North 7th Street. This ends in the unfamiliar drivers racing
through the small local streets. A curb extension on the western leg of the West Main Street and North
7th Street intersection could dissuade drivers from entering a smaller, local street. It would also reduce
the pedestrian crossing distance in the crosswalk and shield the new parking spaces. The applicant may
also discuss the benefits of constructing a raised pedestrian crosswalk at this location to further
discourage cut through traffic.
P197
VI.A.
McDowell Engineering collected traffic and parking data in the neighborhood. The parking study
recorded the number of occupied parking spaces at two‐hour increments. The results show that there is
currently adequate parking in the neighborhood. The proposed site plan adds additional parking spaces
on West Main Street.
McDowell Engineering is looking forward to continued coordination with the City and CDOT through the
entitlement process. Please call if you would like any additional information or have any questions
regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
McDowell Engineering
Kari McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
Professional Traffic Operations Engineer
P198
VI.A.
802 West Main Affordable Housing
Transportation Impact Study
Aspen, Colorado
July 21, 2017
PREPARED FOR:
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
Contact: Jason Bradshaw
PREPARED BY:
McDowell Engineering, LLC
PO Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
970.623.0788
Contact: Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
Project Number: M1263
P199
VI.A.
M1263 802 West Main Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 2
Statement of Engineering Qualifications
Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE is a Transportation and Traffic Engineer for McDowell
Engineering, LLC. Ms. McDowell Schroeder has over twenty years of extensive traffic and
transportation engineering experience. She has completed numerous transportation studies and
roadway design projects throughout the State of Colorado. Ms. McDowell Schroeder is a licensed
Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado and has her certification as a Professional Traffic
Operations Engineer from the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
P200
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 3
Traffic Impact Study for
802 West Main Affordable Housing
Table of Contents
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................ 5
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................ 7
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ................................................................................................ 7
2.2 TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................................................................. 7
2.3 BACKGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE ASSUMPTIONS ....................................................................................................... 9
2.4 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC GROWTH ........................................................................................................................... 9
2.5 SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR ........................................................................................................................... 9
2.6 YEAR 2018 AND 2040 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................................ 9
3.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................................... 12
3.1 TRIP GENERATION FOR PROPOSED LAND USE ......................................................................................................... 12
3.2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................................................... 13
3.3 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND TOTAL TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................ 15
4.0 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 19
4.1 STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMITS ....................................................................................................................... 19
4.2 STATE HIGHWAY TURN LANE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 19
4.3 SIGHT DISTANCE ............................................................................................................................................... 19
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 2 0
6.0 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................................. 21
P201
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 4
Tables and Figures
FIGURE 1: AREA MAP ......................................................................................................................................... 5
FIGURE 2: SITE PLAN .......................................................................................................................................... 6
FIGURE 3: YEAR 2017 EXISTING TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................. 8
FIGURE 4: YEAR 2018 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC (WITH SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR) .................................... 10
FIGURE 5: YEAR 2040 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC (WITH SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR) .................................... 11
TABLE 3: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ................................................................................................................ 12
FIGURE 6: PROJECT‐GENERATED DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................... 14
FIGURE 7: PROJECT‐GENERATED TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ..................................................................................... 16
FIGURE 8: YEAR 2018 TOTAL TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................ 17
FIGURE 9: YEAR 2040 TOTAL TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................ 18
P202
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 5
1.0 Project Description
The applicant is proposing to develop a 10‐unit affordable housing apartment building
at 802 West Main Street in Aspen, Colorado. The purpose of this study is to forecast
and analyze the impacts of the additional traffic volumes associated with this
proposed affordable housing project on the surrounding roadway network.
Recommendations to mitigate any traffic impacts are also included. The analysis
complies with the Colorado Department of Transportation’s level two transportation
impact study requirements. A separate study was prepared to address the City of
Aspen’s traffic analysis requirements.
Refer to the area map in Figure 1 and site plan in Figure 2.
The apartments will access the surrounding transportation network via a network of
sidewalks on the south and east site boundaries. Dedicated on‐street parking spaces
for residents will be located on the north side of West Main Street.
The proposed apartment building will replace the existing single‐family home on the
site. The existing driveway and curb cut to West Main Street will also be removed.
Figure 1: Area Map
P203
VI.A.
24.0'10.5'36.3'17.4'2.5'5.0'2.5'6.0'35.6'12.6'12.7'8.0'12.0'22.5'X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
XXX
XXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X
X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-U
EEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-
U
EEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-U
E
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-U
EEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
T
T
T TTT
T TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTT
T
T
T
T
T TTTTT TT TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
TT
T
T
TT
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
TTTTT
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
792779267926792679257926792779287929792979297929792879287927T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20UPL.1.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'NORTHISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 00/00/00Project #:274Drawn By:Checked By: HHSET NAME 0/00/2000·123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030___________NO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHEGLEGENDEVERGREEN TREE TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING EVERGREEN TREEEXISTING DECIDUOUS TREETREE MITIGATION SCHEDULEVALUEACTIONSPEC 'DBH'#132418"18"REMOVENA18" PRESERVENA15"REMOVE$7,422.00PRESERVEEGDECDECDEC7658910121113141716181910"10"TRANS/REMOVEPRESERVE$3299.00NAREMOVEBELOW MIT VALUEPRESERVE NOT ON PROPERTYREMOVEBELOW MIT VALUEPRESERVENA_____REMOVEREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVE4"REMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVE$1188.00REMOVEBELOW MIT VALUE6"REMOVE$1188.002 DECDECDECDEC4 DECDECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVEDTRANSPLANT$1188.00DECREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHDECEGDECDECDECDECDECDEC15205"16"18"4"10"10"10"4"4"6"6"2 DECNO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHTOTAL VALUE$14,285.00Figure 2: Site PlanP204VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 7
2.0 Existing Conditions
2.1 Description of Existing Transportation System
State Highway 82: State Highway 82 connects Glenwood Springs to Granite,
Colorado. The highway bisects the City of Aspen as North 7th Street and Main Street.
The 4‐lane highway is classified by CDOT as an NR‐b, non‐rural arterial in the vicinity
of the project site. The posted speed is 30mph.
West Main Street: West Main Street adjacent to the project site (west of 7th Street)
is a local, residential City street. It serves only the direct neighborhood and does not
accommodate through traffic. The assumed posted speed limit is 20mph. The
intersection of North 7th Street and West Main Street restricts eastbound left turns
via signage.
West Bleeker Street: West Bleeker Street is a local, residential street serving the
neighborhood west of North 7th Street. The intersection of North 7th Street and West
Bleeker Street is a full movement access.
Alley: The alley located between West Main Street and West Bleeker Street provides
direct access for the neighborhood residents. The intersection of North 7th Street a nd
the alley restricts eastbound left turns via signage.
2.2 Traffic Data Collection
Traffic data was collected at the study area intersections on Thursday April 6, 2017.
Turning movement counts were collected from 7:00 – 9:00am and 4:00 – 6:00pm.
North 7th Street and West Main Street
North 7th Street and Alley
North 7th Street and West Bleeker Street
In addition, twenty‐four‐hour counts were taken on the same date at these locations:
West Main Street, west of North 7th Street
Alley, west of North 7th Street
West Bleeker Street, west of North 7th Street
Bavarian House Alley, between Alley and West Bleeker Street
The resulting Year 2017 traffic volumes can be found in Figure 3.
P205
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Figure 3: Year 2017 Existing Traffic
April 20, 2017
LEGEND :
AM/PM Volumes = XX/XX vehicles per hour
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
2 / 1
4 / 7
1 / 0
504 / 978
0 / 35 / 9995 / 6571 / 32 / 12 / 90 / 3
3
2 / 4
5 / 93 / 5995 / 6674 / 1499 / 9782
2 / 1
0 / 10 / 1998 / 6684 / 5504 / 978P206
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 9
2.3 Background Infrastructure Assumptions
The City of Aspen does not have any pending developments of infrastructure projects
that will directly impact the study area intersections. They are proposing the
construction of a future multiuse trail on the south side of West Main Street, in the
existing ROW.
2.4 Background Traffic Growth
Per CDOT, the State Highway 82 corridor is anticipated to have a 20‐year growth factor
of 1.18 in the vicinity of the project site. This rate equates to an annual growth rate of
0.83%. This growth rate was applied to State Highway 82 to forecast near‐term and
long‐term traffic volumes.
The side streets in the study area have been built out. Therefore, no additional growth
was applied to the side street traffic and turning movements.
2.5 Seasonal Adjustment Factor
The peak traffic volumes in Aspen and on State Highway 82 occurs in July. Therefore,
a seasonal adjustment factor was determined for to adjust for the April counts.
Historic data from CDOT’s Automated Traffic Recorder (ATR) along State Highway 82
near Snowmass was reviewed. The ATR data confirmed the summer traffic peaks.
The average AADTs by month were averaged over 24‐25 years to determine the
seasonal factors of State Highway 82 traffic.
This methodology was used to arrive at a seasonal adjustment factor of 1.29 for the
April data. Calculations for this derivation can be found in the Appendix of the report.
2.6 Year 2018 and 2040 Background Traffic Forecasts
Year 2018 background traffic volumes can be found in Figure 4. Year 2040 background
traffic volumes can be found in Figure 5.
P207
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
April 20, 2017
Figure 4: Year 2018 Background Traffic (With Seasonal Adjustment Factor)
LEGEND :
AM/PM Volumes = XX/XX vehicles per hour
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
3 / 1
5 / 9
1 / 0
655 / 1272
0 / 46 / 121295 / 8551 / 43 / 13 / 120 / 4
3
3 / 5
6 / 124 / 61295 / 8675 / 1649 / 12722
3 / 1
0 / 10 / 11298 / 8695 / 6655 / 1272P208
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
April 20, 2017
Figure 5: Year 2040 Background Traffic (With Seasonal Adjustment Factor)
LEGEND :
AM/PM Volumes = XX/XX vehicles per hour
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
3 / 1
5 / 9
1 / 0
786 / 1526
0 / 46 / 121553 / 10261 / 43 / 13 / 120 / 4
3
3 / 5
6 / 124 / 61553 / 5 / 1779 / 15262
3 / 1
0 / 10 / 11556 / 5 / 6786 / 1526P209
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 12
3.0 Project Traffic
3.1 Trip Generation for Proposed Land Use
The applicant is proposing to construct a 10‐unit affordable housing apartment
building. A trip generation analysis was prepared based upon ITE’s Trip Generation
Manual data for land use #220 Apartment. The trip generation calculations in Table
1 summarize the anticipated traffic volumes that will be generated by the
development.
Multimodal Trip Reduction
A 10% multimodal trip reduction factor was applied to the project generated traffic.
The site is located near excellent multimodal facilities, such as sidewalks and transit
stops.
Project Trip Generation
Based upon the applicant’s proposed land uses, the project can be anticipated to
generate 60 vehicle trips per day (vpd) on the average weekday. Peak hour traffic on
a weekday at project buildout is anticipated to be 6 vehicles per hour (vph) during the
morning peak hour and 7 vph during the evening peak hour.
Table 3: Project Trip Generation
Average
Weekday
ITE Code
Avg.
Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Trips
(vpd) % Trips Trips % Trips Trips % Trips Trips % Trips Trips
Existing Land Use
#210 Single‐Family Detached Housing 1.0 DU 9.52 0.77 1.02 10 26% 0 74% 1 64% 1 36% 0
Proposed Land Use Expansion
#220 Apartment 10 DU 6.65 0.55 0.67 67 29% 2 71% 4 61% 4 39% 3
Multimodal Trip Reduction ‐10%‐7 0 0 0 0
Subtotal 60 24 43
Proposed New Trips 50 23 33
1 Values obtained from Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2012.
DU = Dwelling Units
Units
Inbound
Morning Peak Hour Evening Peak Hour
OutboundOutboundInbound
Table 1 ‐ Project Trip Generation
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Estimated Project‐Generated Traffic1
P210
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 13
3.2 Trip Distribution
The anticipated directional distribution of the project‐generated traffic is largely
based upon the location of the residential apartments relative to amenities in Aspen.
Therefore, the project’s directional distribution is anticipated to be:
40% of site traffic will come from/head to the north.
20% of site traffic will come from/head to the east.
40% of site traffic will come from/head to the south.
The anticipated directional distribution of project‐generated traffic is depicted in
Figure 6.
P211
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Figure 6: Project‐Generated Directional Distribution
April 20, 2017
LEGEND :
Inbound % (Outbound %) Volumes = XX% (XX%)
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
0% (20%)
0% (20%)35% (0%)20% (0%)40% (0%)
3
0% (10%)
0% (40%)5% (0%)35% (0%)2
0% (10%)35% (0%)P212
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 15
3.3 Traffic Assignment and Total Traffic
When the trip generation expected for this site is applied to the estimated trip
distribution, the result is the anticipated assignment of trips on the roadway system.
Figure 7 depicts the new vehicle trips that are anticipated from the project.
The Year 2018 total traffic is the sum of Year 2018 background traffic (Figure 4) with
Figure 7 and can be seen in Figure 8.
Similarly, Year 2040 total traffic is the sum of Figure 5 with Figure 7 and can be seen
in Figure 9.
P213
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Figure 7: Project‐Generated Traffic Assignment
April 20, 2017
LEGEND :
Inbound % (Outbound %) Volumes = XX% (XX%)
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
1 / 1
1 / 11 / 10 / 11 / 2
3
2 / 11 / 12
1 / 1P214
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Figure 8: Year 2018 Total Traffic
April 20, 2017
LEGEND :
AM/PM Volumes = XX/XX vehicles per hour
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
4 / 2
6 / 10
1 / 0
655 / 1272
1 / 56 / 121295 / 8551 / 53 / 13 / 121 / 6
3
3 / 5
8 / 134 / 61296 / 8685 / 1649 / 12722
3 / 1
0 / 10 / 11299 / 8705 / 6655 / 1272P215
VI.A.
N
Project Number:M1263
Prepared by:KJS
Aspen Affordable Housing Partners
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Figure 9: Year 2040 Total Traffic
April 20, 2017
LEGEND :
AM/PM Volumes = XX/XX vehicles per hour
Turning Movements =
(NTS)
3
2
1
1
4 / 2
6 / 10
1 / 0
786 / 1526
1 / 56 / 121553 / 10261 / 53 / 13 / 121 / 6
3
3 / 5
8 / 134 / 61554 / 5 / 1779 / 15262
3 / 1
0 / 10 / 11557 / 5 / 6786 / 1526P216
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 19
4.0 Transportation Impact Analysis
4.1 State Highway Access Permits
Section 2.6(3) of the State Highway Access Code (Access Code) requires a new access
permit when there is a new access or land use change and/or the driveway volume is
anticipated to increase by more than twenty percent.
West Main Street and North 7th Street: The project will add a total of 2 trips per hour
(vph) on a typical weekday evening during the peak hour. This equates to a 35%
increase in traffic on the west leg of West Main Street. Therefore, a revised State
Highway Access Permit will be required for this intersection.
West Main Street and West Bleeker Street: The project will add a total of 6 trips per
hour (vph) on a typical weekday evening during the peak hour. This equates to a 14%
increase in traffic on the west leg of West Bleeker Street. Therefore, a revised State
Highway Access Permit will not be required for this intersection.
4.2 State Highway Turn Lane Analysis
The State Highway Access Code establishes the need for auxiliary turn lanes. Several
criteria apply when determining the traffic volume thresholds. State Highway 82 is a
four‐lane highway with a posted speed limit of 30mph in the vicinity of the proposed
project site. It is classified by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) as
an access category NR‐B, non‐rural arterial. Per Section 3.11(4) of the Access Code3,
auxiliary turn lanes are required for more than 25vph making a left turn movement,
50vph making a right turn movement, and right turn acceleration lanes if there are
operational or safety concerns at the access.
West Main Street and North 7th Street: The southbound right turn from North 7th
Street to West Main Street is anticipated to have 5vph during the evening peak hour
by Year 2040. Therefore, an auxiliary turn lane is not required.
West Main Street and West Bleeker Street: The southbound right turn from North 7th
Street to West Bleeker Street is anticipated to have 6vph during the evening peak hour
by Year 2040. Therefore, an auxiliary southbound right turn lane is not required.
The northbound left turn from North 7th Street to West Bleeker Street is anticipated
to have 5vph during the evening peak hour by Year 2040. Therefore, an auxiliary
northbound left turn lane is not required.
4.3 Sight Distance
West Main Street, the alley, and West Bleeker Street all have adequate sight distance
in both directions that exceeds the 360’ requirement in Table 4‐2 of the Access Code.
P217
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 20
5.0 Recommendations and Conclusions
The proposed 10‐unit affordable housing project is anticipated to be successfully
accommodated into the greater roadway system.
Trip Generation:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 10‐unit affordable housing apartment
building. A 10% multimodal trip reduction factor was applied to the project generated
traffic. The site is located near excellent multimodal facilities, such as sidewalks and
transit stops.
Based upon the applicant’s proposed land uses, the project can be anticipated to
generate 60 vehicle trips per day (vpd) on the average weekday. Peak hour traffic on
a weekday at project buildout is anticipated to be 6 vehicles per hour (vph) during the
morning peak hour and 7 vph during the evening peak hour.
Site Access:
The apartments will access the surrounding transportation network via a network of
sidewalks on the south and east site boundaries. Dedicated on‐street parking spaces
for residents will be located on the north side of West Main Street.
The proposed apartment building will replace the existing single‐family home on the
site. The existing driveway and curb cut to West Main Street will also be removed.
State Highway Access Permits:
Per the State Highway Access Code, new State Highway Access Permits will be
required for the intersection of West Main Street and North 7th Street. The project is
anticipated to increase the current traffic volumes on the west leg of the intersection
by 35%.
Auxiliary Turn Lanes:
Based upon the anticipated Year 2040 total traffic volumes, no auxiliary turn lane
construction is required.
P218
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 21, 2017 Page 21
6.0 Appendix
Reference Documents
1. OTIS Traffic Data. Colorado Department of Transportation.
http://apps.coloradodot.info/dataaccess/
2. Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board, 2010.
3. State Highway Access Code. State of Colorado, 2002.
4. Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2012.
Included Documents
1. Traffic Study Scoping Correspondence with CDOT
2. Traffic Counts
3. Seasonal Adjustment Factor Calculations
P219
VI.A.
1
Kari McDowell Schroeder
From:Harbert - CDOT, Kent
Sent:Monday, March 27, 2017 3:32 PM
To:Kari McDowell Schroeder
Cc:Dan Roussin; Trish.Aragon@cityofaspen.com
Subject:Re: Aspen Affordable Housing - Traffic Scoping
Kari,
Dan and I are available on April 6, 10 or 11.
The most recent five years of crash data (1/1/11 ‐ 12/31/15) is attached.
The week of April 3 will be fine for the traffic count since school will be back in session.
Thanks, Kent
T. Kent Harbert, PE
Access Engineer
CDOT Region 3, Traffic and Safety Residency
222 South 6th Street, Room 100, Grand Junction, CO 81501-3794
Phone: 970.683.6279 Cell: 970.812.6768
Kent.Harbert@State.CO.US | www.codot.gov | www.cotrip.org
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Kari McDowell Schroeder <kari@mcdowelleng.com> wrote:
Trish, Dan, and Kent;
The City of Aspen and Aspen Housing Partners have teamed to form a public‐private partnership to develop three
affordable housing projects in Aspen. One site is located on the State Highway System at 7th & Main. See
attached. This graphic was a draft from one of the public meetings in February.
http://www.aspentimes.com/news/private‐developer‐eyes‐three‐affordable‐housing‐projects‐in‐aspen/
P220
VI.A.
2
I would like to get the four of us together to discuss the traffic analysis scoping for this project. I know that the City of
Aspen’s analysis is quite different that CDOT’s requirements.
