HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.707 E Hyman Ave.A053-03
~
CASE NUMBER
PARCEL ID #
CASE NAME
PROJECT ADDRESS
PLANNER
CASE TYPE
OWNER/APPLICANT
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE OF.FINAL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
PZ ACTION
ADMIN ACTION
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED
BY
A053-03
2737 -182-27001
Park Place. GMQS Application
707 E Hyman Ave
Chris Bendon
GMQS Application
John Cooper/Hyman Ave Holdings LLC
Stan Clauson Associates LLC
GMC01-03
08/04/04
D Driscoll
r'\,
z/~
1J~
~\O
,~
C011~ ~ov
~
PITKIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003
WORK SESSION IS CANCELLED
~
PITKIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING
Plaza One Conference Room
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 3,2003 DRAFT
(Dorothea Farris, Shellie Roy not present - CCI Conference) .
ADDITIONSIDELETIONS TO AGENDA
PROCLAMATIONS, PUBLIC COMMENT, COMMISSIONER COMMENTS,
CONSENT ACTIONS
1. Minutes of 11/18 Special Meeting and 11/19 Regular Meeting
CONSENT PUBLIC HEARING - 2nd Readines
2. Resolution Approving Contract with CDOT for Water Pollution Mitigation on SH/82 at
Independence Pass, Brian Pettet
3. Ordinance Setting Airport Fees and Charges for 2004, Tom Oken, Jim Elwood
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS
5. Renewable Energy Mitigation Program Funding Resolution, Tony Fusaro 1. CJ -10 LM~,^~
ADMINISTRATIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS. 2nd Readines
LAND USE CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Resnick Plat Amendment (PN 6/21/03) (cont'd from 7/23/03) (to be cont'd to 12/17/03 at request of
Applicant), L. Clarke
LAND USE CONSENT ACTIONS
2. Booher-(Hoaglund Ranch) SubdivisionlPUD Final Plat, 2nd Reading, S. Wolff
3. .Park.Pla.cetomm~rC1aC~~~rng'11afagFtClryo:rAspen'TIn~'S)ACCeptance"ofO!stw;tli&!wagement
Comffifssfqi)s'~rrng:N!C:"B1hd'on . . - '''''~''A'',......"...,".""
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. Code Amendments, AH/AH-3, 1 st Reading (PN 11/22/03), L. Clarke
5. Code Amendments, Large Lot GM Incentive (500 Acres/RS-160) (PN 11/22/03), S. Wolff
6. TDR Program Update (PN 11/1/03), S. Wolff
7. Collins Subdivision Detailed/Final Plat, 1 stReading (cont' d from 10/22/03), L. Clarke
LAND USE ACTIONS
8.
BOCC OPEN DISCUSSION
ADJOURN
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
~
MEMORANDUM
Pitkin County Board of County Comm~ssioners
Lance Clarke, Deputy Community Development Director, Pitkin County
Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner, City of Aspen
Park Place Commercial Parking Garage - 707 East Hyman Ave., Aspen
Acceptance of Growth Management Commission Scoring
December 3,2003
SUMMARY:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is
requesting the City of Aspen grant land use approvals to construct a 99-space
commercial parking facility. with an accessory office and two (2) affordable housing
units.
The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B,
C and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and
is located in the Office (0) Zone District. The property
is currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707
East Hyman, and the "Hannah-Dustin" building, 300 So.
Spring. Both are currently office buildings. No changes
are proposed for the Hannah Dustin Building. The
cDmmercial parking facility is proposed to replace the 950 square foot A-Frame.
The parking operation is proposed as an entirely automated system. Cars are placed
on "pallets" and then mechanically moved within the building. No internal ramping
is involved and drivers do not actually enter the garage. A small office houses an
attendant who aids patrons with the system.
The GMQS process requires scoring by the Growth Management Commission
(GMC). Projects must achieve minimum "threshold" scores in various categories in
order to proceed. The GMC reviewed this project and assigned a passing score to
each of the scoring criteria (scoring summary attached). The process now requires
acceptance of the scoring by both City Council and the Pitkin County Board of
County Commissioners, then granting of the allotments by the Aspen City Council.