What are some dates that work for everyone? I am open April 3‐6 and April 10‐11. Please let me know if we can make
one of these dates work.
Trish,
I would also like to discuss the two other sites on Park Circle and Castle Creek at the same time. Maybe we could meet
before or after our meeting with CDOT?
All,
I would like to collect traffic data around the 7th & Main site next week. Spring Break for Aspen Schools is this coming
week. That is my reason for choosing next week. Thoughts?
Kent,
Does CDOT have crash data in this area that is different than what is shown on Aspen’s GIS?
Thanks!
Kari
Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
Transportation / Traffic Engineer
P221
VI.A.
3
Eagle Broomfield Grand Junction
970.623.0788 303.949.4748 303.845.9541 fax
kari@mcdowelleng.com
www.mcdowelleng.com
P222
VI.A.
Traffic Study Scoping Form
Contact Information
Consultant Name:McDowell Engineering
Tele:970‐623‐0788
E‐mail:kari@mcdowelleng.com
Developer/Owner Name: Aspen Housing Partnership
Project Information (Attach proposed site plan.)
Project Name:Aspen Affordable Housing
Project Location:802 West Main Street
Project Description:
Redevelopment from 1 single family home to 13 affordable housing rental apartments.
Existing /
Proposed
Land Uses
ITE Code #units or
Size
Existing /
Proposed
Land Uses
ITE Code #units or
Size
Existing /
Proposed
Land Uses
ITE Code #units or
Size
Ex. Single Family Home #210 1
Pr. Apartment #220 13
Please attach Trip Generation Summary table for large or mixed use projects.
Assumptions
Study Horizons Current Year:2017 Buildout Year:2018 Long Term Year: 2040
North:Bleeker St.South:Main St.
East:7th St.West:8th St.
1. All site entrances 6.
2. 7th St. & Main St.7.
3. 7th St. & Alley 8.
4. 7th St. & Bleeker St.9.
5.10.
Trip Distribution See attached sketch.
Trip Reductions*Internal
Capture Use:0 %Pass By Use:0 %
Multi‐
modal Use:15 %Use:%
Page 1 of 2
Application type (rezoning,
subdivision), acreage, new or re‐
development, etc.
Study Area Boundaries
(Attach map if
needed.)
Intersections to be
Evaluated
(Attach map if
needed.)
*Include in Trip Generation table if provided. Submit calculations based upon ITE's Trip Generation Handbook.
P223
VI.A.
McDowell Engineering Traffic Study Scoping Form
Assumptions (continued)
0.83% per CDOT's historic OTIS data. Study Time Periods AM (7‐9)
PM (4‐6)
SAT (noon)
Other:
Other Factors
Restricted left turns from W. Main Street and alley onto 7th Street.
Synchro
Issues HCS
(Check all that apply.)aaSidra or Rodel
Intersections
Roadway Sections
Signal Warrants
Safety/Sight Distance
Queuing & Storage
CDOT (Access Permit, etc.)
Identify Bicycle, Pedestrian & Transit Accommodations
TDM
Neighborhood Impacts
Other:
Attachments, Notes, & Other Assumptions:
Signed:Review Agency:
(Applicant or Consultant)Department:
Print Name:Signed:
(Applicant or Consultant)
Print Name:
Date: Date:
Page 2 of 2
Analysis Methods &
Anticipated Future
Traffic Growth Rates
(Describe
methodology.)
(Check all that
apply.)
(Proposed/assumed
transportation
improvements, other
studies, nearby proposed
developments, etc.)
P224
VI.A.
PROJECT NUMBER:M1263
PREPARED BY:KJS
DATE:
REVISED:
Average
Weekday
ITE Code
Avg.
Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour Trips (vpd)% Trips Trips % Trips Trips % Trips Trips % Trips Trips
Existing Land Use
#210 Single‐Family Detached Housing 1.0 DU 9.52 0.77 1.02 10 26% 0 74% 1 64% 1 36% 0
Proposed Land Use Expansion
#220 Apartment 13 DU 6.65 0.55 0.67 86 29% 2 71% 5 61% 5 39% 3
Multimodal Trip Reduction ‐15%‐13 0 ‐1 ‐1 0
Subtotal 73 24 43
Proposed New Trips 63 23 33
1 Values obtained from Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2012.
DU = Dwelling Units
Units
Inbound
Morning Peak Hour Evening Peak Hour
OutboundOutboundInbound
3/29/2017
Table 3 ‐ Project Trip Generation
802 Main Street
Aspen, CO
Estimated Project‐Generated Traffic1
D:\MTEC\Project\M1263 Aspen Main Street Affordable Housing\Traffic\2017-03-29 Aspen 802 Main St TIS.xlsmP225
VI.A.
N 7th Street & W Main StreetAspen, COTraffic Data Collection Date: Thursday, April 6, 2017, AMWeather: ClearCar Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik CarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik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otal 200080002000010000008396600 1020300170101784 940090011000Peak Hour Total100040002000000000004683600 101020012010 949460050000000Peak Hour Total 1 vph 0 pph 4 vph 0 pph 2 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 504 vph 0 pph1 vph 1 pph 2 vph 1 pph 2 vph 1 pph 995 vph 0 pph 5 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pphvphpphpph%Peak Hour Data (Cars & Trucks)Peak Hour Pedestrian DataPeak Hour Bicycle DataThruW Main StreetW Main StreetN 7th StreetN 7th StreetEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundRightLeft ThruThruRightRightThruTotal Peak Hour Vehicle Traffic at Intersection1516Left Left Total Peak Hour Peds/Bikes at Intersection3Total Peak Hour Traffic (All Modes) at Intersection1519Percentage Peak Hour Trucks at Intersection5.4Peak Hour Factor0.98TimeRightLeft 241050405995122000000100000000000100P226
VI.A.
N 7th Street & W Main StreetAspen, COTraffic Data Collection Date: Thursday, April 6, 2017, PMWeather: ClearCar Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik CarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik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otal 000290102002000060001718 80 0 040023011150001214 62 1 0 170315000Peak Hour Total000170101000000030009374100 300010009000 624331090203000Peak Hour Total 0 vph 1 pph 7 vph 1 pph 1 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 3 vph 0 pph 978 vph 0 pph3 vph 0 pph 1 vph 0 pph 9 vph 0 pph 657 vph 1 pph 9 vph 2 pph 3 vph 0 pphvphpphpph%Peak Hour Data (Cars & Trucks)Peak Hour Pedestrian DataPeak Hour Bicycle DataTotal Peak Hour Peds/Bikes at Intersection5Total Peak Hour Traffic (All Modes) at Intersection1676Percentage Peak Hour Trucks at Intersection4.4Peak Hour Factor0.92RightThruTotal Peak Hour Vehicle Traffic at Intersection1671Left Left TimeRightLeft ThruW Main StreetW Main StreetN 7th StreetN 7th StreetEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundRightLeft ThruThruRight170097839657319310021000001000000000P227
VI.A.
N 7th Street & Alley (between Main and Bleeker)Aspen, COTraffic Data Collection Date: Thursday, April 6, 2017, AMWeather: ClearCar Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik CarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikSWLSWRNELNERSELSERNWLNWR7:00 AM000000000000000000000000 0000564020000 0100189150000007:15 AM000000001000000000000000 0000817000000 1100195120000007:30 AM000000000000000000000000 00001099000000 1100233100000007:45 AM000000000000000000000000 000012510000000 100022280000008:00 AM000000000000000000000000 00001089000000 1000232120000008:15 AM000000001000000000000000 00001109000000 2000253110000008:30 AM000000000010000000000000 00001208000000 0000240150000008:45 AM000000001000000000000000 001013010000000 10002278000000Total 000000003010000000000000 001083966020000 73001791 91000000Peak Hour Total000000002010000000000000 001046836000000 400095246000000Peak Hour Total 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 2 vph 1 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph0 vph 1 pph 504 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 4 vph 0 pph 998 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pphvphpphpph%Peak Hour Data (Cars & Trucks)Peak Hour Pedestrian DataPeak Hour Bicycle DataThruAlleyAlleyN 7th StreetN 7th StreetEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundRightLeft ThruThruRightRightThruTotal Peak Hour Vehicle Traffic at Intersection1508Left Left TimeRightLeft Total Peak Hour Peds/Bikes at Intersection2Total Peak Hour Traffic (All Modes) at Intersection1510Percentage Peak Hour Trucks at Intersection5.4Peak Hour Factor0.9820000099840 5040000000100000000000000P228
VI.A.
N 7th Street & Alley (between Main and Bleeker)Aspen, COTraffic Data Collection Date: Thursday, April 6, 2017, PMWeather: ClearCar Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik CarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikSWLSWRNELNERSELSERNWLNWR4:00 PM000000001000000000000000 000023614000000 1000157110000004:15 PM000000000010000000000000 000023712000000 100015590001004:30 PM000000001000000000000000 000022811000000 1000135110000004:45 PM000000000000000000000000 000021711000000 100016850000005:00 PM100000000000000000000000 00002557000000 200017780000005:15 PM000000000000000000000000 000022312100000 000015960000005:30 PM000000000000000000000000 00001307000000 100011140000005:45 PM000000000000000000000000 00001926001000 00001728000000Total 100000002010000000000000 00001718 80101000 70001234 62000100Peak Hour Total100000001010000000000000 000093741000000 500063533000100Peak Hour Total 1 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 1 vph 1 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph0 vph 0 pph 978 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 5 vph 0 pph 668 vph 0 pph 1 vph 0 pphvphpphpph%Peak Hour Data (Cars & Trucks)Peak Hour Pedestrian DataPeak Hour Bicycle DataTotal Peak Hour Peds/Bikes at Intersection1Total Peak Hour Traffic (All Modes) at Intersection1655Percentage Peak Hour Trucks at Intersection4.5Peak Hour Factor0.92RightThruTotal Peak Hour Vehicle Traffic at Intersection1654Left Left TimeRightLeft ThruAlleyAlleyN 7th StreetN 7th StreetEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundRightLeft ThruThruRight10100166850 9780000000000000000000000P229
VI.A.
N 7th Street & W Bleeker StreetAspen, COTraffic Data Collection Date: Thursday, April 6, 2017, AMWeather: ClearCar Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik CarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikSWLSWRNELNERSELSERNWLNWR7:00 AM100000000000000000000000 0010564200000 0000189160000007:15 AM200000000000000000000000 1000817010000 0000196130011007:30 AM300000000000000000000000 00001099100000 0000234110000007:45 AM300000000000000000000000 000012510100000 000022380020008:00 AM000000000000000000000000 00001089000000 0000233120010008:15 AM000000002000000000000000 10001109000000 0000253110000008:30 AM200000000000000000000000 30001208000000 0000240150000008:45 AM000000001000000000000000 10001310000000 00002278001000Total 1100000003000000000000000 601072266410000 00001795 94005100Peak Hour Total500000002000000000000000 400046336100000 000094946003000Peak Hour Total 5 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 2 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph4 vph 0 pph 499 vph 1 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 995 vph 0 pph 3 vph 0 pphvphpphpph%Peak Hour Data (Cars & Trucks)Peak Hour Pedestrian DataPeak Hour Bicycle DataTotal Peak Hour Peds/Bikes at Intersection1Total Peak Hour Traffic (All Modes) at Intersection1509Percentage Peak Hour Trucks at Intersection5.4Peak Hour Factor0.91RightThruTotal Peak Hour Vehicle Traffic at Intersection1508Left Left TimeRightLeft ThruW Bleeker StreetW Bleeker StreetN 7th StreetN 7th StreetEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundRightLeft ThruThruRight20500399504 4990000000010000000000000P230
VI.A.
N 7th Street & W Bleeker StreetAspen, COTraffic Data Collection Date: Thursday, April 6, 2017, PMWeather: ClearCar Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik Car Trk Ped Bik CarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBik CarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikCarTrkPedBikSWLSWRNELNERSELSERNWLNWR4:00 PM000000000000000000000000 200023414000000 0000157112040004:15 PM100000003000000000000000 000023712100000 000015591010004:30 PM300000001000000000000000 000022811000000 0000134111030004:45 PM400000100000000000000000 100021711000000 000016850010005:00 PM100000100000000000000000 00002557100000 000017780000005:15 PM100000001000000000000000 000022312100000 000015860010005:30 PM100000001000000000000000 00001307000000 000011040000005:45 PM100000001000000000100000 00001926000000 00001718004000Total 1200000207000000000100000 30001716 80300000 00001230 62 4 0 14 0 0 0Peak Hour Total900000204000000000000000 100093741200000 000063433205000Peak Hour Total 9 vph 0 pph 0 vph 2 pph 4 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph1 vph 0 pph 978 vph 2 pph 0 vph 0 pph 0 vph 0 pph 667 vph 2 pph 5 vph 0 pphvphpphpph%Peak Hour Data (Cars & Trucks)Peak Hour Pedestrian DataPeak Hour Bicycle DataTotal Peak Hour Peds/Bikes at Intersection6Total Peak Hour Traffic (All Modes) at Intersection1670Percentage Peak Hour Trucks at Intersection4.4Peak Hour Factor0.92RightThruTotal Peak Hour Vehicle Traffic at Intersection1664Left Left TimeRightLeft ThruW Bleeker StreetW Bleeker StreetN 7th StreetN 7th StreetEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundRightLeft ThruThruRight40900566701 9780020020020000000000000P231
VI.A.
Daily Vehicle Volume Report
Study Date:Thursday, April 6, 2017
Location: Aspen, Main Street just West of 7th
Eastbound Westbound Total
Volume Volume Volume
00:00 ‐ 00:59 0 0 0
01:00 ‐ 01:59 0 0 0
02:00 ‐ 02:59 0 0 0
03:00 ‐ 03:59 0 0 0
04:00 ‐ 04:59 2 2 4
05:00 ‐ 05:59 1 0 1
06:00 ‐ 06:59 1 1 2
07:00 ‐ 07:59 5 1 6
08:00 ‐ 08:59 7 1 8
09:00 ‐ 09:59 4 6 10
10:00 ‐ 10:59 5 3 8
11:00 ‐ 11:59 5 4 9
12:00 ‐ 12:59 8 5 13
13:00 ‐ 13:59 6 2 8
14:00 ‐ 14:59 7 2 9
15:00 ‐ 15:59 7 3 10
16:00 ‐ 16:59 8 10 18
17:00 ‐ 17:59 3 5 8
18:00 ‐ 18:59 7 1 8
19:00 ‐ 19:59 3 3 6
20:00 ‐ 20:59 2 6 8
21:00 ‐ 21:59 0 3 3
22:00 ‐ 22:59 1 2 3
23:00 ‐ 23:59 0 2 2
Totals 82 62 144
AM Peak Time 9:00 ‐ 10:00
AM Peak Volume 4 6 10
PM Peak Time 16:00 ‐ 17:00
PM Peak Volume 8 10 18
P232
VI.A.
Daily Vehicle Volume Report
Study Date:Thursday, April 6, 2017
Location: Aspen, Alley just West of 7th
Eastbound Westbound Total
Volume Volume Volume
00:00 ‐ 00:59 0 0 0
01:00 ‐ 01:59 0 0 0
02:00 ‐ 02:59 0 0 0
03:00 ‐ 03:59 0 0 0
04:00 ‐ 04:59 0 0 0
05:00 ‐ 05:59 0 1 1
06:00 ‐ 06:59 1 1 2
07:00 ‐ 07:59 1 0 1
08:00 ‐ 08:59 2 0 2
09:00 ‐ 09:59 0 0 0
10:00 ‐ 10:59 3 0 3
11:00 ‐ 11:59 1 0 1
12:00 ‐ 12:59 1 0 1
13:00 ‐ 13:59 0 0 0
14:00 ‐ 14:59 0 0 0
15:00 ‐ 15:59 1 0 1
16:00 ‐ 16:59 2 1 3
17:00 ‐ 17:59 1 0 1
18:00 ‐ 18:59 0 0 0
19:00 ‐ 19:59 0 0 0
20:00 ‐ 20:59 0 0 0
21:00 ‐ 21:59 0 0 0
22:00 ‐ 22:59 0 0 0
23:00 ‐ 23:59 0 0 0
Totals 13 3 16
AM Peak Time 10:00 ‐ 11:00
AM Peak Volume 3 0 3
PM Peak Time 16:00 ‐ 17:00
PM Peak Volume 2 1 3
P233
VI.A.
Daily Vehicle Volume Report
Study Date:Thursday, April 6, 2017
Location: Aspen, Bleeker Street just West of 7th
Eastbound Westbound Total
Volume Volume Volume
00:00 ‐ 00:59 0 0 0
01:00 ‐ 01:59 0 2 2
02:00 ‐ 02:59 0 1 1
03:00 ‐ 03:59 0 0 0
04:00 ‐ 04:59 1 0 1
05:00 ‐ 05:59 0 0 0
06:00 ‐ 06:59 2 1 3
07:00 ‐ 07:59 9 5 14
08:00 ‐ 08:59 5 7 12
09:00 ‐ 09:59 11 7 18
10:00 ‐ 10:59 8 8 16
11:00 ‐ 11:59 11 7 18
12:00 ‐ 12:59 7 9 16
13:00 ‐ 13:59 8 11 19
14:00 ‐ 14:59 6 6 12
15:00 ‐ 15:59 8 11 19
16:00 ‐ 16:59 12 5 17
17:00 ‐ 17:59 5 7 12
18:00 ‐ 18:59 6 9 15
19:00 ‐ 19:59 2 5 7
20:00 ‐ 20:59 1 3 4
21:00 ‐ 21:59 4 5 9
22:00 ‐ 22:59 3 3 6
23:00 ‐ 23:59 1 0 1
Totals 110 112 222
AM Peak Time 9:00 ‐ 10:00
AM Peak Volume 11 7 18
PM Peak Time 15:00 ‐ 16:00
PM Peak Volume 8 11 19
P234
VI.A.
Daily Vehicle Volume Report
Study Date:Thursday, April 6, 2017
Location: Aspen, Bavarian House Alley
Northbound Southbound Total
Volume Volume Volume
07:00 ‐ 07:59 3 6 9
08:00 ‐ 08:59 0 1 1
Totals 3 7 10
AM Peak Time 7:00 ‐ 8:00
AM Peak Volume 3 6 9
Northbound Southbound Total
Volume Volume Volume
16:00 ‐ 16:59 2 1 3
17:00 ‐ 17:59 0 0 0
Totals 2 1 3
PM Peak Time 16:00 ‐ 17:00
PM Peak Volume 2 1 3
P235
VI.A.