The BOCC is being asked to accept the scoring assigned by the GMC. In the
alternative, the BOCC can choose to not accept the scoring and the applicant can
appeal that decision to ajoint City Council/BOCC hearing.
Staff recommends the BOCC adopt Resolution. No. _, Series of 2003.
Park Place memo page 1
^
t:. . .'.'..'.
ApPLICANT:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC. Represented by Stan Clauson, AICP
LOCATION, LOT SIZE; ZONING:
707 East Hyman Avenue. The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B, C
and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and is located in the Office (0)
Zone District.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Hannah/Dustin building (west building) - Office (also current use)
A-Frame (east building) - Commercial parking, affordable housing, accessory office.
REVIEW PROCEDURE:
Growth Management Scoring - Section 26.470, Aspen Land Use Code.
Actions required for approval of allotments. "Since the Growth Management Quota
System applies throughout the Aspen Metro Area, no growth management allocation
shall be awarded unless the City Council and Board of County Commissioners both
accept the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission."
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption ofBOCC Resolution No. _, Series of2003.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to adopt Resolution No. _, Series of2003."
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Proposed Resolution and Scoring Summary
Exhibit B - Development Application
Park Place memo page 2
f*"\
'.J
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD QF COUNTY COMMISSIQNERSOF PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO, ACCEPTING THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDED SCORING OF THE PARK PLACE
COMMERCIAL PARKING GARAGE GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION, 707
EAST HYMAN AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN.
Resolution No. -2003
RECITALS
1. On November 11, 2003, the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission ("the
GMC") held a duly noticed public hearing at which time evidence and testimony was presented
with respect to the Park Place Commercial Parking Garage Growth Management application.
2. The Park Place Commercial Parking Garage Growth Management Application is a
development application received by the City of Aspen Community Development Department
from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, John Cooper Managing Partner, owner and applicant,
represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, for a Growth Management allocation of 4,000
square feet of net leasable space for a proposed commercial parking facility housing ninety-nine
cars, two affordable housing units, an accessory parking attendant office, and an existing office
building. The parcel is described as Lots A, B, C, and D, Block 105, City and Towntsite of
Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, also described as the Hannah-Dustin Condominiums
according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 78 Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder. The parcel is currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707 East Hyman
Avenue, generally located on Lots C and D, and the "Hannah-Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring
Street, generally located on Lots A and B. Both are currently office buildings. Minimal
changes are proposed for the Hannah Dustin Building and site. The commercial parking facility
is proposed to replace the A-Frame; and,
3. The GMC scored the application pursuant to the criteria for commercial and office
development, Section 26.470.100 of the Aspen Land Use Code. The Commission assigned
scores meeting and exceeding the minimum threshold scores necessary for commercial growth
management allotment and said scores are attached as Attachment A of this document.
4. Pursuant to Section 26.470 ofthe Aspen Land Use Code, both the City Council and the Pitkin
County Board of County Commissioners must accept the scoring assigned by the GMC in
order for the City Council to award growth management development allotments.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County
Commissioners that it does hereby accept the assigned scoring of the Park Place Commercial
Parking Garage Growth Management application.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE _ day of
[signatures on following page]
,2003.
Resolution No. ~2003
Page 2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST:
By
Jack Hatfield, Chairman
Date
Lyndee R. Dean
Clerk to the BOCC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
John Ely,
County Attorney
Cindy Houben,
Community Development Director
Attachment A - GMC Scoring
-.:t -.:t -.:t -.:t -.:t -.:t -.:t -.:t-.:t 0 0
..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..,f ai
....
00 ..- en L() L() 0 t- L() to II) 00
..- N ..- ..- ..- N ..- ..- "":u:i
.... ....
t-t-L()oot-t-t-
~~~oo~~~ooen
-.:t-.:t-.:t-.:t-.:t-.:t-.:t-.:t
-r-~ ~-r-~oor-
oo..-t-L()L()entoL()to
-r-N-r-oor-oor-""r""""oor-oor-oor-
to t-L()OOt-t-t-
~oo~~enooen
c-05 (/)
...oc"'cOCO'E
Q) (/) ~ -0 .- = E CO
OlC$COt:::~O$
::I ..c 0 ~ CO -.J'..c 0
"'0 (/)2::11-
...:::c:::""O::Q)...<(...I
~..c~ C > Q) Q) Q) C
...0"5~-g2Q)~Q)-g
wo::o::...,...,(f)0...20...-,
0)0
u:i..,f
CON
0"":
....
o
..,fo
....ai
Q)
:0
~
'(ii
>
CO
(/)
.....
C Q)
'0 :0
c..co
o~
..- >
(/) CO
Q) (/)
Uc
.'~ '0
~Q)c..
::9(f)L()
.!!l -0"- .
CO C 'Q)
> CO g>:o
CO (/) .- CO
(/)Q)~=
:s;go~
o '(3 I CO
c..coQ)(/)
ooLL:oc
..- U CO .-
=-00
Cl)c..o...c..
.~ .Q> tt g -.:t
(5gj....<(uj
-00.... .....
Q)' >- 0 C
- '0 :!: C '0
(3 ~:g :~ ~
tn(ij= > E
.S ::I ~ e 0
(5 0<(0... a:l
(J , ,
CI)<(a:l()O
000
"":u:i
.... ....
00 0
u:i..,f
NN
0"":
....
(1)"C
... -
o 0
u.r::
(f) C/)
CI) ~
tn.r::
fl-
CI)
>
<(
"GY:lti b/I- A -b ~
f:kJfIhm No._ I ~~
~~~
~~
~
- (/)
o c
..r::.(/)(/) 2
e! :s :s 8..!::
,c:00Q)0
~ c.. c..:o c..
Q) Q) CO Q)
tn:o :0 = :0
.S CO CO ~ CO .
(5~~co~E
~~~'O~E
'+- '+- .......0 '+- .-
S 0 0 0..... 0 .!::
:)~~~~E
Soo ,00
'2 -.:t -.:t a:l to C
.... I I + I I
::5<(a:l<(() 0
~
MEETING DATE: November 11, 2003
NAME OF PROJECT:
GROWtIll\1ANAGEMENT SCORING-
707 East Hyman - PARK PLACE
CLERK:
Jackie Lothian
STAFF:
Chris Bendon
WITNESSES: (1) Stan Clauson, Jeffrey Halferty, Ron Erickson, John Fightlin,
Scott Brown, Hanna Pevny, Fred Martell, Katie Bartlett, l\1ike Hoffman, l\1ark 'rye,
Carl Hecht, Sam Alexander, Gary Snyder, John Westownsend
EXHIBITS: 1 Staff Report (x ) (Check If Applicable)
2 Affidavit of Notice (x) (Check If Applicable)
3 Various maps, drawings
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve GMC Resolution #1, 2003 finding the
park Place Commercial Parking Facility located 707 East Hyman met the necessary
threshold scoring for development alloc.ation with the .additional conditions: the
window casements shall be color coated or not mill fillished and a walkway between
the parking garage and the Hannah Dustin building shall be provided to permit
project residents to access trash receptacles in the alley. Seconded by Peter Martin.
VOTE: YES 9 NO 1
RUTH KRUGER YES X NO JOHN ROWLAND YES _X_ NO
ROGER HANEMAN YES X NO MICHAEL AUGELLO YES ~X_ NO
JACK JOHNSON YES X NO ERIC COHEN YES X - NO -
PETER MARTIN YES X NO STEVE SKADRON YES NO X
JOHN HOWARD ~SX NO PETER THOMAS YES _X_ NO
GMCVOTE
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission
RE:
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Community Development Director
Chris Bend~n, Senior Long Range Planner 0)NwJ
"Park Place" - 707 E. Hyman Avenue
Growth Management Scoring - Public Hearing
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
November 11,2003
SUMMARY:
Hyman A venue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is
requesting land use approvals to construct a 99 parking space commercial parking
facility with an accessory office and two (2) affordable housing units. A growth
management allocation of 4,000 square feet of net leasable space is being requested.