Seasonal Adjustment Factor Calculations
State Highway 082A (Continuous Count Station Id: 000236 ON SH 82 NW/O SNOWMASS CREEK RD, CRS 11 & 16, SNOWMASS)
236 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
236 2017 18550 18921 19443
236 2016 18612 18613 18878 16828 17254 21393 22397 20902 20479 18174 16340 18813
236 2015 17908 17741 18317 16451 15838 20486 22141 20765 20084 18002 16160 18790
236 2014 16786 16586 17062 15332 15302 19047 20643 19455 18461 16665 14287 17401
236 2013 16471 16387 15888 13074 14574 17789 19205 18535 16845 13969 12114 14336
236 2012 16266 15875 16306 14115 14832 17835 19174 19048 17124 15655 14824 15915
236 2011 16703 15716 16399 13695 13876 17634 18818 18620 17543 15235 14378 16553
236 2010 16309 15908 16508 14295 14115 17727 18957 18342 14489 16566
236 2009 17545 17067 16855 15097 14805 18291 19416 18236 17741 15681 14839 16267
236 2008 18043 17945 18408 16378 16098 19157 20581 19852 18648 17649 15681 16153
236 2007 18475 17921 18854 16740 16936 19847 20828 21227 18998 18296 19537 18597
236 2006 16925 17517 17585 20900 16223 19271 19695 20076 18422 16744 16081 17722
236 2005 16542 16885 17329 15008 14987 18501 19511 18953 17653 15863 15462 16004
236 2004 15436 15162 16432 14645 14291 17552 18662 18313 17147 15253 14902 17026
236 2003 15323 15142 15032 14088 13892 16483 18147 17357 15852 14843 13149 15086
236 2002 15380 15353 15607 15067 14721 16659 18206 17893 15925 14900 13701 15101
236 2001 15577 15884 16343 14956 14816 17190 18174 18152 15902 15552 14421 14725
236 2000 15727 14405 14985
236 1999 14071 14653 15639 14126 13567 15945 18030 17850 16675 15075 13560 14860
236 1998 13980 14555 14565 13773 14789 16221 17939 17116 15857 14335 13342 14621
236 1997 12665 14260 14975 13245 13020 17119 17569 16904 15308 14305 12669 14307
236 1996 12552 13486 14143 12940 12905 15130 16994 16940 14983 13652 12674 13187
236 1995 12659 12633 13298 11569 12212 15020 16118 16631 14294 13487 12782 13338
236 1994 12417 12542 13796 11727 11962 14544 15342 15753 14325 12891 11852 12973
236 1993 11220 11305 12595 10817 10720 13181 14669 14557 13431 12159 11547 12812
236 1992
236 1991
average 15684 15752 16261 14559 14423 17479 18749 18325 16895 15396 14300 15672
1.2 1.19 1.15 1.29 1.3 1.07 1 1.02 1.11 1.22 1.31 1.2
P236
VI.A.
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT APPLICATION
Issuing authority application
acceptance date:
Page 1 of 2 CDOT Form #137 01/10Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used
Instructions:- Contact the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) or your local government to determine your issuing authority.
- Contact the issuing authority to determine what plans and other documents are required to be submitted with your application.
- Complete this form (some questions may not apply to you) and attach all necessary documents and Submit it to the issuing authority.
- Submit an application for each access affected.
- If you have any questions contact the issuing authority.
- For additional information see CDOT’s Access Management website at http://www.dot.state.co.us/AccessPermits/index.htm
2) Applicant or Agent for permittee (if different from property owner)
Street address
Phone #
Mailing address
City, state & zip Phone # (required)
county subdivision block lot section township range
6) What side of the highway?
N S E W
5) What State Highway are you requesting access from?
4) Legal description of property: If within jurisdictional limits of Municipality, city and/or County, which one?
3) Address of property to be served by permit (required)
City, state & zip
1) Property owner (Permittee)
8) What is the approximate date you intend to begin construction?
9) Check here if you are requesting a:
new access temporary access (duration anticipated: ) improvement to existing access
change in access use removal of access relocation of an existing access (provide detail)
7) How many feet is the proposed access from the nearest mile post?
_____________ feet ( N S E W) from:_____________
13) Are there other existing or dedicated public streets, roads, highways or access easements bordering or within the property?
no yes, if yes - list them on your plans and indicate the proposed and existing access points.
12) Does the property owner own or have any interests in any adjacent property?
no yes, if yes - please describe:
11) Do you have knowledge of any State Highway access permits serving this property, or adjacent properties in which you have a property interest?
no yes, if yes - what are the permit number(s) and provide copies:and/or, permit date:
15) If you are requesting commercial or industrial access please indicate the types and number of businesses and provide the floor area square footage of each.
business/land use square footage business square footage
16) If you are requesting residential developement access, what is the type (single family, apartment, townhouse) and number of units?
type number of units type number of units
17) Provide the following vehicle count estimates for vehicles that will use the access. Leaving the property then returning is two counts.
# of passenger cars and light trucks at peak hour volumes # of multi unit trucks at peak hour volumes
# of single unit vehicles in excess of 30 ft.# of farm vehicles (field equipment)Total count of all vehicles
How many feet is the proposed access from the nearest cross street?
_____________ feet ( N S E W) from:_______________________________
10) Provide existing property use
14) If you are requesting agricultural field access - how many acres will the access serve?
E-mail address E-mail address if available
Indicate if your counts are
peak hour volumes or average daily volumes.
Please print
or type
P237
VI.A.
If an access permit is issued to you, it will state the terms and conditions for its use. Any changes in the use of the
permitted access not consistent with the terms and conditions listed on the permit may be considered a violation of the
permit.
The applicant declares under penalty of perjury in the second degree, and any other applicable state or federal
laws, that all information provided on this form and submitted attachments are to the best of their knowledge
true and complete.
I understand receipt of an access permit does not constitute permission to start access construction work.
Applicant or Agent for Permittee signature Date
Property owner signature Date
If the applicant is not the owner of the property, we require this application also to be signed by the property owner or
their legally authorized representative (or other acceptable written evidence). This signature shall constitute agreement
with this application by all owners-of-interest unless stated in writing. If a permit is issued, the property owner, in most
cases, will be listed as the permittee.
Page 2 of 2 CDOT Form #137 01/10
Print name
Print name
Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used
18) Check with the issuing authority to determine which of the following documents are required to complete the review of your application.
a) Property map indicating other access, bordering roads and streets.
b)Highway and driveway plan profile.
c)Drainage plan showing impact to the highway right-of-way.
d)Map and letters detailing utility locations before and after
development in and along the right-of-way.
e)Subdivision, zoning, or development plan.
f)Proposed access design.
g)Parcel and ownership maps including easements.
h)Traffic studies.
i)Proof of ownership.
1- It is the applicant’s responsibility to contact appropriate agencies and obtain all environmental clearances that apply
to their activities. Such clearances may include Corps of Engineers 404 Permits or Colorado Discharge Permit System
permits, or ecological, archeological, historical or cultural resource clearances. The CDOT Environmental Clearances
Information Summary presents contact information for agencies administering certain clearances, information about
prohibited discharges, and may be obtained from Regional CDOT Utility/Special Use Permit offices or accessed via the
CDOT Planning/Construction-Environmental-Guidance webpage http://www.dot.state.co.us/environmental/Forms.asp.
2- All workers within the State Highway right of way shall comply with their employer’s safety and health policies/
procedures, and all applicable U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations - including, but not
limited to the applicable sections of 29 CFR Part 1910 - Occupational Safety and Health Standards and 29 CFR Part 1926
- Safety and Health Regulations for Construction.
Personal protective equipment (e.g. head protection, footwear, high visibility apparel, safety glasses, hearing protection,
respirators, gloves, etc.) shall be worn as appropriate for the work being performed, and as specified in regulation. At a
minimum, all workers in the State Highway right of way, except when in their vehicles, shall wear the following personal
protective equipment: High visibility apparel as specified in the Traffic Control provisions of the documentation
accompanying the Notice to Proceed related to this permit (at a minimum, ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, class 2); head protection
that complies with the ANSI Z89.1-1997 standard; and at all construction sites or whenever there is danger of injury to
feet, workers shall comply with OSHA’s PPE requirements for foot protection per 29 CFR 1910.136, 1926.95, and
1926.96. If required, such footwear shall meet the requirements of ANSI Z41-1999.
Where any of the above-referenced ANSI standards have been revised, the most recent version of the standard shall
apply.
3- The Permittee is responsible for complying with the Revised Guidelines that have been adopted by the Access Board
under the American Disabilities Act (ADA). These guidelines define traversable slope requirements and prescribe the
use of a defined pattern of truncated domes as detectable warnings at street crossings. The new Standards Plans and
can be found on the Design and Construction Project Support web page at:
<http://www.dot.state.co.us/DesignSupport/>, then click on Design Bulletins.
P238
VI.A.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING APPLICATION FOR ACCESS PERMIT
(CDOT FORM NO. 137)
January 2010
To construct, relocate, close, or modify access(es) to a State Highway or when there are changes in use of
such access point(s), an application for access permit must be submitted to the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) or the local jurisdiction serving as the issuing authority for State Highway Access
Permits. Contact the CDOT Regional Access Unit in which the subject property is located to determine
where the application must be submitted. The following link will help you determine which CDOT Region
office to contact:
http://www.dot.state.co.us/AccessPermits/PDF/Region_Address_and_Map.pdf
All applications are processed and access permits are issued in accordance to the requirements and
procedures found in the most current version of the State Highway Access Code (Access Code). Copies
of the Access Code and the application form are available from the CDOT Headquarters, Access Unit
located at 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, CO 80222 and in each of the six Regional CDOT offices.
The locations of CDOT Regional Offices, the Access Code and the application form are also available
from CDOT’s web site at:
http://www.dot.state.co.us/AccessPermits/index.htm
Please complete all information requested accurately. Access permits granted based on applications found
to contain false information may be revoked. An incomplete application will not be accepted. If additional
information, plans and documents are required, attach them to the application. Keep a copy of your
submittal for your records. Please note that only the original signed copy of the application will be accepted.
Do not send or enclose any permit fee at this time. A permit fee will be collected if an access permit is
issued. The following is a brief description of the information to be provided on each enumerated space on
the application form (CDOT Form 137, 2010).
1.Property Owner (Permittee): Please provide the full name, mailing address and telephone
number and the E-mail address (if available) of the legal property owner (owner of the surface rights).
Please provide a telephone number where the Permittee can be reached during business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). Having a contract on the property is not a sufficient legal right to that property for
purposes of this application. If the access is to be on or across an access easement, then a copy of the
easement MUST accompany this application. If federal land is involved, provide the name of the
relevant federal agency AND attach copy of federal authorization for property use.
2.Agent for permittee: If the applicant (person completing this application) is different than the
property owner (Permittee), provide entity name (if applicable), the full name of the person serving as
the Agent, mailing address, telephone number, and the E-mail address (if available). Please provide a
telephone number where the Agent can be reached during business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.).
Joint applications such as owner/lessee may be submitted. Corporations must be licensed to do business
in Colorado: All corporations serving as, or providing, an Agent as the applicant must be licensed to do
business in Colorado.
Instructions for completing Application for Access Permit (CDOT Form #137), January 2010
Page 1P239
VI.A.
3.Address of Property to be Served: Provide if property to be served has an official street
address. If the access is a public road, note the name (or future name) of the road.
4.Legal Description of Property: Fill in this item to the extent it applies. This information is
available at your local County Courthouse, or on your ownership deed(s). A copy of the deed may be
required as part of this application in some situations. To determine applicability, check with the
CDOT’s Regional Access Manager or issuing authority staff.
5.State Highway: Provide the State Highway number from which the access is requested.
6.Highway Side: Mark the appropriate box to indicate what side of the highway the requested
access is located.
7.Access Mile Point: Without complete information, we may not be able to locate the proposed
access. To obtain the distance in feet, drive the length between the mile point and the proposed access,
rounding the distance on the odometer to the nearest tenth of a mile; multiply the distance by 5,280 feet
to obtain the number of feet from the mile point. Then enter the direction (i.e. north, south, east, west)
from the mile point to the proposed access. Finally, enter the mile point number. It is helpful in rural or
undeveloped areas if some flagging is tied to the right-of-way fence at the desired location of the access.
Also, if there is a cross street or road close to the proposed access, note the distance in feet (using the
same procedures noted above) from that cross street or road.
8.Access Construction Date: Fill in the date on which construction of the access is planned to
begin.
9.Access Request: Mark items that apply. More than one item may be checked.
10.Existing property use: Describe how the property is currently being used. For example,
common uses are Single Family Residential, Commercial or Agricultural.
11.Existing Access: Does the property have any other legal alternatives to reach a public
road other than the access requested in this application? Note the access permit number(s) for any
existing state highway access point(s) along with their issue date(s). If there are no existing access
point(s), mark the “no” box.
12.Adjacent Property: Please mark the appropriate box. If the “yes” box is marked, provide a
brief description of the property (location of the property in relation to the property for which this
access application is being made).
13.Abutting Streets: If there are any other existing or proposed public roads or easements
abutting the property, they should be shown on a map or plan attached to this application.
14.Agricultural Acres: Provide number of acres to be served.
Instructions for completing Application for Access Permit (CDOT Form #137), January 2010
Page 2P240
VI.A.
15.Access Use: List the land uses and square footage of the site as it will be when it is fully
developed. The planned land uses as they will be when the site is fully developed are used to project
the amount of traffic that the site will generate, peak hour traffic levels and the type of vehicles that can
be expected as a result of the planned land uses. There may be exceptional circumstances that would
allow phased installation of access requirements. This is at the discretion of the CDOT Regional Access
Unit or issuing authority staff.
16.Estimated Traffic Count: Provide a reasonable estimate of the traffic volume expected to use
the access. Note the type of vehicles that will use the access along with the volume (number of vehicles
in and out at either the peak hour or average daily rates) for each type of vehicle. A vehicle leaving the
property and then returning counts as two trips. If 40 customers are expected to visit the business daily,
there would be 80 trips in addition to the trips made by all employees and other visitors (such as
delivery and trash removal vehicles). If the PDF on-line version of this application is being used, the
fields for each type of vehicle will automatically be added together to populate the last field on the page.
17.Documents and Plans: The CDOT Regional Access Manager or issuing authority staff will
determine which of these items must be provided to make the application complete. Incomplete
applications will not be accepted. If an incomplete application is received via U.S. mail or through
means other than in the hand of the Access Manager or issuing authority staff, it will not be processed.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify with the CDOT Regional Access Manager or
issuing authority staff whether the application is complete at the time of submission.
Signature: Generally, if the applicant is not the property owner, then the property owner or a legally
authorized representative must sign the application. With narrow exceptions, proof of the property
owner ’s consent is required to be submitted with the application (proof may be a power of attorney or a
similar consent instrument). The CDOT Regional Access Manager or issuing authority staff will
determine if the exception provided in the Access Code (2.3 (3) (b)) is applicable.
If CDOT is the issuing authority for this application, direct your questions to the CDOT Regional Access
Manager or the issuing authority staff serving the subject property.
http://www.dot.state.co.us/AccessPermits/PDF/Region_Address_and_Map.pdf
If the application is accepted, it will be reviewed by the CDOT Regional Access Manager or the issuing
authority staff. If an Access Permit is issued, be sure to read all of the attached Terms and Conditions
before signing and returning the Access Permit. The Terms and Conditions may require that additional
information be provided prior to issuance of the Notice to Proceed.
The CDOT Regional Access Manager (or issuing authority staff) MUST be contacted prior to commencing
work on any Access Permit project. A Notice to Proceed that authorizes the Permittee to begin
access related construction MUST be issued prior to working on the access in the State Highway
right-of-way. The Notice to Proceed may also have Terms and Conditions that must be fulfilled before
work may begin on the permitted access.
Instructions for completing Application for Access Permit (CDOT Form #137), January 2010
Page 3P241
VI.A.
802 West Main Affordable Housing
Parking Study
Aspen, Colorado
July 25, 2017
PREPARED FOR:
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
Contact: Jason Bradshaw
PREPARED BY:
McDowell Engineering, LLC
PO Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
970.623.0788
Contact: Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
Project Number: M1263
P242
VI.A.
M1263 802 West Main Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 2
Statement of Engineering Qualifications
Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE is a Transportation and Traffic Engineer for McDowell
Engineering, LLC. Ms. McDowell Schroeder has over twenty years of extensive traffic and
transportation engineering experience. She has completed numerous transportation studies
and roadway design projects throughout the State of Colorado. Ms. McDowell Schroeder is a
licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado and has her certification as a
Professional Traffic Operations Engineer from the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
P243
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 3
Parking Study for
802 West Main Affordable Housing
Table of Contents
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................ 4
................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................ 5
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ................................................................................................ 5
2.2 PARKING DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................................................. 6
2.3 EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................ 6
2.4 EXISTING PARKING CONDITION SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 6
3.0 PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................................... 8
3.1 REQUIRED PARKING & ASPEN LAND USE CODE ........................................................................................................ 8
3.2 PROPOSED PARKING IMPROVEMENTS ..................................................................................................................... 9
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 10
4.1 PARKING RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 10
5.0 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................................. 11
P244
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 4
1.0 Project Description
The applicant is proposing to develop a 10‐unit affordable housing apartment
building at 802 West Main Street in Aspen, Colorado. The purpose of this study is to
analyze the current and future parking conditions in the adjacent neighborhood.
Refer to the area map in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Area Map
The proposed apartment building will replace the existing single‐family home on the
site. The existing driveway and curb cut to West Main Street will also be removed.
Dedicated on‐street parking spaces for residents will be located on the north side of
West Main Street.
P245
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 5
2.0 Existing Conditions
2.1 Description of Existing Transportation System
State Highway 82: State Highway 82 connects Glenwood Springs to Granite,
Colorado. The highway bisects the City of Aspen as North 7th Street and Main
Street. The 4‐lane highway is classified by CDOT as an NR‐b, non‐rural arterial in the
vicinity of the project site. The posted speed is 30 mph.
There is no parking allowed on State Highway 82 near the project site.
West Main Street: West Main Street adjacent to the project site (west of 7th Street)
is a local, residential city street. It serves only the direct neighborhood and does not
accommodate through traffic. The assumed posted speed limit is 20 mph. The
intersection of North 7th Street and West Main Street restricts eastbound left turns
via signage.
There is unmarked angled parking on the south side of West Main Street and parallel
parking on the north side of the street.
West Bleeker Street: West Bleeker Street is a local, residential street serving the
neighborhood west of North 7th Street. The intersection of North 7th Street and
West Bleeker Street is a full movement access intersection.
There is parallel parking on both sides of the street.
Alley: The alley located between West Main Street and West Bleeker Street provides
direct access for the neighborhood residents. The intersection of North 7th Street
and the alley restricts eastbound left turns via signage.
There are several private parking areas that are accessed from the alley. All parking
on the alley is head in parking.
North 8th Street: North 8th Street is a local, residential street, connecting West Main
Street and West Bleeker Street.
There is parallel parking on the west side of the street. There is no parking allowed
on the east side of the street.
P246
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 6
2.2 Parking Data Collection
Parking data was collected at the following locations on Thursday April 6, 2017.
Inventory and occupancy were recorded at two‐hour intervals from 6:00 AM to 8:00
PM.
North 8th Street
West Main Street
Alley
Bleeker Street
2.3 Existing Parking Conditions
An inventory of the current parking spaces in the neighborhood determined the
number of available parking spaces on the street network. This includes private
parking spaces that are directly accessed from the street network. Parking lots that
are internal to the private residences were observed, but are not included in Table
1. The number of occupied spaces was also recorded.
Notes on permit types, amount of movement in the parking spaces, and non‐
conforming parking alignment are available in the parking inventory diagrams
included in the Appendix.
2.4 Existing Parking Condition Summary
After the data collection was conducted and the results were analyzed, it was
determined that the capacity of the current parking facilities is sufficient for the
current conditions. Occupancy rates between 6:00 AM and 8:00 PM range from 26%
to 79%, with a neighborhood average of 50%.
As expected, peak occupancy occurred at 6:00 AM. At peak occupancy, the
neighborhood parking spaces were 63% filled. West Main Street’s parking spaces
were 79% utilized.