The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B,
C and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and
is located in the Office (0) Zone District. The property
is currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707
East Hyman, and the "Hannah-Dustin" building, 300 So.
Spring. Both are currently office buildings. No changes
are proposed for the Hannah Dustin Building. The
commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the
950 square foot A-Frame.
The parking operation is proposed as an entirely automated system. Cars are placed
on "pallets" and then mechanically moved within the building. No internal ramping
is involved and drivers do not actually enter the parking area. A small office houses
an attendant who aids patrons with the system. The Main Issues section of this memo
page 2, provides more detail on certain aspects ofthe project. The Scoring section of
this memo starts on page 5 and provides the scoring criteria and staffs analysis of
each criterion.
The GMQS process requires scoring by the Growth Management Commission. The
scoring will occur at the hearing by use of the scoring sheets provided at the meeting.
Projects must achieve minimum "threshold" scores in various categories in order to
proceed.
Staff has scored the application and found it meeting the necessary scores for
approval. Staff is recommending approval.
Park Place GMC memo page 1
~
MAIN ISSUES:
Traffic Generation: There is a question of whether this facility will attract more auto
trips to town ("build it and they will come") or will this project ease parking
frustration of people already coming to town. Staff suggests its likely a little of both -
this facility will add to the inventory of parking and provide some relief to the
"circling phenomenon." Parking demand is primarily a function of downtown
destinations (restaurants, shopping, skiing, etc.) and parking serves that demand. At
the same time, additional capacity may attract some additional auto trips that would
otherwise be either discouraged from downtown or be handled by other transit modes.
This section of Hyman Avenue is one ofthe least traveled streets downtown (vehicles
per day approximately 2,300 to 3,200) and no physical improvement are necessary to
accommodate the addHional145 trips. 1 for;
Traffic Queuing. The proposed project has two parking bays and can queue up to
four cars at a time. Parking each car takes approximately 90 seconds - the average
time for the system's mechanics to complete a full cycle. It is suggested that during
peak periods, both bays will accept vehicles and patrons wanting to retrieve their cars
will be required to wait. With the two bays in operation, a minimum of three minutes
will be available for exiting the vehicle, collecting belongings, etc. With a parking
space behind each bay, additional time is available for patrons. The 90-second cycle
time of the mechanical system permits the facility to process up to 40 cars per hour,
more than the expected peak-hour demand of 37 autos, 29 inbound. (See traffic report
section of application.) Staff does not foresee a queuing problem with this project.
Noise: Compliance with the City's noise limitations was raised during the P&Z
review. A system of the same manufacturer located in Washington D.C. was
analyzed by an acoustical engineer. (See noise report in application.) Sound readings
within the lobby of this system reported ail overall sound level of approximately 43 to
48 dBA. It is this "A-weighted" scale that the City's noise ordinance specifies as the
method of measuring noise. (The second two charts of the noise report describe the
"profile" of the noise, or what it sounds like.)
The City's noise limitation for this commercial zone district is 65 dBA during the day
(7 am to 9 pm) and 60 dBA during the night (9 pm to 7 am) measured at the property
line. The lobby readings of the Washington D.C. facility indicate that this facility will
be well within the City's requirement at the property line. In fact, the facility should
be within the City's more-strict residential noise limitations of 55 dBA during the day
and 50 dBA at night.
Sound readings were also taken within the mechanical area of the Washington D.C.
facility. These readings aren't pertinent to the noise issue because: one of the
overhead doors will remain closed during mechanical operation; patrons do not enter
the mechanical area; and, the City does not regulate noise levels within buildings.
Park Place GMC memo page 2
~
Staff believes the facility will be in compliance with the City's noise regulations. The
proposed resolution requ,ires a "noise check" prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy (C.O.). This test will be performed by the City of Aspen and will be done
under a variety of operating conditions.
Public Parking: The level of public access was discussed at P&Z and the applicant
specified 19 parking spaces as permanently available to the public. The public access
element of the project was important to several P&Z members wanting the facility to
remain actively serving parking needs and not . storage of vehiCles or remaining
unused. The 19-space requirement is specified in the proposed resolution.
Operations Prospectus: During their review, the Planning and Zoning Commission
requested an operations plan detailing the day-to-day opera.tion of the facility and
documenting representations of the applicant. This plan contains hours of operation,
a description of how the operator will use unused spaces for public parking, and a
yearly report to the City. The operations prospectus is appended to the proposed
resolution.
Pedestrian Improvements: The site currently provides a sidewalk along Spring
Street and essentially no pedestrian provision along Hyman Avenue. The proposal
would complete the sidewalk provided along the Benedict Commons for the
remainder of the block.
Sidewalk
along
Benedict
Commons
and existing
condition
along subject
property.
Dimensional Requirements: The dimensions of this project are proposed to be
established through adoption of a PUD (Planned Unit Development). Following is a
comparison of the proposed dimensions and those allowed in the District.
Dimension: Proposed Proposed Hannah Office Zone
Park Place Dustin Lot: District:
Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot 60 ft. 60 ft. 60 ft.
Width
Front Yard 6.5 ft. 0-10ft. (varies) (west 10 ft. (secondary
Park Place GMC memo page 3
~
Setback
Side Yard Setback
Rear Yard Setback
Maximum Height
Percent of Open
Space
Allowable FAR
Residential Off-
Street Parkin
Commercial Off-
Street Parking
Distance between
Buildings on the
lot.
3 ft. (west)
5 ft. (east)
Oft.
35 ft.
No
Requiremen
t
1.29:1
= primary)
6.5 ft. (north
secondary)
o (east)
10ft (existing)
28 ft. (existing)
No Requirement
Same as Office zone
requirement
3 total
N/A
99 spaces
3 along alley (loss of
3 surface spaces on
north side)
10ft.
10 ft.
Staff believes the proposed dimensions are appropriate.
Both the neighboring Benedict Commons Building and the
Aspen Athletic Club building across the street exceed a 1: 1
FAR with the Aspen Athletic Club Building having an FAR
of approximately 1.82: 1. The Benedict Commons building
has a 6.5-foot setback along the Hyman Avenue property
line.
The 35-foot proposed height of the parking facility is
measured to the top of the flat roof. The adjacent Benedict
Commons building was approved for a 30-foot height limit
and certain ridgelines are developed to approximately 34 feet
(measured at the midpoint of the sloped roof), The portion
of the building closest to Hyman Avenue has been restricted
to 26 feet, reducing the appearance of massing on the front
fayade.
The proposed east side yard setback of 5 feet meets the
requirement of the Office Zone Districts and mirrors the 5-
foot setback of the Benedict Commons building.
No changes to the he Hannah-Dustin building are proposed.
front yard is 2/3 of
primary front yard)
5 ft.
15 ft.
25 ft.
No Requirement
.75:1. May be
increased to I : 1
through Special
Review
Minimum: Lesser of
1 /bedroom or 2/unit.
3/1 ,000 s.f. net
leasable space.
10 ft.
Neighboring Benedict
Commons Building
Bell Mountain Townhomes
across the alley from
subject site.
Park Place GMC memo page 4
SCORlNG:
Score sheets will be distributed at the meeting. The application responds to
each of the scoring criteria with a requested score. Staff's analysis is provided
below with a recommended score.
Scoriof! - Quality of Desif!n:
Score:
o
1
2
3
A totally deficient design
A major design flaw
An acceptable (but standard) design
An excellent design
Criterion - Architectural Design. Considering the compatibility of the proposed
development (in terms of scale, siting, massing, height, and building materials) with
existing, neighboring developments.
Staff Response - The proposed building has been designed to appear as a
mixed-use building. . Staff believes this is appropriate for this mixed-use
neighborhood. The residential uses provide an appealing fayade along the
street and help soften the building. The building's mass has been setback to
provide a smaller scale along the street fayade. The massing, height, and
siting of the building is generally consistent with the neighboring buildings.