P247
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 7
Table 1: Traffic Data Collection
6:00 AM 3 43%
8:00 AM 3 43%
10:00 AM 5 71%
12:00 PM 4 57%
2:00 PM 3 43%
4:00 PM 3 43%
6:00 PM 4 57%
8:00 PM 4 57%
4 57%
6:00 AM 15 79%
8:00 AM 14 74%
10:00 AM 8 42%
12:00 PM 9 47%
2:00 PM 9 47%
4:00 PM 5 26%
6:00 PM 11 58%
8:00 PM 13 68%
11 58%
6:00 AM 15 65%
8:00 AM 12 52%
10:00 AM 10 43%
12:00 PM 6 26%
2:00 PM 6 26%
4:00 PM 8 35%
6:00 PM 8 35%
8:00 PM 11 48%
10 43%
6:00 AM 7 47%
8:00 AM 6 40%
10:00 AM 5 33%
12:00 PM 7 47%
2:00 PM 5 33%
4:00 PM 6 40%
6:00 PM 7 47%
8:00 PM 7 47%
7 47%
64 32 51%
64 40 73%
Percent
OccupiedRoad
Type o f
Parking
Space
Time
Parking
Spaces
Available
Parking
Spaces
Occupied
ParallelNorth 8th
Street
Alley Head‐In
West
Bleeker
Street
West Main Street A verage
Alley Average
Parallel
23
North 8th Stree t Average
7
19
15
West Bleeker Street Average
Neighborhood Total
Neighborhood Peak Occupancy
(6:00 AM)
West
Main
Street
Parallel
& Angle
P248
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 8
3.0 Project Parking Requirements
3.1 Required Parking & Aspen Land Use Code
Per Aspen’s Land Use Code, a residential multi‐family (as a single use) land use area
requires one parking unit per housing unit. Therefore, for a 10‐unit affordable
housing apartment building, 10 parking spaces are required.
The Land Use Code also states a maximum parking threshold of 1.25 parking spaces
per housing unit. Therefore, the applicant cannot exceed 13 parking spaces for the
project.
Table 2: Parking Impact Requirement Calculations
P249
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 9
3.2 Proposed Parking Improvements
The applicant will construct 10 parking spaces for the 10‐unit affordable housing
apartments. This is consistent with the City’s parking requirements described in
Section 3.1.
In addition, the applicant is committed to improving six public parking spaces in the
West Main Street Right‐of‐Way for the benefit of the neighborhood. The applicant
is willing to offer one of these spaces to the City for use in the CAR TO GO carshare
program. The public parking spaces are likely to be used by the neighborhood
residents or possibly people desiring to use the City’s future multiuse path on the
south side of West Main Street in the future.
The parking improvements will include improving and formalizing the current
parking on West Main Street. This will be accomplished by paving and striping head‐
in parking spaces on both sides of West Main Street. Ninety‐degree parking
functions well on low volume, local streets. The anticipated traffic volume on West
Main Street is less than 28 vehicles per hour – one car every two minutes. This low
traffic volume allows time for the parked cars to maneuver without impeding West
Main Street traffic.
With the parking reconstruction, there is an opportunity to improve the safety of the
West Main Street and North 7th Street intersection. Residents have noted that non‐
local drivers will sometimes try to cut through the neighborhood to avoid traffic on
North 7th Street. This ends in the unfamiliar drivers racing through the small local
streets. A curb extension on the western leg of the West Main Street and North 7th
Street intersection could dissuade drivers from entering a smaller, local street. It
would also reduce the pedestrian crossing distance in the crosswalk and shield the
new parking spaces. The applicant may also discuss the benefits of constructing a
raised pedestrian crosswalk at this location to further discourage cut through traffic.
P250
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 10
4.0 Recommendations
4.1 Parking Recommendations
Several recommendations to address the current and future parking conditions have
been developed.
1. Construct 10 head‐in parking spaces for the residents of the 802 West
Main Street affordable housing building.
2. To address neighborhood concerns, the applicant is committed to
improving six public parking spaces in the West Main Street Right‐of‐Way
for the benefit of the neighborhood.
3. The applicant is willing to offer one of these spaces to the City for use in
the CAR TO GO carshare program.
4. Reconstruct West Main Street’s parallel and angle parking as head‐in
parking. This change will add accommodate 6 more spaces from the
current configuration. The low volume and low speed traffic on West
Main Street is appropriate to allow drives to safely maneuver in and out
of head‐in parking spaces.
5. Add curb extensions and a raised pedestrian crosswalk on the west leg of
West Main Street and North 7th Street intersection. These modifications
will help dissuade vehicular traffic from using the local residential street
as a through street.
6. Create parking permits for this neighborhood. Parking permits will keep
other non‐residents from parking in designated residential parking
spaces.
P251
VI.A.
M1263 802 Main Street Affordable Housing July 25, 2017 Page 11
5.0 Appendix
P252
VI.A.
P253
VI.A.
P254
VI.A.
P255
VI.A.
P256
VI.A.
P257
VI.A.
P258
VI.A.
P259
VI.A.
P260
VI.A.
July 27, 2017
Jennifer Phelan
Deputy Director of Community Development
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 802 West Main Street – Property Operations and Maintenance Protocol
Dear Ms. Phelan:
This letter is intended to describe the operations and maintenance protocols that are required under the
federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit (“LIHTC”) program. Aspen Housing Partners, LLC, as the Development
Entity, is required under the LIHTC program to employ a property management company that is credentialed
and qualified by the Colorado Housing Finance Authority (“CHFA”) to conduct all operations and maintenance
matters including the compliance of tenants to both the LIHTC and APCHA qualification standards.
Property operations will include maintaining all physical improvements to the property including all buildings,
mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems and landscape and irrigation. The property management
company will hire local contractors to handle all ongoing building and site maintenance requirements,
including but not limited to: trash service; landscape service; and snow removal of the driveway, parking lot
and walkways.
As part of the financial underwriting and LIHTC regulations, the Development Entity will be required to
establish both CAPEX and operating reserves. These reserves are overseen and set aside on a monthly basis
to ensure regular and necessary building and site upkeep. The property will also be subject to periodic audits
by a CHFA representative to ensure reserves are being utilized to maintain the property. These audits will be
shared with the City to confirm appropriate maintenance measures are upheld.
Furthermore, the general partner to the Development Entity will be required to provide operating shortfall
and maintenance guarantees which provides another layer of motivation to keep the property operating in
an efficient manner.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions on the matter.
Sincerely yours,
Jason Bradshaw, Manager
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
970.319.9298
P261
VI.A.
C
APPENDIX C – PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SET (24X36
FORMATTING)
Exhibit 1. Existing Conditions and Draft Plat
• Improvement Survey
• Draft Planned Development Survey Plat
Exhibit 2. Site Planning & Landscape Plan Set
• Demolition, Vegetation and Tree Removal Plan
• Illustrative Site Plan
• Landscape Perspective Studies
• Planting and Restoration Plan
• Mobility/Multimodal Diagram
• Mobility Pedestrian Access Diagram
• Exterior Light Plan
Exhibit 3. Engineering Plan Set
• Notes
• Existing Conditions
• Site Plan Layout
• Drainage Basins
• Grading and Drainage
• Utility Plan
Exhibit 4. Architectural Plan Set
• Floor Plans
• Roof & Height Plan
• Floor area (FAR) Diagrams & Calculations
• Net Livable Area Diagrams & Calculations
• Building Elevations
• Perspective Building Renderings
P262
VI.A.
OWNER
CITY OF ASPEN
City Hall
130 S. Galena St
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.920.5000
APPLICANT
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
Jason Bradshaw
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970-319-9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
ARCHITECT
David Johnston Architects
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.3444
F: 970.920.2186
brian@djarchitects.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Connect One Design
0123 Emma Rd.
Suite 200A
Basalt, CO 81621
P. 970.279.1030
hh@connectonedesign.com
PLANNER
Method Planning + Development
119 South Spring St. Suite 102
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.274.0890
adam@methodpd.com
CIVIL ENGINEER
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
P: 970.340.4130
F: 866.876.5873
richardg@rfeng.biz
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
McDowell Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
P: 970.623.0788
kari@mcdowelleng.com
GENERAL
1.1 TITLE SHEET
1.2 SURVEY
LANDSCAPE
L.1 LANDSCAPE PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL
2.1 1”=10’ SITE PLAN
3.1 ¼” LOWER LEVEL PLAN
3.2 ¼” MAIN LEVEL PLAN
3.3 ¼” UPPER LEVEL PLAN
3.4 ¼” ROOF PLAN
3.5 ¼” LOWER AND MAIN LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.6 ¼” UPPER AND ROOF LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.7 ¼” MAIN LEVEL RCP
3.8 ¼” LOWER & UPPER LEVEL RCP
4.1 NORTH ELEVATIONS
4.2 SOUTH ELEVATIONS
4.3 EAST ELEVATIONS
4.4 WEST ELEVATIONS
5.1 ¼” SECTIONS ‘A’ & ‘B’
5.2 ¼” SECTION ‘C’
5.3 ¼” SECTIONS ‘D’ & ‘E’
5.4 ¼” SECTIONS ‘F’ & ‘G’
5.5 ¼” SECTIONS ‘H’ & ‘I’
5.6 ¼” SECTION ‘J’
6.1 ½” WINDOW DETAILS
6.2 ½” FIREPLACE SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.3 ½” STAIR SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.4 ½” KICKER DETAILS
7.1 FLOOR ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.2 WALL ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.3 ROOF ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.4 WINDOW DETAILS
7.5 DOOR DETAILS
10.1 WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULES
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DRAFT PLAT
IMPROVEMENT SURVEY
DRAFT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SURVEY PLAT
SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE PLAN SET
L.1.00 – DEMOLITION, VEGETATION AND TREE
REMOVAL PLAN
L.2.00 – ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN
L.3.00 – LANDSCAPE PERSPECTIVE STUDIES
L.4.00 – PLANTING AND RESTORATION PLAN
L.5.00 – MOBILITY/MULTIMODAL DIAGRAM
L.6.00 – MOBILITY PEDESTRIAN ACCESS DIAGRAM
L.7.00 – EXTERIOR LIGHT PLAN
ENGINEERING PLAN SET
C-001 – NOTES AND LEGEND
C-101 – EXISTING CONDITIONS
C-102 – SITE LAYOUT
C-103 – DRAINAGE BASINS
C-104 – GRADING AND DRAINAGE
C-105 – UTILITY PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SET
3.0 – FLOOR PLANS
3.1 - ROOF PLANS
3.2 – F.A.R. PLANS
3.3 – NET LIVABLE PLANS
4.1 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.2 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.3 – 3D VIEWS
PROJECT INFORMATION
LOCATION .......................................................................................................... 802 WEST MAIN ASPEN, CO 81611
LOT SIZE ............................................................................................................................................................... 9,000 S.F.
PARCEL ID# .............................................................................................................................................273512308005
SUBDIVISION: ............................................................................................................................................................. N/A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ................................ LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PROJECT INFORMATION
DRAWING INDEX
PROJECT DIRECTORY
802 WEST MAIN - AH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AH/PD PRELIMINARY PLAN SETVICINITY MAP
7.26.2017WEST MAIN STREET PERSPECTIVEP263
VI.A.
P264VI.A.
S75°09'11"E90.00'S14°50'49"
W
100.00'
N14°50'49"E 100.00'N75°09'11"W90.00'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDYH#5 REBAR & ALUM.CAP L.S. #ILLEGIBLEGRAVELPARKING#5 REBARTBM EL=7928.50'WEST MAIN STREET100' R-O-WASPHALTNORTH 7T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
75' R-O-W
ASPHALT ALLEY20.39' R-O-WASPHALT#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #29030ADJOINER BUILDINGCONCRETESIDEWALKCONCRETE CURB & GUTTERCONCRET
E
C
U
R
B
&
G
U
T
T
E
R
CONCRE
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
CONCRE
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
KRFTA BUSSTOPFENCE(TYP.)LOT Q, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT S, BL
O
C
K
1
2
COA GPS#8N. GARMISCH& E. DURANTCOA GPS#3 S. GARMISCH& W. FRANCIS ST.N 88°39'14" E5023.12'N 67°05'26" W4869.09'FIREHYD.BAVARIAN INN CONDO ASSOC.834 W. MAIN STREET
2.5'2.5'BUILDING ENVELOPEBUILDING ENVELOPE
BUILDING ENVELOPEBUILDING
E
N
V
E
L
O
P
ELOT 19,000 S.F.±10'3.5'NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Since 2007160911 OF 1CITY OF ASPENCITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO802 WEST MAIN STREET P.D.LOTS Q, R & S, BLOCK 12, COA802 WEST MAIN STREETJRNJRNJULY 19, 2017091.DWGNESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e ak Surveying, Inc.0101020405NOTES:1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN INTHE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY STEWART TITLE COMPANY, FILE NO. 01330-90874DATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 28, 2016.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS DECEMBER 07, 08 AND 12, 2016.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S75°09'11"E BETWEEN THESOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT Q, BLOCK 12, A #5 REBAR FOUND IN PLACE AND THESOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT S, BLOCK 12, A #5 REBAR & ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #ILLEGIBLEFOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN MAP AND THE WARRANTYDEED RECORDED AUGUST 15, 2007 AS RECEPTION NO. 541023 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERKAND RECORDER'S OFFICE AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE.6) ACCORDING TO FEMA PANEL 08097C0203C DATED JUNE 4, 1987 THE SUBJECT PROPERTYEXISTS WITHIN ZONE X OUTSIDE OF A 100 OR 500 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.7) ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.8) WETLAND BOUNDARY DELINEATION WAS NOT PROVIDED AND NO VISIBLE MARKS WERELOCATED AT THE TIME OF SURVEY.NORTH
VICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'SUBJECTPROPERTYFINAL PLAT802 WEST MAIN STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENTLOT'S Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPENCITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO802 MAIN STREET - PARCEL NO. 2735-123-08-005CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE:THIS FINAL PLAT WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDEROF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, AT ___________ O'CLOCK ____.M., ON THE _________ DAYOF _______________, 2017, AND IS DULY RECORDED IN BOOK ___________, PAGE___________, AS RECEPTION NO. __________________.BY:________________________________ CLERK AND RECORDERBY: ____________________________ DEPUTYCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL:THE APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FORCOMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USECODE BY THE CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR THIS ________ DAYOF __________________, 2017, TO THE EXTENT THAT ANYTHING IN THIS PLAT ISINCONSISTENT OR IN CONFLICT WITH ANY CITY OF ASPEN DEVELOPMENT ORDERS ORANY OTHER PROVISIONS OF APPLICABLE LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OTHERAPPLICABLE LAND USE REGULATIONS AND BUILDING CODES, SUCH OTHERDEVELOPMENT ORDERS OR APPLICABLE LAWS SHALL CONTROL.BY: ______________________________ JESSICA GARROWAS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORCITY OF ASPEN ENGINEER'S REVIEW:THIS PLAT WAS REVIEWED FOR THE DEPICTION OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SURVEYREQUIREMENTS. THIS ________ DAY OF __________________, 2017.BY:________________________________________________ TRICIA ARAGON, P.E.AS: CITY OF ASPEN ENGINEERCERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP:KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT THE CITY OF ASPEN, BEING THE SOLE OWNERIN FEE SIMPLE OF ALL OF THAT REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND BEING MOREPARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:LOT'S Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OFPITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, CONTAINING 9,000 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.HAS BY THESE PRESENTS LAID OUT, PLATTED AND DESCRIBED THE SAME AS SHOWNHEREON.CITY OF ASPENCOUNTY OF PITKINSTATE OF COLORADO.EXECUTED THIS ____________ DAY OF __________, A.D., 2017.OWNER: CITY OF ASPEN.BY: ___________________________________________, NAME:_____________________________________ TITLE:_____________________________________STATE OF ___________ ) )SS.COUNTY OF _________ )THE FOREGOING OWNER'S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ______DAY OF __________, 2017 BY ___________________________ AS_____________________________OF CITY OF ASPEN, AS _____________ OF THE CITY OFASPEN.WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: ___________________________________________________________NOTARY PUBLICTITLE EXAMINER'S CERTIFICATE:I, _____________________________, AS TITLE EXAMINER FOR STEWART TITLE COMPANY, DOCERTIFY THAT ON OR BEFORE _____________________, I HAVE CAUSED AN EXAMINATION TOBE MADE OF TITLE TO LOT 1, 802 WEST MAIN STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ANDEXCEPT FOR____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________SAID PROPERTY IS FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL OTHER MONETARY LIENS ANDENCUMBRANCES.DATED: _______________________________BY:____________________________________ ____________________, TITLE EXAMINER STEWART TITLE COMPANYREVIEWSURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE:I, JASON R. NEIL, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, THAT THIS PLAT IS A TRUE, CORRECT ANDCOMPLETE PLAT OF LOT 1, 802 WEST MAIN STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, CITY OF ASPEN,COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, AS LAID OUT, PLATTED, DEDICATED AND SHOWNHEREON, THAT SUCH PLAT WAS MADE FROM AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF SAID PROPERTY BYME, OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION, AND CORRECTLY SHOWS THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONSOF THE LOTS, EASEMENTS AND STREETS AS THE SAME ARE STAKED UPON THE GROUND INCOMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE SET MY HAND AND SEAL THIS _____DAY OF ________________A.D., 2017.BY: ________________________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935 FOR AND ON BEHALF OF PEAK SURVEYING, INC.P265VI.A.
LANDSCAPECOVERL.COVER802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017context map802 west main streetaspen, colorado 81611AspenNORTHsheet indexsheet numbersheet nameL.COVERcoverdemo, vegetation + tree removal plansite planperspective sketchesplanting planmultimodal diagrampedestrian directness diagramL.1.00L.2.00L.3.00L.4.00L.5.00L.6.00lighting planL.7.00802 West Main Street Site and Landscape Plan SetP266VI.A.
24.0'10.5'36.3'17.4'2.5'5.0'2.5'6.0'35.6'12.6'12.7'8.0'12.0'22.5'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGG
GGG
G
GGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
T
TTT
TTT
T
TT
TTTTT
TT
T
TT
TTT
TTTTTTT
TT
T
T
TTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTT
TTT
TTT
TTTTTTT
TTT
T
T
TTT
TTT
TTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTT
TTT
TTTT
T
TT
TTT
TT
TTTT
TTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 792779267926792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927 T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20DEMOLITION,VEGETATION +TREE REMOVALPLANL.1.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'NORTH802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017NO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHLEGENDEVERGREEN TREE TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING EVERGREEN TREEEXISTING DECIDUOUS TREETREE MITIGATION SCHEDULEVALUEACTIONSPEC 'DBH'#132418"18"REMOVENA18"PRESERVENA15"REMOVE$7,422.00PRESERVEEGDECDECDEC76589101213141716181910"10"TRANS/REMOVEPRESERVE$3299.00NAREMOVEBELOW MIT VALUEPRESERVENOT ON PROPERTYREMOVEBELOW MIT VALUEPRESERVENAREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVE4"REMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVE$1188.00REMOVEBELOW MIT VALUE6"REMOVE$1188.002 DECDECDECDEC4 DECDECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVEDTRANSPLANT$1188.00DECREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHDECEGDECDECDECDECDECDEC15205"16"18"4"10"10"10"4"4"6"6"2 DECNO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHTOTAL VALUE $14,285.00PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE TREE PROTECTIVE FENCE, TYP.TREE PROTECTIVE FENCE, TYP.10' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK3.5' SETBACK P267VI.A.
ILLUSTRATIVESITE PLANL.2.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/201742" fence and gate provide privacyfrom highway 82 sidewalkbike parkingADA ramps (typ.)tall columnar trees providescreeningraised pedestrian crossing; connectivity to futureCity of Aspen multimodal trail; see civil plans forimprovement detailsclimate appropriate plantingsadjacent to building providestreetscape interest and pedestrianscalesnow storage zonenew bench at existing bus stopbear-proof trash and recycling enclosurelocated across from Bavarian dumpsterrasied bed vegetable garden forresidentsdownlit bollards demarcatepedestrian entrancesinviting path allows residents to access the coveredwalkway to unit entrances; main path to trashexisting trees to remain provide shade andscreening of buildingslarge lawn area extends from neighbor's lawn areamain level ADA compliant walkway from sidewalkproperty line fence extends from T5tree to west main street property line5' detached sidewalksnow storage zonepreserve pioneer evergreen treehighway 82west main streetalleyexisting trees to remain provide shade andscreening of buildingsprimary building access via ADA compliant walkway6' detached sidewalkpedestrian entrance from alley; not gated12345678910small gathering are and gas fire pitPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE
2.5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE2.5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE
3.5' SETBACKNORTH P268VI.A.
LANDSCAPEPERSPECTIVESKETCHESL.3.00802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017View OneView from sidewalk looking south at the ground level units facing Highway 82View TwoView from the intersection of west main street and n 7th street looking toward the bike racks andthe main entrance to the stairsView ThreeView from the parking spaces along west main and toward mainentranceView FourView from the sidewalk looking north along highway 82/ n 7th streetP269VI.A.
792779267926792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927
UP STREET TREES Populus angustifolia / Narrowleaf Poplar SCREEN TREES Populus tremuloides erecta / Swedish Aspen LAWN TREES Ginkgo biloba `Princeton Sentry` / Princeton Sentry Ginkgo CLIMATE-ADAPTED PERRENIAL MIX - VEGETABLE GARDEN - SOD -CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULEPLANTING ANDRESTORATION PLANL.4.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017PROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE
2.5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE2.5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE
3.5' SETBACKNORTH P270VI.A.
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGG
GGGGGG
GGG
GGGG
GGG
GGGGGG
GGGGGGG
GGG
GGG
GGG
GGGGGGG
GGG
G
GG
GGG
GGGGGGG
GGG
G792779267926792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
7929
7928
7928
7927
UP
802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017MULTIMODALDIAGRAML.5.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'enhanced pedestrian access pointsenhanced pedestrian accesspointbike parking (10 spaces)curb equal to or less than 6"effective walkway width 6'6' walkway widthless than5% slope onsidewalkand bufferless than5% slope onsidewalkand bufferADA ramp (typ.)raised pedestrian crossing; connectivity tofuture City of Aspen multimodal trailtransit system informationand community board in centralbuilding coreproposed bench atexisting bus stopexisting curb cut(driveway closure) removedfrom propertyless than 2%cross slope onsidewalk5' buffer6" vertical curbPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE12345
67891010' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK3.5' SETBACK
10 designated parking spacesNORTHP271VI.A.
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGG
GGG
G
GGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG792779267926 792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927
UP
PEDESTRIANDIRECTNESSDIAGRAML.6.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017crow flies distance 65'walking distance 91' (1.4 DF)c
r
ow
f
l
i
e
s
d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
4
9
'walking distance 69' (1.4 DF)PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
10' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK3.5' SETBACKNORTH P272VI.A.
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGG
GGG
G
GGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG792779267926 792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927
UP
EXTERIOR LIGHTINGPLANL.7.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017LEGENDWAC 'GATE' LED BOLLARD PATH LIGHT;115 LUMENS AT 24" ABOVE GRADEWAC 'INVISILED PRO OUTDOOR' 24VOUTDOOR LED TAPE LIGHT;12 LEDS PER FOOT AT 18" ABOVE GRADE,W/IN RECESSED CHANNELPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINENORTH P273VI.A.
P274VI.A.
P275VI.A.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDYHGRASSSINGLE STORYWOOD FRAME HOUSE812 W. MAIN STREETSTONE PATIOBOULDER(TYP.)#5 REBAR & ALUM.CAP L.S. #ILLEGIBLECONCRETEDRIVEWAYGRAVELPARKING#5 REBARTBM EL=7928.50'FLAGSTONE WALKCONCRETEPADBRICKPLANTERWEST MAIN STREET100' R-O-WASPHALTNORTH 7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
75' R-O-W
ASPHALT ALLEY20.39' R-O-WASPHALTCONCRETE PANSTORMDRAINVEGETATION AND BRUSH#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #29030ADJOINER BUILDINGADJOINE
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
GSTORM DRAIN(TYP.)FLOWLI
N
ECONCRETESIDEWALKCONCRETE CURB & GUTTERCONCRET
E
C
U
R
B
&
G
U
T
T
E
R
CONCRE
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
CONCR
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
KRFTA BUSSTOPSTREETLIGHTTIE RET.
W
A
L
L
(
T
Y
P
.
)TIE RET. WALL (TYP.)SIGNFENCE (TYP.)FENCE(TYP.)FENCE(TYP.)STORM DRAIN(TYP.)LOT Q, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT S, BL
O
C
K
1
2EGOSWWATERSERVICEWATERLINE(TYP.)ELEC.METERGASMETERGASLINEELECTRICLINETELEPHONELINE7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
7927 TELE.PED.CABLE TVPED.VEGETATION AND BRUSHRIDGEEL=7940.3'FFEL=7930.1'FFEL=7928.4'T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20COA GPS#8N. GARMISCH& E. DURANTCOA GPS#3 S. GARMISCH& W. FRANCIS ST.N 88°39'14" E5023.12'N 67°05'26" W4869.09'FIREHYD.BAVARIA
N
I
N
N
C
O
N
D
O
A
S
S
O
C
.
834 W. M
A
I
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
SEWER LINE79307930793079317929 STREETLIGHTSTREETCONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE CURB & GUTTERXXXFENCEP276VI.A.
7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
79277930793079317929P277
VI.A.
XXXXX7
9
2
7 7926792679267925792679277
9
2
879297929
792979297928
7928
792779307930793079317929XP278
VI.A.
7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
7927 S7930793079317929 P279VI.A.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDYHOSW7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
7927 S79307930793079317929 XXXP280VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
1.0
ARCH COVER SHEET
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
GENERAL 1.1 TITLE SHEET 1.2 SURVEY LANDSCAPE L.1 LANDSCAPE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL
2.1 1”=10’ SITE PLAN
3.1 ¼” LOWER LEVEL PLAN
3.2 ¼” MAIN LEVEL PLAN
3.3 ¼” UPPER LEVEL PLAN
3.4 ¼” ROOF PLAN
3.5 ¼” LOWER AND MAIN LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.6 ¼” UPPER AND ROOF LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.7 ¼” MAIN LEVEL RCP
3.8 ¼” LOWER & UPPER LEVEL RCP
4.1 NORTH ELEVATIONS
4.2 SOUTH ELEVATIONS
4.3 EAST ELEVATIONS
4.4 WEST ELEVATIONS
5.1 ¼” SECTIONS ‘A’ & ‘B’
5.2 ¼” SECTION ‘C’
5.3 ¼” SECTIONS ‘D’ & ‘E’
5.4 ¼” SECTIONS ‘F’ & ‘G’
5.5 ¼” SECTIONS ‘H’ & ‘I’
5.6 ¼” SECTION ‘J’
6.1 ½” WINDOW DETAILS
6.2 ½” FIREPLACE SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.3 ½” STAIR SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.4 ½” KICKER DETAILS
7.1 FLOOR ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.2 WALL ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.3 ROOF ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.4 WINDOW DETAILS
7.5 DOOR DETAILS
10.1 WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULES
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DRAFT PLAT IMPROVEMENT SURVEY DRAFT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SURVEY PLAT SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE PLAN SET L.1.00 – DEMOLITION, VEGETATION AND TREE REMOVAL PLAN
L.2.00 – ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN
L.3.00 – LANDSCAPE PERSPECTIVE STUDIES
L.4.00 – PLANTING AND RESTORATION PLAN
L.5.00 – MOBILITY/MULTIMODAL DIAGRAM
L.6.00 – MOBILITY PEDESTRIAN ACCESS DIAGRAM
L.7.00 – EXTERIOR LIGHT PLAN
ENGINEERING PLAN SET
C-001 – NOTES AND LEGEND
C-101 – EXISTING CONDITIONS
C-102 – SITE LAYOUT
C-103 – DRAINAGE BASINS
C-104 – GRADING AND DRAINAGE
C-105 – UTILITY PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SET
3.0 – FLOOR PLANS
3.1 - ROOF PLANS
3.2 – F.A.R. PLANS
3.3 – NET LIVABLE PLANS
4.1 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.2 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.3 – 3D VIEWS
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
1. The Contract Documents shall consist of the general notes and the architectural, mechanical, and structural drawings. All future
additional specifications, details, drawings, clarifications, or changes shall, in turn, become part of these documents. Work indicated
or reasonably implied in any one of the documents shall be supplied as though fully covered in all. Any discrepancy between any
parts of the drawings shall be reported to the Architect immediately for clarification.
2. David Johnston Architects, PC., waves any and all liability for problems which arise from failure to follow the design intent of the
plans. Contractor to obtain and/or request guidance of David Johnston Architects, PC., with respect to any errors, omissions,
inconsistencies, or conflicts which may be discovered or alleged.
3. The Plans and Specifications are the property of the Architect and are not to be used without the permission of same.
4. All work shall comply with all state and local codes, ordinances, rules, regulations and laws of building officials or authorities having
jurisdiction. All work shall be performed to the highest standards or craftsmanship by journeymen of the appropriate trades.
5. The Contract Documents represent the finished structure. They do not indicate the method of construction. The Contractor shall
provide all measures necessary to protect the structure during construction. Observation visits to the site by the Structural Engineer
or Architect shall not include inspection of the above items nor will the architect or structural engineer be responsible for the
contractor's means, methods, techniques, sequences for procedure of construction, or the safety precautions and the techniques,
sequences for procedure of construction, or the safety precautions and the programs incident thereto. The Contractor shall be
responsible for all Federal and OSHA regulations.
6. THE DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE SCALED. Written dimensions are to be used. If there is a discrepancy in dimensions, the Architect
should be notified for clarification. All dimensions on the drawings shall be verified against the existing conditions. All dimensions
are to rough framing or face of concrete unless noted otherwise.
7. These documents are intended to include all labor, materials, equipment, and services required to complete all work described herein.
It is the responsibility of the Contractor to bring to the attention of the Architect any conditions which will not permit construction
according to the intentions of these documents.
8. The Building Inspector shall be notified by the Contractor when there is need of an inspection as required by the I.R.C., or by any local
code or ordinance.
9. LOT STAKED: The Contractor shall arrange for the building to be located and staked after demolition or site clearing, to be approved
by the Architect. The Contractor shall review the lot staking and verify, to the best of his ability, its accuracy. The Contractor shall
also check the grade where it meets the building to evaluate the consistency with the drawings during excavation. Work to be done
by a certified surveyor.
10. RECORD DRAWINGS: Contractor to maintain a complete set of blue/black-line prints of contract drawings and shop drawings for
record mark-up purposes throughout the Contract time. Mark-up drawings during course of the work to show changes and actual
installation conditions, sufficient to form a complete record for Owner's purposes. Give particular attention to work which will be
concealed and difficult to measure and record at a later date, and work which may require servicing or replacement during life of
project. Require entities marking prints, to sign and date each mark-up. Bind prints into manageable sets, with durable paper cover,
appropriately labeled.
11. SOILS AND CONCRETE: The General Contractor shall arrange for a visual site inspection at the completion of excavation by a soils
engineer, and the required concrete testing prior to any foundation work.
12. Property lines, utilities and topography shown is representative of information taken from a survey. Notify Architect of any
discrepancy or variation between the Drawings and actual site conditions.
ABREVIATIONS
A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
ADJ. ADJUSTABLE
ALT. ALTERNATE
A.B. ANCHOR BOLTS
& AND
ARCH. ARCHITECTURAL
@ AT
BM. BEAM
BM. PKT. BEAM POCKET
BRG. BEARING
BLK’G. BLOCKING
BOT. BOTTOM
B.F. BOTTOM OF FOOTING
BLDG. BUILDING
B.O. BY OWNER
CAB. CABINET
CLG. CEILING
CL. CENTER LINE
C.T. CERAMIC TILE
CLR. CLEAR
COL. COLUMN
CONC. CONCRETE
CONN. CONNECTION
CONT. CONTINUOUS
DTL. DETAILS
DBL. DOUBLE
DWL. DOWEL
E.W. EACH WAY
ELEV. ELEVATION
EXIST’G EXISTING
EXT. EXTERIOR
FLR. FLOOR
FTG. FOOTING
FND. FOUNDATION
GA. GAUGE
G.L. GLU-LAM
G.W.B. GYPSUM WALL BOARD
HT. HEIGHT
HK. HOOK
HORIZ. HORIZONTAL
INFO. INFORMATION
INSUL. INSULATION
JST. JOIST
L.L. LIVE LOAD
LONGINT. LONGITUDINAL
N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT
O.C. ON CENTER
OPP. OPPOSITE
O/ OVER
PTD. PAINTED
PERF. PERFORATED
PL. PLATE
PLY. PLYWOOD
PROP. LINE PROPERTY LINE
REINF. REINFORCEMENT
RDWD. REDWOOD
REQ’D. REQUIRED
RESIL. RESILENT
REV. REVISED
S.M. SHEET METAL
SIM. SIMILAR
S.F. SQUARE FEET
STD. STANDARD
STL. STEEL
STDS. STUDS
THK. THICK
TLT. TOILET
T.F. TOP OF FOOTING
T.P. TOP OF PLATE
T.L. TOP OF LEDGE
T.W. TOP OF WALL
TOT. TOTAL
T.B. TOWEL BAR
TRANSV. TRANSVERSE
TYP. TYPICAL
U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED UTHERWISE
V.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELD
OWNER
CITY OF ASPEN
City Hall
130 S. Galena St
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.920.5000
APPLICANT
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
Jason Bradshaw
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970-319-9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
ARCHITECT
David Johnston Architects
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.3444
F: 970.920.2186
brian@djarchitects.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Connect One Design
0123 Emma Rd.
Suite 200A
Basalt, CO 81621
P. 970.279.1030
hh@connectonedesign.com
PLANNER
Method Planning + Development
119 South Spring St. Suite 102
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.274.0890
adam@methodpd.com
CIVIL ENGINEER
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
P: 970.340.4130
F: 866.876.5873
richardg@rfeng.biz
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
McDowell Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
P: 970.623.0788
kari@mcdowelleng.com
033
LBB
5.1
A
REFERENCE GRID LINE
SPOT ELEVATION
WINDOW MARK
DOOR MARK
ROOM NUMBER
DRAWING REVISION
ASSEMBLY DETAIL CUT
SECTION CUT
EXTERIOR ELEVATION
DETAIL CALLOUT
SECTION DETAIL CALLOUT
INTERIOR ELEVATION
ROOM
100
F11
1
T. O. RIDGE BEAM
123'-6 1/2"
4.4
1
1
7.1
1
7.1
8.1
1
2
3
4
SYMBOL LEGEND
MATERIAL LEGEND
GYPSUM WALL
BOARD
RAW FRAMING
WOOD BLOCKING
ROCK - NON
COMPACTED FILL
CONCRETE
STONE
FRAME WALL
BRICK
PLYWOOD
BATT INSULATION
FINISHED WOOD
RIGID INSULATION
8
PROJECT INFORMATION
LOCATION .......................................................................................................... 802 WEST MAIN ASPEN, CO 81611
LOT SIZE ............................................................................................................................................................... 9,000 S.F.
PARCEL ID# .............................................................................................................................................273512308005
SUBDIVISION: ............................................................................................................................................................. N/A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ................................ LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
802 WEST MAIN - AH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AH/PD PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SETDRAWING INDEX
PROJECT DIRECTORY
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
ABBREVIATIONS
PROJECT INFORMATION
VICINITY MAP
WEST MAIN STREET PERSPECTIVE
P281VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.0
FLOOR PLANS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.UP1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
UPRGDW
RG
DW
RGDW
RG
DWRG DWW
WW WWDR
DRDR DRDRREF
REF
REF REFREFUPUP1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
RGDW
RG
DW
RGDW
RG
DWRG DWW
WW WWDR
DRDR DRDRREF
REF
REF REFREFSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
BASEMENT/ FOUNDATIONS
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL PLANP282 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.1
ROOF PLAN
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
27'-541/64"27'-723/64"
27'-541/64"
31'-61/2"
31'-61/2"
31'-61/2"
27'-319/32"
31'-61/2"
27'-541/64"
31'-61/2"
27'-541/64"
23'-0"
27'-723/64"
27'-335/64"
27'-723/64"
27'-723/64"
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL
FUTURE PV PANELS
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLANP283 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.2
F.A.R. PLANS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
FLOOR AREA - MAIN LEVEL
USE
AH UNIT
OVERHANGS >4'
STAIRS
AREA
3,663.43
213.99
70.06
3,947.48 sq ft UP1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
AH UNIT
672.54 sq ft
DECK
35.00 sq ft
DECK
35.00 sq ft
DECK
41.00 sq ft
DECK
41.00 sq ft
DECK
92.77 sq ft
DECK
868.10 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
AH UNIT
743.76 sq ft
AH UNIT
743.44 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
OVERHANGS >4'
54.07 sq ft
OVERHANGS >4'
223.81 sq ft
UPSTORAGE
929.89 sq ftMECHANICAL
397.89 sq ft STAIRS
106.38 sq ft
UP1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
UPOVERHANGS >4'
54.07 sq ft
OVERHANGS >4'
159.92 sq ft
AH UNIT
672.54 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
AH UNIT
743.44 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
STAIRS
70.06 sq ft
FLOOR AREA - UPPER LEVEL
USE
AH UNIT
DECK
OVERHANGS >4'
AREA
3,658.04
1,112.87
277.88
5,048.79 sq ft
FLOOR AREA - BASEMENT
USE
MECHANICAL
STAIRS
STORAGE
AREA
397.89
106.38
929.89
1,434.16 sq ft
10,430.43 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
BASEMENT MECHANICAL & STORAGE FLOOR AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA
TOTAL FLOOR AREAP284 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.3
NET LIVABLE PLANS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
NET LIVABLE FLOOR AREA
UNIT
MAIN LEVEL, AH UNIT
SECOND LEVEL, AH UNIT
AREA
3,374.50
3,374.50
6,749.00 sq ft UP1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
AH UNIT
681.88 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
684.91 sq ft
AH UNIT
626.47 sq ft
UPUP1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
UPAH UNIT
681.88 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
684.91 sq ft
AH UNIT
626.47 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL NET LIVABLE PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
BASEMENT MECHANICAL & STORAGE
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL NET LIVABLE PLANP285 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
4.1
ELEVATIONS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
31'-61/2"
27'-541/64"27'-541/64"27'-723/64"
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
BRICK PLATE STEEL CANOPY
VERTICAL GEOLAM RAIN SCREEN
VERTICAL GEOLAM FENCE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
PER 26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
PER 26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
PER 26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
31'-61/2"
27'-335/64"27'-319/32"
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
VERTICAL GEOLAM RAIN SCREEN
BRICK
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
PLATE STEEL CANOPY
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
SOUTH ELEVATIONP286 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
4.2
ELEVATIONS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
31'-61/2"
23'-55/32"
27'-541/64"
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
WIRE BALLUSTRADE
METAL FASCIA
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
31'-61/2"
27'-723/64"
23'-55/32"
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
WIRE BALLUSTRADE
METAL FASCIA
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
WEST ELEVATIONP287
VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
4.3
3D RENDERINGS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
ARCHITECTURAL RENDERING AARCHITECTURAL RENDERING C
ARCHITECTURAL RENDERING BP288 VI.A.
Method Planning + Development
Memorandum
119 South Spring Street, #102 | Aspen Colorado 81611
(p) 970.274.0890 | (e) adam@methodpd.com
Planning – 01
September 25, 2017
Adam Roy
Justin Barker
Chris Everson
Jason Bradshaw
802 West Main Street Affordable Housing – Responses and Supplemental Material for
DRC Comments
Dear Justin:
The purpose of this Memo is to respond to the Design Review Committee (the “DRC”) comments and
provide and describe any supplemental or alternative design material that incorporate changes
requested from the various DRC department representatives. The below sections are organized by
department with comments enumerated in normal text, while the project team’s responses are
provided in italics. Any additional material is provided as exhibits attached hereto and described within
the respective responses. All alternative descriptions, calculations or material provided as exhibits are
to supersede any similar or related representations provided in the originally submitted land use
application for the 802 West Main Street Affordable Housing Project.
ENGINEERING
These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet
submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting.