The proposed materials are consistent with neighboring buildings and are
appropriate for a mixed-use building within this mixed-use zone district. Staff
recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Site Design. Considering the quality, character, and appropriateness of
the proposed layout, landscaping, and open space areas, the amount of site coverage
by buildings, the extent of underground utilities, and the arrangement of
improvements for efficiency of circulation, inCluding access for service, increased
safety and privacy, and provision of snow storage areas.
Staff Response - The neighborhood is mixed-use and the plan completes an
urban streetscape along Hyman Avenue. The small site and proposed use do
not provide a significant opportunity for useable open space. All utilities are
being under-grounded and snow storage is expected to be minimal as the
building has a flat roof and there is minimal surface area that will require
snow removal. A condition related to a snow storage easement has been
included in the proposed resolution. Staff recommends a score of 2 for this
criterion.
Criterion - Environmental Conservation. Considering the use of passive and/or
active energy conservation techniques in the construction and operation of the
proposed development, including but not limited to insulation, glazing, passive solar
orientation, efficient heating and cooling systems and solar energy devices; the extent
Park Place GMC memo page 5
~
to which the proposed development avoids wasting energy by excluding excessive
lighting and inefficient wood burning devices; and the proposed development's
location with regard to the potential for solar gain to result in energy conservation.
Staff Response - The application represents the installation of low-flow
fixtures, efficient lighting and heating systems, and energy efficient glazing
and insulation. Compliance with the City's efficient building will be
achieved. Staff recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Amenities. Considering the provision of usable open space, pedestrian
and bicycle ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters, and other common areas for
users of the proposed development.
Staff Response - The proposal will significantly improve the aesthetics of the
area. The office and planned attendant service provides amenity to the users
of the facility. Staff also believes the parking use provides amenity to the
downtown by adding to the parking infrastructure. Staff recommends a score
of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Visual Impact. Considering the scale and location of the building(s) in
the proposed development to prevent infringement on designated scenic view planes.
Staff Response - The plan does not interfere with any protected views and the
building has been designed to lessen its massing on the street fayade. The
proposed 35-foot height of the rear portion of the building is generally
consistent with the height of surrounding buildings. The 35-foot height is also
to be measured to the flat roof and does not incorporate an exemption for
pitched roofs. Staff recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Trash and Utility Access. Considering the extent to which required trash
and utility access areas are screened.from public view; are sized to meet the needs of
the proposed development and to provide for public utility placement; can be easily
accessed,' allow trash bins to be moved by service personnel, provide users with
recycling bins, and provide enclosed trash bins, trash compaction or other unique
measures.
Staff Response - Proper utility easements and access have been proposed.
The trash demand is expected to be minimal due to the project having only
two residences. Residential access to the trash bin, expected to be along the
alleyway, is circuitous. An easement and a trash facility on the Hannah Dustin
property could improve this condition. Staff recommends a score of 1 for this
criterion.
[i'l} (1/1 !-ol
\#~VV~
l~; t V\
~ r~~ledl
() lOI\~ ~ tlAk 'I1Jfi b1 <i?~-
Park Place GMC memo page 6
~
Scorine - Availability of Public Facilities and Services
Score:
o Proposed development requires the provision of new public
facilities and services at increased public expense.
1 Proposed development may be handled by existing public
facilities and services, or any public facility or service improvements
made by the applicant benefits the proposed development. only, and
not the area in general.
2 Proposed development improves the availability. of public
facilities and services in the area without increased, undue public
expense.
Criterion - Water Supply / Fire Protection. Considering the ability of the water
supply system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to
install any water system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading
required to serve the proposed development. Fire protection facilities and services
shall also be reviewed, considering the ability of the appropriate fire protection
district to provide services' according to established response times without the
necessity of upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of available water pressure
and capacity for providing fire fighting flows,' and the commitment of the applicant to
provide any fire protection facilities which may be necessary to serve the proposed
development
Staff Response - Sufficient infrastructure is available on this site. Adequate
municipal water exists for this property and there is no apparent limitation.