Utilities:
1. The application documents call out that a new water service line might be needed, this will need
to be determined prior to building permit issuance, ideally prior to submittal. Include line size
and location on the civil sheets.
Service line plan and profile design will be completed prior to permit submittal and shown on
permit plans.
2. If the water service line will need to be 4” or larger, fire flow calcs and a thrust restraint design
are required for review. 2” or smaller, a letter from a fire flow designer stating that a 2” line or
smaller is sufficient in providing adequate fire flows will be acceptable.
Both requests will be met for the 4-inch or 2 inch service line design.
3. If a new service line is proposed, the existing water service line to the property it shall be
abandoned per COA Water Department Standards.
The old line will be abandoned according to COA Water Department Standards.
4. Sheet C-105 shows a proposed alignment for the water service line, how will this be installed at
7’ deep without impacting the neighboring property?
The water service line location will be adjusted so it does not impact the neighboring property.
NO.
DATE:
BY:
TO:
CC:
SUBJECT:
P289
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 2
5. Page 13 calls out that there may not be adequate capacity in the existing transformer. Please
verify. If a new transformer needs to be installed or this transformer needs to be upsized, the
City’s standard is for the new transformer/utility pedestals to be located on the projects
property. Note that adequate clearance distances will be required (3’ sides and rear, 10’ front)
and that an easement be granted prior to building permit issuance. If an example easement is
desired by the applicant the Engineering Department can provide one.
The power requirements will be determined prior to permit submittal and if a new or
upgraded transformer is needed it will meet city requirements for location and easements.
ROW:
1. A raised pedestrian crossing is not permitted to be installed in this location due to the
complexity of the intersection and snow removal. We can discuss traffic calming measures in a
separate meeting if desired by the applicant.
No raised crosswalk will be installed as part of this project.
2. The alley shall be brought into compliance with the COA Engineering Design Standards for alley
entrances. Provide a design at building permit submittal.
An appropriate alley entrance will be designed in accordance with COA Engineering Design
Standards.
3. Discussions with the City and the applicant have resulted in an agreement that the ROW
improvements (parking alignment, orientation, curb and gutter and storm infrastructure) shall
be kept in the land use application plans with a disclaimer on the drawings and in the
application, that the final configuration and orientation of the ROW improvements and
assignment of the parking will be determined prior to building permit. The Engineering
Department will work with the applicant to finalize the disclaimer wording prior to P&Z.
The Applicant and Project Team are of the understanding that the Planned Development will
establish the proposed configuration and orientation of the ROW improvements and
assignment of the parking as the approved standards. The PD Plan Set drawings will provide a
disclaimer that adjustments deemed essential and necessary to the referenced ROW
improvements can be adjusted with out land use amendment if so directed by the approving
body, which in this case is the Aspen City Council. The Applicant will work with the Engineering
Department to finalize this disclaimer prior to P&Z.
TIA:
1. Clarify what traffic calming features are proposed for claiming credit. We can discuss options in
an additional meeting.
The applicant is proposing to construct a curb extension on the northwest corner of W. Main
Street and N. 7th Street. The intent of the curb extension is two-fold. The extended curb
narrows the roadway width, thus providing a shorter and safer crossing distance for
pedestrians. The Institute of Transportation Engineers recognizes curb extensions as an
appropriate traffic calming measure for low to mid-volume roadways. In addition, the curb
extension will help to visually guide motorists navigating the S-curves. Neighborhood
residents have complained about misguided motorists trying to avoid congestion on the State
Highway 82 S-curves by driving through the neighborhood. The narrowed roadway width will
delineate the small, local residential roadway from the highway. A visual distinction between
P290
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 3
the residential West Main Street and the S-curve route into/out of town would help cut down
on this traffic.
2. TDM to be reviewed by Lynn.
The Project Team has had continued conversations with the Transportation Director on TDM
implements. The applicant is proposing to improve transit access via the construction of a
new sidewalk along West Main Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a sidewalk that
will connect the neighborhood to the existing bus stop on North 7th Street. The sidewalk will
be ADA compliant, with a cross slope of 2% or less. In addition, the applicant has entertained
the idea of providing a newly created and improved parking space in the West Main Street
ROW for the City Transportation Department for use in the CAR TO GO car-share program.
PARKS
1. A Tree Removal permit is required.
A tree removal permit will be submitted at point of building permit.
2. Tree mitigation amounts may be incorrect.
Tree mitigation amounts will be determined at point of building permit
3. Tree protection fencing is required and must be inspected PRIOR to any construction activity.
The standard for tree protection will be followed at point of construction
4. 5’ minimum planting strip for Right of Ways.
This standard will be followed where planting strips are proposed and approved in the PD Plan
Set.
5. Pruning of neighboring property trees must be done by a certified arborist and kept to a
minimum.
This requirement will be followed and coordinated with the neighboring property.
6. City Forester to determine how close to trunk of evergreen at corner of 7th & Main applicant
can get for foundation of house.
The Project Team can mark the building edge and review on site with Forester.
7. Bike parking area raises concerns with proximity to evergreen.
Project Team will review onsite with City Forester to ensure the location is compatible with the
existing evergreen tree.
8. Aspen tree at neighbors to the west will require a jogged sidewalk with a floating component.
The details of this standard will be verified in the field prior to building permit submittal.
9. Tree species to be planted need to be vetted by City Forester
All tree species will be coordinated and reviewed with City Forester prior to building permit
submittal.
P291
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 4
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
1. Upper level has only 1 exit. This allows for a max of 4 units on the upper level and a maximum
travel distance of 125' from the furthest point, travelling down the stairs to either a protected
exit or to a spot clear of the building. You exceed this distance and have 5 units. 2015 IBC
1006.3.2
An additional exterior stair has been incorporated from the upper level on the north end of the
building.
2. Basement storage is a common facility and must be accessible. The total area of inaccessible
stories exceeds 3,000 sqft so you may not take the 3000 sqft exemption. A lift would be
acceptable if occupant load of basement storage is 5 or less. 2015 IBC 1104.4
An accessible lift from the main level down to the storage has been incorporated into the
common area design.
3. No elevator: Only main level units required to be Type B. No Type A req'd. 2015 IBC 1107.7
Main level units will be Type B accessible.
4. Need accessible on property route from all accessible units to trash. 2 units appear to have
stepped porches. 2015 IBC 1104.5
The route to the trash will be accessible on site and demonstrated upon building permit
submittal.
5. Van accessible parking space: 8' space and 8' aisle ICC A117.1-2009 section 502.
A van accessible parking space will be accommodated and demonstrated upon building permit
submittal.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
1. The current proposal does not specific what the dimensions of the trash and recycling space will
be (pg. L.2.00 & L.4.00). Code (12.10.050 (A) a) requires a minimum of 120 square feet. The
proposed location meets other parts of the code requirements (i.e. alley access, ADA access,
hauler access, etc.).
The proposed trash enclosure is 150 sq. ft. in area.
2. Table 03 (pg. 33 of the application) indicates there will be 150 SF of space for trash and
recycling, but this is not shown on any of the drawings.
This representation is found on Sheet L.2 of Exhibit 2 in Appendix C of the application.
3. The narrative indicates the enclosure will meet the wildlife protection requirements of
12.08.020.
This statement is correct – the enclosure for trash and recycling will meet wildlife protection
requirements.
P292
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 5
ZONING
1. Addressing, request from the City; don’t wait until building permit.
Addressing of the units will be addressed following land use approvals of the proposed project.
2. Mail delivery; is there a room, or area dedicated to mail?
Mail delivery area will be established with USPS, including the postmaster and the
neighborhood mail carrier.
3. Setbacks: East setback the balconies are in the setback and the Code does not provide an
exception for the encroachment of a balcony into setbacks.
Byway of the PD review, the Project Team is proposing a building setback that establishes the
building line setback on all sides of the Property, along with a deck/balcony encroachment
setback. The intent of this approach is to memorialize the building setback separate from any
projections, such as decks and balconies. If preferable to the Community Development
Department, the setbacks will be establish to include all applicable elements within the
setbacks, including decks and balconies.
4. Provide FA calculations, which include subgrade calculations (storage under building does not
appear to have subgrade calculations), and deck in totals. Conversation is needed for the
extensive space below the walkways and 2nd level area. The Code exempts space below a deck.
However, the space below the second level ‘deck’ is extensive.
The Project Team has worked with the Community Development Department to clarify
definition of certain exterior elements and those defined elements have been appropriately
applied to the floor area calculations for the proposed building. Any adjustments to
definitions, nomenclature and related calculations have been incorporated into the proposed
floor area calculations and the related development standards and PD drawing sheets.
Updated Floor Area Calculation summary section of the originally submitted application is
provided as Exhibit A attached to this Memo. An updated AH/PD Development Standards
table is also provided as Exhibit B attached to this Memo.
5. Garden in setback shall meet 26.575.020(E)(5). Allowed projections into Setback.
The raised garden beds are within the proposed rear setback and will comply with the
reference standards in remaining at or below thirty inches (30”) above finished grade.
PLANNING
1. Although the project meets the minimum requirements for Residential Design Standards, the
Planned Development review allows for a more robust conversation related to design. The
criteria require a project to provide visual interest and incorporate present day details, while
using materials that are respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history.
While the project provides visual interest and the overall form of the design is appropriate, the
prevalent materials in the vicinity include wood or brick as a primary material, with other more
modern materials such as metal panels or stucco as a secondary material. Generally, where
wood and brick are used in the area, the materials help to reduce the scale of buildings with
their roughly 4’ high coursing. We are concerned with the relatively large scale composite panels
being applied to the largest modules of the project and recommend adjustment, such as
cladding the gable elements with horizontal or vertical siding/rain screen and using the larger
P293
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 6
composite panels on the flat roofed elements. Staff would like to see the use of primary and
secondary materials be more consistent with the surrounding character of residential
properties.
The Applicant and Project Team agree that the proposed project provides visual interest and
that the overall massing and form of the design reflect the historical styles and building form
patterning of the nearby areas of this western portion of downtown Aspen. Originally
proposed as a three-story flat roofed building, byway of public input and direct feedback from
City Council during work sessions, the Project Team shifted focus to a two-story form and more
closely follow the general tenets and spirit of the City’s Historic Preservation Guidelines and
Historic District Guidelines. Specifically, the site planning, building placement, massing and
form, and architectural character and material selections all take cues from these Guidelines.
The Project Team responded with a design of which the height, mass and scale are two-stories
in form, while also maintain a verticality that is essential due to the significant corner that the
property occupies, the heights, mass and scale of other properties that comprise the block, and
especially the elongated nature of the property in both directions. The Project Team studied a
shorter, “squattier” two-story building form with lower floor plates and a flat roof. This design
exercise resulted in a building form that was out of proportion between the horizontal length
of the building façades and vertical streetscape of the building from the public realm. The use
of a single, primary building material assists in establishing the appropriate mass and scale of
the building at this significant corner along Main Street, while retaining a two-story height.
The introduction of a secondary wainscot or base material as described in the above comment,
would result in a perceived building streetscape that is again squattier in appearance across
the long street edges of the property.
Taking guidance from the historic design and district guidelines, the material selection and
proposed vernacular intend for the building “to be recognized as a product of its time” while
avoiding “the imitation of older historic styles [that] blur the distinction between old and new
buildings”. Furthermore, with the property not being located within a historic district, the
mass, scale and proposed vernacular complement the varied character styles within the
surrounding neighborhood, while also respecting the Main Street Historic District to the east.
The material use, being comprised predominantly of composite paneling, has been
intentionally applied to reinforce the proportions of rhythm of the building’s streetscapes as
described above. With the massing and form reflecting the character of the surrounding area,
the use of traditional material to establish the primary character of the building would in fact,
mimic the typical character and style found historically in this area of town.
For these reasons, the Project intends to respectfully retain the current design leading into
public hearings before Planning and Zoning and City Council. If strong sentiments are
presented in these forums, the Project Team will respond with minor adjustments throughout
the process accordingly.
2. The upper floor balconies do not contain any covering, which could pose a snow/ice shedding
issue with some sloped roofs angling toward the balconies. This is also in contrast to the PD
review criteria, which requires building entrances to be design to minimize icing and snow
shedding effects. Staff suggests incorporating roof eaves or overhangs to provide cover for these
balconies. Additionally, eaves or overhangs can help reduce the perceived scale of the project
and reference historic building details traditionally found on residential structures.
P294
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 7
Snow breaks and/or fences will handle all snow and ice buildup and shedding. All water
shedding will be accommodated by integrated gutter and downspout systems that will direct
the stormwater to the project’s stormwater management system. Although eaves establish a
historical character that is found elsewhere, large traditional eaves would run counter to the
proposed architectural vernacular and are therefore inappropriate to the design. Furthermore,
and as noted above, the proportions of the elongated building façades need to be balanced
with a perception of greater verticality rather than lesser. For this reason, the character design
elements of the building are incorporated to establish an appropriate scaled two-story
building form at this prominent street corner, rather and a “squattier” and out of proportioned
reduced building streetscape.
3. The applicant has stated that the area adjacent to the alley is retained as open space, which
could accommodate parking if necessary in the future. In traditional development, parking is
typically located and accessed from the alley and required in both residential and commercial
design standards. If parking is not to occur off the alley at this time, it should be memorialized in
the PD plat and agreement that no future structures can be located in the open space area
adjacent to the alley to allow for parking there if it is needed in the future due to potential
changes to the adjacent Main Street ROW.
The details and descriptions of this area and the related protection from future permanent
improvements will be memorialized in the approving ordinance and adopting Planned
Development Agreement.
ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
The following comments/requirements are addressed by a single response below:
1. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and specifications,
which are on file at the District office.
2. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof,
foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system.
3. Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to
specific ACSD requirements and prior to soil stabilization. Soil nails are not allowed in ROW.
4. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD.
5. Connection to the ACSD sewer system will require installation of a pumping system.
6. One tap is allowed for each building.
7. Shared service line agreements will be required where more than one unit is served by a single
service line.
8. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping
plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or
easements to be dedicated to the district.
9. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office can
develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the
district.
P295
VI.A.
802 West Main Planning Memo 01 - DRC Responses.docx
September 25, 2017
Page | 8
10. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve
capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional
proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment
capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all
development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed.
11. Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned
capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be
assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be
overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of
concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line).
The proposed project is in compliance or will comply with each of the above eleven (11)
comments/requirements and will be demonstrated at the point of building permit submittal
and review.
12. The glycol heating and snowmelt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to
any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have
approved containment facilities.
Currently, there is no glycol snowmelt system associated with the proposed project. If at any
point such a system is contemplated, this requirement will be accommodated at the point
building permit submittal and review.
13. The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once
detailed building and utility plans are available.
Understood and the Project Team will coordinate with ACSD prior to building permit
submittal.
P296
VI.A.
Updated Section III.D.5, Floor Area Calculations, of the 802 West Main
Street Land Use Application Submitted on July 27, 2017.
5. Floor Area Calculations
The following floor area calculations for the Proposed Project are based
on the current architectural floor plans provided in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C.
The floor area diagrams in this Exhibit for determining floor area ratio (FAR)
and net livable area (NLA) are based on the measurement methodologies
provided in Sections 26.575.020.D and 26.575.020.I of the Code respectively.
The FAR calculations will be used to establish the maximum residential floor
area allowed under the proposed Planned Development. The NLA calculations
are provided to establish a basis for the amount of non-mitigation affordable
housing full time equivalents (FTEs) that will be created out of the Proposed
Project. As the project is at a conceptual design level for the purposes of land
use reviews, this application is requesting that a ten percent (10%) increase be
allowed and memorialized as the maximum limit for both FAR and NLA floor
area. The request is made due to the conceptual level of the current design and
the fact that any final and detailed determinations of floor area applicable to
FAR calculations have yet to be determined beyond a conceptual level. It
should be noted that the 110% request for floor area would still render those
amounts significantly below the allowed FAR for the Property under the
AH/PD zoning standards.
As described above, a summary of the total building floor area
calculations broken out across the three (3) levels of the Proposed Project,
pursuant to the definition of floor area in Section 26.104.100 of the Code, are
as follows:
¥ Lower Level (subgrade) Building Floor Area: 1,328 sq. ft.
¥ Main Level Building Floor Area: 3,663 sq. ft.
¥ Upper Level Building Floor Area: 3,658 sq. ft.
¥ Total Building Floor Area: 8,649 sq. ft.
P297
VI.A.
Updated Section III.D.5, Floor Area Calculations, of the 802 West Main
Street Land Use Application Submitted on July 27, 2017.
These calculations are measured from the outside of any exterior wall of the
building and contain all floor area within each of the three (3) levels. As
described above, this application is requesting an approval for a floor area
amount ten percent (10%) above this current conceptual level calculation.
Although not specifically a standard under the proposed AH/PD, the relative
building floor area of the Proposed Project would not exceed 9,514 sq. ft.
The total allowable floor area is guided by the prescribed FAR of 1.1:1
under the AH/PD zone district standards. With a gross/net site area of 9,000
sq. ft., the respective allowable floor area for the Property is 9,900 sq. ft. The
following floor area summary is broken out by building use and takes into
account the methodology for calculating the Project’s applicable allowable
floor area pursuant Section 26.575.020.D of the Code:
¥ Affordable Housing Unit Floor Area: 7,321 sq. ft.
¥ Storage Floor Area: 231 sq. ft.
¥ Mechanical Floor Area: 99 sq. ft.
¥ Decks, Breezeways, Exterior Stairways & Porches: 754 sq. ft.
¥ Total Floor Area Applicable to FAR: 8,404 sq. ft.
As described above, this application is requesting an approval for an allowable
floor area that is ten percent (10%) above this current conceptual level
calculation. It is therefore requested that the allowable floor area of the
Proposed Project’s AH/PD be limited to 9,245 sq. ft. or a FAR of 1.03:1. The
following Table 01 provides a detailed calculation summary of the respective
building floor area and allowable FAR floor area calculations for the Proposed
Project.
P298
VI.A.
Updated Section III.D.5, Floor Area Calculations, of the 802 West Main
Street Land Use Application Submitted on July 27, 2017.
Table 01. Proposed Floor Area Calculations
Proposed Zoning: AH/PD
Property Zoning & Existing Conditions Total Area (sq. ft.)
Site Area 9,000
Allowable Overall FAR (1.1:1)9,900
Percentage of exposed Lower Level Area 24.8%
15% of FAR floor area for decks, balconies, exterior stairs & porches 1,485
Building Levels Building Use Sq. Feet
Basement (Lower Level)AH Residential 0
Storage 930
Mechanical 398
Decks, Breezeway, Exterior Stairways and Porches 129
Lower Level Building Floor Area 1,328
Level # 1 Floor Area including exterior elements 1,457
Level #1 (Main Level)AH Residential 3,663
Storage 0
Mechanical 0
Decks, Breezeway, Exterior Stairways and Porches 961
Level # 1 Building Floor Area 3,663
Level # 1 Floor Area including exterior elements 4,625
Level # 2 (Upper Level)AH Residential 3,658
Storage 0
Mechanical 0
Decks, Breezeway, Exterior Stairways and Porches 1,148
Level # 2 Building Floor Area 3,658
Level # 1 Floor Area including exterior elements 4,806
Total Building Floor Area 8,649
Total Decks, Breezeways, Exterior Stairways and Porches 2,239
Total Floor Area 10,888
Building Floor Area Summary*Use Floor Area
(sq. ft.)
Percentage of
Total
Affordable Housing Residential Floor Area 7,321 85%
Storage Floor Area 930 11%
Mechanical Floor Area 398 5%
Total Building Floor Area 8,649 100%
Total Gross Floor Area + 10%9,514 110%
*does not adjust for partial subgrade FAR reduction or 15% for exterior areas
Applicable Allowable Floor Area Summary for FAR Use Floor Area
(sq. ft.)
Percentage of
Total
Affordable Housing Residential Floor Area**7,321 87%
Storage Floor Area**231 3%
Mechanical Floor Area**99 1%
Total Allowable Floor Area for FAR 7,651 91%
Applicable Decks, Balconies, Exterior Stairways and Porches***754 9%
Total Allowable Floor Area for FAR 8,404 100%
Total FAR Floor Area + 10%9,245 110%
**includes reduction of each respective Level #1 floor areas based on % of subgrade condition
***the total floor area for these elements exceeds 15% of allowable FAR and therefore that portion applies to total allowable floor area
P299
VI.A.
Updated Section III.D.5, Floor Area Calculations, of the 802 West Main
Street Land Use Application Submitted on July 27, 2017.
The Net Livable Area for the Proposed Project is based on the
methodology for calculating NLA pursuant to Section 26.575.020.I of the
Code. The following summary provides the NLA for each of the three (3)
levels of the Proposed Project:
¥ Lower Level (subgrade) Net Livable Area: 0 sq. ft.
¥ Main Level Net Livable Area: 3,375 sq. ft.
¥ Upper Level Net Livable Area: 3,375 sq. ft.
¥ Total Net Livable Area: 6,750 sq. ft.
As described above, this application is requesting an approval for a net livable
floor area that is ten percent (10%) above this current conceptual level
calculation. It is therefore requested that the allowable floor area of the
Proposed Project’s AH/PD be limited to 7,425 sq. ft.
For determining the total FTE count that this project would have the
ability to offset for any applicable new development, the conversion factor of
400 sq. ft. per FTE is used:
At Current Conceptual Level: 6,750 sq. ft. / 400 sq. ft. = 16.9 FTEs
With 10% Increase: 7,425 sq. ft. / 400 sq. ft. = 18.6 FTEs
P300
VI.A.
Updated Table 03. 802 West Main Street – Rezoning Comparison and
Proposed AH/PD Development Standards
Table 03. 802 West Main Street - Rezoning Comparison and Proposed AH/PD Development Standards
Underlying Zoning: Similar Use Zoning: Proposed Rezoning:
R-15 RMF AH/PD
#AH/PD Zoning Dimensional
Requirements Standard/Dimension Standard/Dimension Standard/Dimension
1 Minimum Gross Lot Area (sq. ft.)15,000 6,000 9,000
2 Minimum Net Lot Area per Unit (sq.ft.)n/a n/a 900
3 Maximum Allowable Density (# of units)2 n/a 10
4 Maximum Density (units per acre)n/a n/a 48.4
5 Minimum Lot Width 75 feet 60 feet 75 feet
6 Minimum Front Yard Setback *25 feet 5 feet 2.5 feet
7 Minimum East Side Yard Setback *10 feet 5 feet 2.5 feet
8 Minimum West Side Yard Setback *10 feet 5 feet 3.5 feet
9 Minimum Rear Yard Setback *10 feet 5 feet 10 feet
10 Maximum Site Coverage n/a n/a 47%
11 Maximum Height 25 feet 32 feet 28 feet
12 Public Amenity Space n/a n/a n/a
13 Minimum Distance between Buildings 10'n/a n/a
14 Minimum Percent Open Space n/a n/a 50%
15 Minimum Trash Access Area (sq. ft.)n/a n/a 150
16 Total Building Floor Area n/a n/a 9,514
17 Total Deck and Breezeway Area n/a n/a 2,462
18 Allowable Floor Area (FAR) sq. ft. **4,500 11,250 9,900
19 Proposed Floor Area (FAR) sq. ft. ***n/a n/a 9,245
20 Proposed Maximum FAR 0.50 1.25 1.03
21 Proposed Net Livable Area sq. ft.n/a n/a 7,425
22 Minimum on-street parking stalls 2 10 10
23 Maximum Unit Size sq. ft.FAR dependent 2,500 770
* Yard setbacks establish building setback only. Any projections such as decks and balconies can encroach within the setback
** Based on standared in 26.710.110.D
*** includes applicable amount of deck and breezeway area over 15% of allowable Floor Area Ratio
P301
VI.A.
Method Planning + Development
Memorandum
119 South Spring Street, #102 | Aspen Colorado 81611
(p) 970.274.0890 | (e) adam@methodpd.com
Planning – 02
September 27, 2017
Adam Roy
Justin Barker
Chris Everson
Jason Bradshaw
802 West Main Street Affordable Housing – Updated AH/PD Plan Set
Dear Justin:
The purpose of this Memo is to provide updates to the AH/PD Plan Set per the meetings and discussion
with zoning as well as in response to DRC comments. Attached is the full PD Plan Set with specific
updates as follows:
• Disclaimer and secondary stair added to the Illustrative Site Plan, sheet L2.00 of Exhibit 2-C
• Updated Architectural Plan Set, Exhibit 4-C, including:
o Grid Lines to all plan sheets 3.0 to 3.2
o Updated height call-outs on the roof plan, sheet 3.1
o Revised floor area calculations and call-outs on sheet 3.2
o Addition of grid lines and updated height measurement detail and dimensions on the
elevation sheets, 4.1 and 4.2.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
NO.
DATE:
BY:
TO:
CC:
SUBJECT:
P302
VI.A.
OWNER
CITY OF ASPEN
City Hall
130 S. Galena St
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.920.5000
APPLICANT
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
Jason Bradshaw
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970-319-9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
ARCHITECT
David Johnston Architects
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.3444
F: 970.920.2186
brian@djarchitects.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Connect One Design
0123 Emma Rd.
Suite 200A
Basalt, CO 81621
P. 970.279.1030
hh@connectonedesign.com
PLANNER
Method Planning + Development
119 South Spring St. Suite 102
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.274.0890
adam@methodpd.com
CIVIL ENGINEER
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
P: 970.340.4130
F: 866.876.5873
richardg@rfeng.biz
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
McDowell Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
P: 970.623.0788
kari@mcdowelleng.com
GENERAL
1.1 TITLE SHEET
1.2 SURVEY
LANDSCAPE
L.1 LANDSCAPE PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL
2.1 1”=10’ SITE PLAN
3.1 ¼” LOWER LEVEL PLAN
3.2 ¼” MAIN LEVEL PLAN
3.3 ¼” UPPER LEVEL PLAN
3.4 ¼” ROOF PLAN
3.5 ¼” LOWER AND MAIN LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.6 ¼” UPPER AND ROOF LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.7 ¼” MAIN LEVEL RCP
3.8 ¼” LOWER & UPPER LEVEL RCP
4.1 NORTH ELEVATIONS
4.2 SOUTH ELEVATIONS
4.3 EAST ELEVATIONS
4.4 WEST ELEVATIONS
5.1 ¼” SECTIONS ‘A’ & ‘B’
5.2 ¼” SECTION ‘C’
5.3 ¼” SECTIONS ‘D’ & ‘E’
5.4 ¼” SECTIONS ‘F’ & ‘G’
5.5 ¼” SECTIONS ‘H’ & ‘I’
5.6 ¼” SECTION ‘J’
6.1 ½” WINDOW DETAILS
6.2 ½” FIREPLACE SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.3 ½” STAIR SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.4 ½” KICKER DETAILS
7.1 FLOOR ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.2 WALL ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.3 ROOF ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.4 WINDOW DETAILS
7.5 DOOR DETAILS
10.1 WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULES
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DRAFT PLAT
IMPROVEMENT SURVEY
DRAFT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SURVEY PLAT
SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE PLAN SET
L.1.00 – DEMOLITION, VEGETATION AND TREE
REMOVAL PLAN
L.2.00 – ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN
L.3.00 – LANDSCAPE PERSPECTIVE STUDIES
L.4.00 – PLANTING AND RESTORATION PLAN
L.5.00 – MOBILITY/MULTIMODAL DIAGRAM
L.6.00 – MOBILITY PEDESTRIAN ACCESS DIAGRAM
L.7.00 – EXTERIOR LIGHT PLAN
ENGINEERING PLAN SET
C-001 – NOTES AND LEGEND
C-101 – EXISTING CONDITIONS
C-102 – SITE LAYOUT
C-103 – DRAINAGE BASINS
C-104 – GRADING AND DRAINAGE
C-105 – UTILITY PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SET
3.0 – FLOOR PLANS
3.1 - ROOF PLANS
3.2 – F.A.R. PLANS
3.3 – NET LIVABLE PLANS
4.1 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.2 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.3 – 3D VIEWS
PROJECT INFORMATION
LOCATION .......................................................................................................... 802 WEST MAIN ASPEN, CO 81611
LOT SIZE ............................................................................................................................................................... 9,000 S.F.
PARCEL ID# .............................................................................................................................................273512308005
SUBDIVISION: ............................................................................................................................................................. N/A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ................................ LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PROJECT INFORMATION
DRAWING INDEX
PROJECT DIRECTORY
802 WEST MAIN - AH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AH/PD PRELIMINARY PLAN SETVICINITY MAP
7.26.2017WEST MAIN STREET PERSPECTIVEP303
VI.A.
P304VI.A.
S75°09'11"E90.00'S14°50'49"
W
100.00'
N14°50'49"E 100.00'N75°09'11"W90.00'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDYH#5 REBAR & ALUM.CAP L.S. #ILLEGIBLEGRAVELPARKING#5 REBARTBM EL=7928.50'WEST MAIN STREET100' R-O-WASPHALTNORTH 7T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
75' R-O-W
ASPHALT ALLEY20.39' R-O-WASPHALT#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #29030ADJOINER BUILDINGCONCRETESIDEWALKCONCRETE CURB & GUTTERCONCRET
E
C
U
R
B
&
G
U
T
T
E
R
CONCRE
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
CONCRE
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
KRFTA BUSSTOPFENCE(TYP.)LOT Q, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT S, BL
O
C
K
1
2
COA GPS#8N. GARMISCH& E. DURANTCOA GPS#3 S. GARMISCH& W. FRANCIS ST.N 88°39'14" E5023.12'N 67°05'26" W4869.09'FIREHYD.BAVARIAN INN CONDO ASSOC.834 W. MAIN STREET
2.5'2.5'BUILDING ENVELOPEBUILDING ENVELOPE
BUILDING ENVELOPEBUILDING
E
N
V
E
L
O
P
ELOT 19,000 S.F.±10'3.5'NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Since 2007160911 OF 1CITY OF ASPENCITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO802 WEST MAIN STREET P.D.LOTS Q, R & S, BLOCK 12, COA802 WEST MAIN STREETJRNJRNJULY 19, 2017091.DWGNESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e ak Surveying, Inc.0101020405NOTES:1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN INTHE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY STEWART TITLE COMPANY, FILE NO. 01330-90874DATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 28, 2016.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS DECEMBER 07, 08 AND 12, 2016.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S75°09'11"E BETWEEN THESOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT Q, BLOCK 12, A #5 REBAR FOUND IN PLACE AND THESOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT S, BLOCK 12, A #5 REBAR & ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #ILLEGIBLEFOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN MAP AND THE WARRANTYDEED RECORDED AUGUST 15, 2007 AS RECEPTION NO. 541023 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERKAND RECORDER'S OFFICE AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE.6) ACCORDING TO FEMA PANEL 08097C0203C DATED JUNE 4, 1987 THE SUBJECT PROPERTYEXISTS WITHIN ZONE X OUTSIDE OF A 100 OR 500 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.7) ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.8) WETLAND BOUNDARY DELINEATION WAS NOT PROVIDED AND NO VISIBLE MARKS WERELOCATED AT THE TIME OF SURVEY.NORTH
VICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'SUBJECTPROPERTYFINAL PLAT802 WEST MAIN STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENTLOT'S Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPENCITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO802 MAIN STREET - PARCEL NO. 2735-123-08-005CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE:THIS FINAL PLAT WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDEROF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, AT ___________ O'CLOCK ____.M., ON THE _________ DAYOF _______________, 2017, AND IS DULY RECORDED IN BOOK ___________, PAGE___________, AS RECEPTION NO. __________________.BY:________________________________ CLERK AND RECORDERBY: ____________________________ DEPUTYCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL:THE APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FORCOMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USECODE BY THE CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR THIS ________ DAYOF __________________, 2017, TO THE EXTENT THAT ANYTHING IN THIS PLAT ISINCONSISTENT OR IN CONFLICT WITH ANY CITY OF ASPEN DEVELOPMENT ORDERS ORANY OTHER PROVISIONS OF APPLICABLE LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OTHERAPPLICABLE LAND USE REGULATIONS AND BUILDING CODES, SUCH OTHERDEVELOPMENT ORDERS OR APPLICABLE LAWS SHALL CONTROL.BY: ______________________________ JESSICA GARROWAS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORCITY OF ASPEN ENGINEER'S REVIEW:THIS PLAT WAS REVIEWED FOR THE DEPICTION OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SURVEYREQUIREMENTS. THIS ________ DAY OF __________________, 2017.BY:________________________________________________ TRICIA ARAGON, P.E.AS: CITY OF ASPEN ENGINEERCERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP:KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT THE CITY OF ASPEN, BEING THE SOLE OWNERIN FEE SIMPLE OF ALL OF THAT REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND BEING MOREPARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:LOT'S Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OFPITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, CONTAINING 9,000 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.HAS BY THESE PRESENTS LAID OUT, PLATTED AND DESCRIBED THE SAME AS SHOWNHEREON.CITY OF ASPENCOUNTY OF PITKINSTATE OF COLORADO.EXECUTED THIS ____________ DAY OF __________, A.D., 2017.OWNER: CITY OF ASPEN.BY: ___________________________________________, NAME:_____________________________________ TITLE:_____________________________________STATE OF ___________ ) )SS.COUNTY OF _________ )THE FOREGOING OWNER'S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ______DAY OF __________, 2017 BY ___________________________ AS_____________________________OF CITY OF ASPEN, AS _____________ OF THE CITY OFASPEN.WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: ___________________________________________________________NOTARY PUBLICTITLE EXAMINER'S CERTIFICATE:I, _____________________________, AS TITLE EXAMINER FOR STEWART TITLE COMPANY, DOCERTIFY THAT ON OR BEFORE _____________________, I HAVE CAUSED AN EXAMINATION TOBE MADE OF TITLE TO LOT 1, 802 WEST MAIN STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ANDEXCEPT FOR____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________SAID PROPERTY IS FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL OTHER MONETARY LIENS ANDENCUMBRANCES.DATED: _______________________________BY:____________________________________ ____________________, TITLE EXAMINER STEWART TITLE COMPANYREVIEWSURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE:I, JASON R. NEIL, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, THAT THIS PLAT IS A TRUE, CORRECT ANDCOMPLETE PLAT OF LOT 1, 802 WEST MAIN STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, CITY OF ASPEN,COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, AS LAID OUT, PLATTED, DEDICATED AND SHOWNHEREON, THAT SUCH PLAT WAS MADE FROM AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF SAID PROPERTY BYME, OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION, AND CORRECTLY SHOWS THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONSOF THE LOTS, EASEMENTS AND STREETS AS THE SAME ARE STAKED UPON THE GROUND INCOMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE SET MY HAND AND SEAL THIS _____DAY OF ________________A.D., 2017.BY: ________________________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935 FOR AND ON BEHALF OF PEAK SURVEYING, INC.P305VI.A.
LANDSCAPECOVERL.COVER802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017context map802 west main streetaspen, colorado 81611AspenNORTHsheet indexsheet numbersheet nameL.COVERcoverdemo, vegetation + tree removal plansite planperspective sketchesplanting planmultimodal diagrampedestrian directness diagramL.1.00L.2.00L.3.00L.4.00L.5.00L.6.00lighting planL.7.00802 West Main Street Site and Landscape Plan SetP306VI.A.
24.0'10.5'36.3'17.4'2.5'5.0'2.5'6.0'35.6'12.6'12.7'8.0'12.0'22.5'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGG
GGG
G
GGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE
T
TTT
TTT
T
TT
TTTTT
TT
T
TT
TTT
TTTTTTT
TT
T
T
TTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTT
TTT
TTT
TTTTTTT
TTT
T
T
TTT
TTT
TTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTT
TTT
TTTT
T
TT
TTT
TT
TTTT
TTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 792779267926792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927 T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20DEMOLITION,VEGETATION +TREE REMOVALPLANL.1.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'NORTH802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017NO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHLEGENDEVERGREEN TREE TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING EVERGREEN TREEEXISTING DECIDUOUS TREETREE MITIGATION SCHEDULEVALUEACTIONSPEC 'DBH'#132418"18"REMOVENA18"PRESERVENA15"REMOVE$7,422.00PRESERVEEGDECDECDEC76589101213141716181910"10"TRANS/REMOVEPRESERVE$3299.00NAREMOVEBELOW MIT VALUEPRESERVENOT ON PROPERTYREMOVEBELOW MIT VALUEPRESERVENAREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVE4"REMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHREMOVE$1188.00REMOVEBELOW MIT VALUE6"REMOVE$1188.002 DECDECDECDEC4 DECDECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVEDTRANSPLANT$1188.00DECREMOVENO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHDECEGDECDECDECDECDECDEC15205"16"18"4"10"10"10"4"4"6"6"2 DECNO VALUE/ POOR HEALTHTOTAL VALUE $14,285.00PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE TREE PROTECTIVE FENCE, TYP.TREE PROTECTIVE FENCE, TYP.10' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK3.5' SETBACK P307VI.A.
P308VI.A.
LANDSCAPEPERSPECTIVESKETCHESL.3.00802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017View OneView from sidewalk looking south at the ground level units facing Highway 82View TwoView from the intersection of west main street and n 7th street looking toward the bike racks andthe main entrance to the stairsView ThreeView from the parking spaces along west main and toward mainentranceView FourView from the sidewalk looking north along highway 82/ n 7th streetP309VI.A.
792779267926792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927
UP STREET TREES Populus angustifolia / Narrowleaf Poplar SCREEN TREES Populus tremuloides erecta / Swedish Aspen LAWN TREES Ginkgo biloba `Princeton Sentry` / Princeton Sentry Ginkgo CLIMATE-ADAPTED PERRENIAL MIX - VEGETABLE GARDEN - SOD -CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULEPLANTING ANDRESTORATION PLANL.4.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017PROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE
2.5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE2.5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE
3.5' SETBACKNORTH P310VI.A.
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGG
GGGGGG
GGG
GGGG
GGG
GGGGGG
GGGGGGG
GGG
GGG
GGG
GGGGGGG
GGG
G
GG
GGG
GGGGGGG
GGG
G792779267926792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
7929
7928
7928
7927
UP
802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017MULTIMODALDIAGRAML.5.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'enhanced pedestrian access pointsenhanced pedestrian accesspointbike parking (10 spaces)curb equal to or less than 6"effective walkway width 6'6' walkway widthless than5% slope onsidewalkand bufferless than5% slope onsidewalkand bufferADA ramp (typ.)raised pedestrian crossing; connectivity tofuture City of Aspen multimodal trailtransit system informationand community board in centralbuilding coreproposed bench atexisting bus stopexisting curb cut(driveway closure) removedfrom propertyless than 2%cross slope onsidewalk5' buffer6" vertical curbPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE12345
67891010' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK3.5' SETBACK
10 designated parking spacesNORTHP311VI.A.
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGG
GGG
G
GGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG792779267926 792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927
UP
PEDESTRIANDIRECTNESSDIAGRAML.6.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017crow flies distance 65'walking distance 91' (1.4 DF)c
r
ow
f
l
i
e
s
d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
4
9
'walking distance 69' (1.4 DF)PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
10' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK2.5' SETBACK3.5' SETBACKNORTH P312VI.A.
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGG
GGG
G
GGGGGGGGGGGG
GGG
GGGGGGGGGGGGG792779267926 792679257926792779
2
87929
79297
9
2
9
792
9
7928
7928
7927
UP
EXTERIOR LIGHTINGPLANL.7.000'08'16'SCALE: 1"=8'802 MAIN STREETISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 07/26/17Project #:274Drawn By: KTChecked By: HHPD SITE PLANASPEN COLORADO 81611 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E · L A N D P L A N N I N G
123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 07/26/2017LEGENDWAC 'GATE' LED BOLLARD PATH LIGHT;115 LUMENS AT 24" ABOVE GRADEWAC 'INVISILED PRO OUTDOOR' 24VOUTDOOR LED TAPE LIGHT;12 LEDS PER FOOT AT 18" ABOVE GRADE,W/IN RECESSED CHANNELPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINENORTH P313VI.A.
P314VI.A.
P315VI.A.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDYHGRASSSINGLE STORYWOOD FRAME HOUSE812 W. MAIN STREETSTONE PATIOBOULDER(TYP.)#5 REBAR & ALUM.CAP L.S. #ILLEGIBLECONCRETEDRIVEWAYGRAVELPARKING#5 REBARTBM EL=7928.50'FLAGSTONE WALKCONCRETEPADBRICKPLANTERWEST MAIN STREET100' R-O-WASPHALTNORTH 7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
75' R-O-W
ASPHALT ALLEY20.39' R-O-WASPHALTCONCRETE PANSTORMDRAINVEGETATION AND BRUSH#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #29030ADJOINER BUILDINGADJOINE
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
GSTORM DRAIN(TYP.)FLOWLI
N
ECONCRETESIDEWALKCONCRETE CURB & GUTTERCONCRET
E
C
U
R
B
&
G
U
T
T
E
R
CONCRE
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
CONCR
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
KRFTA BUSSTOPSTREETLIGHTTIE RET.
W
A
L
L
(
T
Y
P
.
)TIE RET. WALL (TYP.)SIGNFENCE (TYP.)FENCE(TYP.)FENCE(TYP.)STORM DRAIN(TYP.)LOT Q, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT R, BL
O
C
K
1
2
LOT S, BL
O
C
K
1
2EGOSWWATERSERVICEWATERLINE(TYP.)ELEC.METERGASMETERGASLINEELECTRICLINETELEPHONELINE7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
7927 TELE.PED.CABLE TVPED.VEGETATION AND BRUSHRIDGEEL=7940.3'FFEL=7930.1'FFEL=7928.4'T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20COA GPS#8N. GARMISCH& E. DURANTCOA GPS#3 S. GARMISCH& W. FRANCIS ST.N 88°39'14" E5023.12'N 67°05'26" W4869.09'FIREHYD.BAVARIA
N
I
N
N
C
O
N
D
O
A
S
S
O
C
.
834 W. M
A
I
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
SEWER LINE79307930793079317929 STREETLIGHTSTREETCONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE CURB & GUTTERXXXFENCEP316VI.A.
7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
79277930793079317929P317
VI.A.
XXXXX7
9
2
7 7926792679267925792679277
9
2
879297929
792979297928
7928
792779307930793079317929XP318
VI.A.
7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
7927 S7930793079317929 P319VI.A.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDYHOSW7
9
2
7 792679267926792579267927792879297929792979297928
7928
7927 S79307930793079317929 XXXP320VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
1.0
ARCH COVER SHEET
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
GENERAL 1.1 TITLE SHEET 1.2 SURVEY LANDSCAPE L.1 LANDSCAPE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL
2.1 1”=10’ SITE PLAN
3.1 ¼” LOWER LEVEL PLAN
3.2 ¼” MAIN LEVEL PLAN
3.3 ¼” UPPER LEVEL PLAN
3.4 ¼” ROOF PLAN
3.5 ¼” LOWER AND MAIN LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.6 ¼” UPPER AND ROOF LEVEL MATCH PLANS
3.7 ¼” MAIN LEVEL RCP
3.8 ¼” LOWER & UPPER LEVEL RCP
4.1 NORTH ELEVATIONS
4.2 SOUTH ELEVATIONS
4.3 EAST ELEVATIONS
4.4 WEST ELEVATIONS
5.1 ¼” SECTIONS ‘A’ & ‘B’
5.2 ¼” SECTION ‘C’
5.3 ¼” SECTIONS ‘D’ & ‘E’
5.4 ¼” SECTIONS ‘F’ & ‘G’
5.5 ¼” SECTIONS ‘H’ & ‘I’
5.6 ¼” SECTION ‘J’
6.1 ½” WINDOW DETAILS
6.2 ½” FIREPLACE SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.3 ½” STAIR SECTIONS & DETAILS
6.4 ½” KICKER DETAILS
7.1 FLOOR ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.2 WALL ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.3 ROOF ASSEMBLIES & DETAILS
7.4 WINDOW DETAILS
7.5 DOOR DETAILS
10.1 WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULES
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DRAFT PLAT IMPROVEMENT SURVEY DRAFT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SURVEY PLAT SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE PLAN SET L.1.00 – DEMOLITION, VEGETATION AND TREE REMOVAL PLAN
L.2.00 – ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN
L.3.00 – LANDSCAPE PERSPECTIVE STUDIES
L.4.00 – PLANTING AND RESTORATION PLAN
L.5.00 – MOBILITY/MULTIMODAL DIAGRAM
L.6.00 – MOBILITY PEDESTRIAN ACCESS DIAGRAM
L.7.00 – EXTERIOR LIGHT PLAN
ENGINEERING PLAN SET
C-001 – NOTES AND LEGEND
C-101 – EXISTING CONDITIONS
C-102 – SITE LAYOUT
C-103 – DRAINAGE BASINS
C-104 – GRADING AND DRAINAGE
C-105 – UTILITY PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SET
3.0 – FLOOR PLANS
3.1 - ROOF PLANS
3.2 – F.A.R. PLANS
3.3 – NET LIVABLE PLANS
4.1 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.2 – EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4.3 – 3D VIEWS
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
1. The Contract Documents shall consist of the general notes and the architectural, mechanical, and structural drawings. All future
additional specifications, details, drawings, clarifications, or changes shall, in turn, become part of these documents. Work indicated
or reasonably implied in any one of the documents shall be supplied as though fully covered in all. Any discrepancy between any
parts of the drawings shall be reported to the Architect immediately for clarification.
2. David Johnston Architects, PC., waves any and all liability for problems which arise from failure to follow the design intent of the
plans. Contractor to obtain and/or request guidance of David Johnston Architects, PC., with respect to any errors, omissions,
inconsistencies, or conflicts which may be discovered or alleged.
3. The Plans and Specifications are the property of the Architect and are not to be used without the permission of same.
4. All work shall comply with all state and local codes, ordinances, rules, regulations and laws of building officials or authorities having
jurisdiction. All work shall be performed to the highest standards or craftsmanship by journeymen of the appropriate trades.
5. The Contract Documents represent the finished structure. They do not indicate the method of construction. The Contractor shall
provide all measures necessary to protect the structure during construction. Observation visits to the site by the Structural Engineer
or Architect shall not include inspection of the above items nor will the architect or structural engineer be responsible for the
contractor's means, methods, techniques, sequences for procedure of construction, or the safety precautions and the techniques,
sequences for procedure of construction, or the safety precautions and the programs incident thereto. The Contractor shall be
responsible for all Federal and OSHA regulations.
6. THE DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE SCALED. Written dimensions are to be used. If there is a discrepancy in dimensions, the Architect
should be notified for clarification. All dimensions on the drawings shall be verified against the existing conditions. All dimensions
are to rough framing or face of concrete unless noted otherwise.
7. These documents are intended to include all labor, materials, equipment, and services required to complete all work described herein.
It is the responsibility of the Contractor to bring to the attention of the Architect any conditions which will not permit construction
according to the intentions of these documents.
8. The Building Inspector shall be notified by the Contractor when there is need of an inspection as required by the I.R.C., or by any local
code or ordinance.
9. LOT STAKED: The Contractor shall arrange for the building to be located and staked after demolition or site clearing, to be approved
by the Architect. The Contractor shall review the lot staking and verify, to the best of his ability, its accuracy. The Contractor shall
also check the grade where it meets the building to evaluate the consistency with the drawings during excavation. Work to be done
by a certified surveyor.
10. RECORD DRAWINGS: Contractor to maintain a complete set of blue/black-line prints of contract drawings and shop drawings for
record mark-up purposes throughout the Contract time. Mark-up drawings during course of the work to show changes and actual
installation conditions, sufficient to form a complete record for Owner's purposes. Give particular attention to work which will be
concealed and difficult to measure and record at a later date, and work which may require servicing or replacement during life of
project. Require entities marking prints, to sign and date each mark-up. Bind prints into manageable sets, with durable paper cover,
appropriately labeled.
11. SOILS AND CONCRETE: The General Contractor shall arrange for a visual site inspection at the completion of excavation by a soils
engineer, and the required concrete testing prior to any foundation work.
12. Property lines, utilities and topography shown is representative of information taken from a survey. Notify Architect of any
discrepancy or variation between the Drawings and actual site conditions.
ABREVIATIONS
A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
ADJ. ADJUSTABLE
ALT. ALTERNATE
A.B. ANCHOR BOLTS
& AND
ARCH. ARCHITECTURAL
@ AT
BM. BEAM
BM. PKT. BEAM POCKET
BRG. BEARING
BLK’G. BLOCKING
BOT. BOTTOM
B.F. BOTTOM OF FOOTING
BLDG. BUILDING
B.O. BY OWNER
CAB. CABINET
CLG. CEILING
CL. CENTER LINE
C.T. CERAMIC TILE
CLR. CLEAR
COL. COLUMN
CONC. CONCRETE
CONN. CONNECTION
CONT. CONTINUOUS
DTL. DETAILS
DBL. DOUBLE
DWL. DOWEL
E.W. EACH WAY
ELEV. ELEVATION
EXIST’G EXISTING
EXT. EXTERIOR
FLR. FLOOR
FTG. FOOTING
FND. FOUNDATION
GA. GAUGE
G.L. GLU-LAM
G.W.B. GYPSUM WALL BOARD
HT. HEIGHT
HK. HOOK
HORIZ. HORIZONTAL
INFO. INFORMATION
INSUL. INSULATION
JST. JOIST
L.L. LIVE LOAD
LONGINT. LONGITUDINAL
N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT
O.C. ON CENTER
OPP. OPPOSITE
O/ OVER
PTD. PAINTED
PERF. PERFORATED
PL. PLATE
PLY. PLYWOOD
PROP. LINE PROPERTY LINE
REINF. REINFORCEMENT
RDWD. REDWOOD
REQ’D. REQUIRED
RESIL. RESILENT
REV. REVISED
S.M. SHEET METAL
SIM. SIMILAR
S.F. SQUARE FEET
STD. STANDARD
STL. STEEL
STDS. STUDS
THK. THICK
TLT. TOILET
T.F. TOP OF FOOTING
T.P. TOP OF PLATE
T.L. TOP OF LEDGE
T.W. TOP OF WALL
TOT. TOTAL
T.B. TOWEL BAR
TRANSV. TRANSVERSE
TYP. TYPICAL
U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED UTHERWISE
V.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELD
OWNER
CITY OF ASPEN
City Hall
130 S. Galena St
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.920.5000
APPLICANT
Aspen Housing Partners, LLC
Jason Bradshaw
228 Eastwood Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970-319-9298
jebradshaw@mac.com
ARCHITECT
David Johnston Architects
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.3444
F: 970.920.2186
brian@djarchitects.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Connect One Design
0123 Emma Rd.
Suite 200A
Basalt, CO 81621
P. 970.279.1030
hh@connectonedesign.com
PLANNER
Method Planning + Development
119 South Spring St. Suite 102
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.274.0890
adam@methodpd.com
CIVIL ENGINEER
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
P: 970.340.4130
F: 866.876.5873
richardg@rfeng.biz
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
McDowell Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
P: 970.623.0788
kari@mcdowelleng.com
033
LBB
5.1
A
REFERENCE GRID LINE
SPOT ELEVATION
WINDOW MARK
DOOR MARK
ROOM NUMBER
DRAWING REVISION
ASSEMBLY DETAIL CUT
SECTION CUT
EXTERIOR ELEVATION
DETAIL CALLOUT
SECTION DETAIL CALLOUT
INTERIOR ELEVATION
ROOM
100
F11
1
T. O. RIDGE BEAM
123'-6 1/2"
4.4
1
1
7.1
1
7.1
8.1
1
2
3
4
SYMBOL LEGEND
MATERIAL LEGEND
GYPSUM WALL
BOARD
RAW FRAMING
WOOD BLOCKING
ROCK - NON
COMPACTED FILL
CONCRETE
STONE
FRAME WALL
BRICK
PLYWOOD
BATT INSULATION
FINISHED WOOD
RIGID INSULATION
8
PROJECT INFORMATION
LOCATION .......................................................................................................... 802 WEST MAIN ASPEN, CO 81611
LOT SIZE ............................................................................................................................................................... 9,000 S.F.
PARCEL ID# .............................................................................................................................................273512308005
SUBDIVISION: ............................................................................................................................................................. N/A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ................................ LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
802 WEST MAIN - AH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AH/PD PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SETDRAWING INDEX
PROJECT DIRECTORY
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
ABBREVIATIONS
PROJECT INFORMATION
VICINITY MAP
WEST MAIN STREET PERSPECTIVE
P321VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.0
FLOOR PLANS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
9/26/2017
SHEET No.
UPRGDW
RG
DW
RGDW
RG
DWRG DWUP
1
1
2
2
4
4
6
6
5
5
7
7
9
9
11
11
10
10
8
8
3
3
LIFT
W
WW WWDR
DRDR DRDRREF
REF
REF REFREFA A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
1A2.03
2A2.04
2A2.03
1A2.04
UP1
1
2
2
4
4
6
6
5
5
7
7
9
9
11
11
10
10
8
8
3
3
LIFT
A A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
1A2.03
2A2.04
2A2.03
1A2.04
DN
UP
1 2 4 65 7 9 111083RGDW
RG
DW
RGDW
RG
DWRG DWW
WW WWDR
DRDR DRDRA A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
1A2.03
2A2.041A2.04
REF
REF
REF REFREFSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
BASEMENT/ FOUNDATIONS
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL PLANP322 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.1
ROOF PLAN
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
9/26/2017
SHEET No.
1
1
2
2
4
4
6
6
5
5
7
7
9
9
11
11
10
10
8
8
3
3
123'-0"
127'-4"127'-4"
127'-217/32"
127'-217/32"
127'-217/32"127'-217/32"
125'-817/32"
125'-817/32"
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL
FUTURE PV PANELS
A A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
1A2.03
2A2.04
2A2.03
1A2.04
125'-817/32"125'-817/32"7.1:121/3 SLOPE LINE
AREA BEYOND15' OFFSET 12:127.1:1212:127.1:12 12:12
7.1:12 12:12
7.1:1212:12
1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE1/3 SLOPE LINE
1/3 SLOPE LINE
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLANP323 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.2
F.A.R. PLANS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
9/26/2017
SHEET No.
FLOOR AREA - MAIN LEVEL
USE
AH UNIT
DECK
STAIR
AREA
3,663.43
815.54
132.02
4,610.99 sq ft
DN
UP
1
1
2
2
4
4
6
6
5
5
7
7
9
9
11
11
10
10
8
8
3
3
AH UNIT
672.54 sq ft
DECK
35.00 sq ft
DECK
35.00 sq ft
DECK
41.00 sq ft
DECK
41.00 sq ft
DECK
92.77 sq ft
DECK
903.38 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
AH UNIT
743.76 sq ft
AH UNIT
743.44 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
A A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
UP1
1
2
2
4
4
6
6
5
5
7
7
9
9
11
11
10
10
8
8
3
3
STORAGE
929.89 sq ftMECHANICAL
397.89 sq ft
STAIRS
115.60 sq ft
LIFT
13.61 sq ft
A A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
UP
UP
1 2 4 65 7 9 111083
AH UNIT
672.54 sq ft
STAIR
66.00 sq ft
DECK
815.54 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
AH UNIT
743.44 sq ft
AH UNIT
749.15 sq ft
A A
C C
F F
H H
G G
D D
E E
B B
STAIR
66.02 sq ft
FLOOR AREA - UPPER LEVEL
USE
AH UNIT
DECK
AREA
3,658.04
1,148.15
4,806.19 sq ft
FLOOR AREA - BASEMENT
USE
LIFT
MECHANICAL
STAIRS
STORAGE
AREA
13.61
397.89
115.60
929.89
1,456.99 sq ft
10,874.17 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
BASEMENT MECHANICAL & STORAGE FLOOR AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA
TOTAL FLOOR AREA
AREA OF EXPOSED SUBGRADE WALL=310 SF
AREA OF BURIED WALL=1250 SF
% OF EXPOSED WALL AREA = 24.8%
AREA OF BURIED BASEMENT FLOOR AREA=1,328 SF
329.34 SF TO APPLY TO F.A.R.P324VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
3.3
NET LIVABLE PLANS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
9/26/2017
SHEET No.
NET LIVABLE FLOOR AREA
UNIT
MAIN LEVEL, AH UNIT
SECOND LEVEL, AH UNIT
AREA
3,374.50
3,374.50
6,749.00 sq ft
DN
UP
AH UNIT
681.88 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
684.91 sq ft
AH UNIT
626.47 sq ft
UPUP
UP
AH UNIT
681.88 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
690.62 sq ft
AH UNIT
684.91 sq ft
AH UNIT
626.47 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL NET LIVABLE PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
BASEMENT MECHANICAL & STORAGE
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL NET LIVABLE PLANP325 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
4.1
ELEVATIONS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
9/26/2017
SHEET No.
H G F E D C B A
125'-817/32"125'-817/32"27'-113/4"27'-113/4"COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
VERTICAL GEOLAM RAIN SCREEN
VERTICAL GEOLAM FENCE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
PER 26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
PER 26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
PER 26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
HISTORIC GRADEFINISH GRADE PLATE STEEL CANOPY
BRICK
BRICK
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
127'-4"127'-4"127'-227/32"
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
VERTICAL GEOLAM RAIN SCREEN
BRICK
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
PLATE STEEL CANOPY
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
HISTORIC GRADE
FINISH GRADE
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
SOUTH ELEVATIONP326 VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
4.2
ELEVATIONS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
9/26/2017
SHEET No.
11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
123'-55/32"27'-111/2"24'-51/4"127'-217/32"
125'-817/32"
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
WIRE BALLUSTRADE
METAL FASCIA
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
HISTORIC GRADEFINISH GRADE
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
A B C D E F G H
123'-55/32"
127'-217/32"27'-71/2"25'-81/4"COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
4" CLAPBOARD SIDING
COMPOSITE PANEL RAIN SCREEN
WIRE BALLUSTRADE
METAL FASCIA
BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT PER
26.575.020.F OF THE CODE
HISTORIC GRADE
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
WEST ELEVATIONP327
VI.A.
DRAWING ISSUE802 WEST MAINASPEN, COSHEET No.
LAND USE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1702
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3444
970-920-2186
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
TEL
FAX
4.3
3D RENDERINGS
owned by and are the property of David Johnston
Architects, PC and developed for use and in
conjunction with the specified project. None
of the ideas, designs, arrangements or plans
shall be used by or disclosed for any purpose
whatsoever without the written authorization
of David Johnston Architects, PC.
7/26/2017
SHEET No.
ARCHITECTURAL RENDERING AARCHITECTURAL RENDERING C
ARCHITECTURAL RENDERING BP328 VI.A.
EXHIBIT IP329VI.A.
P330VI.A.
P331VI.A.
P332VI.A.
P333VI.A.
P334VI.A.
P335VI.A.
P336VI.A.
P337VI.A.
P338VI.A.
P339VI.A.
P340VI.A.
P341VI.A.
P342VI.A.
P343VI.A.
P344VI.A.