The site is within the service area of the Fire District. Compliance with the
Fire Code is required. The applicant and the Fire Marshall have discussed the
various code provisions and staff has included the relevant requirements in the
proposed resolution.
The current building was not developed with a sprinkler system and the
proposed building should improve fire safety for the area. Staff believes this
will improve general fire safety of the area. Staff recommends a score of 2 for
this criterion.
Criterion - Sanitation. Considering the ability of the sanitary sewer system to serve
the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any sanitary
system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the
proposed development.
Staff Response - The project will be served by the Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District and the District's requirements have been incorporated into
the proposed resolution. This includes devices to prevent chemicals that may
Park Place GMC memo page 7
come from the autos from entering the storm sewer. Staff recommends a
score of 1 for this criterion.
Criterion - Public Transportation/Roads. Considering the ability of the proposed
development to be served by existing public transit routes. The review shall also
consider the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed development without
substantially altering existing automobile and pedestrian traffic patterns, creating
safety hazards or maintenance problems, overloading the existing street system or
causing a need to extend the existing road network and consider the applicant's
commitment to install the necessary road system improvements to serve the increased
usage attributable to the proposed q,evelopment.
Staff Response - This section of Hyman Avenue has a very low use (vehicles
per day approximately 2,300 to 3,200) compared with similar downtown
streets with 2-3 times the use. This facility will add approximately 145 trips
per day, a minimal increase the existing use of the street. No street or
intersection improvements will be necessary to accommodate this volume.
Peak hour trips are projects to be 37 vehicles per hour and the system can
accommodate up to 40 vehicles per hour. The majority of thepeak-a.m: trips
are inbound (29 trips).
With both bays in active use plus the two extra loading spaces, incoming
patrons will have between 3 and 6 minutes to gather belongings and exit their
vehicle. (90 seconds on average per vehicle x two bays = 3 minutes. Plus a
space behind each bay = 6 minutes.) Staff does not foresee a queuing problem
with this project. Staff recommends a score of 1 for this criterion.
Criterion - Drainage. Considering the degree to which the applicant proposes to
maintain historic drainage patterns on the development site. .if the development
requires use of the City's drainage system, the review shall consider the commitment
by the applicant to install the necessary drainage control facilities and to maintain
the system over the long-term.
Staff Response - The proposed development incorporates site drainage and
the City Engineer is satisfied with the applicant's proposal. The current
development does not contain site drainage and the proposal should be
considered an improvement to the area's drainage infrastructure. Staff
recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Parking. Considering the provisions of parking spaces to meet the
commercial, office, and/or residential needs of the proposed development as required
by Chapter 26. 515, and considering the design of the parking spaces with respect to
their visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience, and safety.
Staff Response - The project provides parking for the residential uses, plus
commercial parking for the general public. This improvement to downtown
Park PlaCe GMC memo page 8
parking infrastructure will benefit a wide range of downtown destinations and
should be considered an improvement to the area's infrastructure. Staff
recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Scorin2 - Affordable Housin2.
Score: Project houses 61 to 100 percent of the additional employees generated by the
proposed development: 10 points for the first 60 percent housed, plus 1 point
for each additional 8 percent housed.
Staff Response - The land use code provides an employee generation schedule of 3
employees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space in the office zone district.
Because this project is unique (it is not a typical office building) staff recommends
the employee generation of specific use be considered as opposed to the one-size- fits-
all schedule.
The expected employee generation of this project is 5 FTEs (full-time equivalents). A
one-bedroom apartment and a three-bedroom apartment house 4.75 employees
according to the City Land Use Code. This project houses 95% of the employees
generated.
The Housing Board has recommended approval of the mitigation, with conditions.
Staff has proposed language in the resolution tying the employee housing mitigation
to this specific proposal and requiring an audit to confirm actual employment.
Staff recommends a score of 14 for this criterion - 10 points for the first 60% and 1
point for each 8% above 60% = 14.
Scorin2 - Bonus Points.
Score: 0-4 points.
Bonus points may be awarded to proposals exceeding the substantive standards.
Projects must still meet threshold scoring and bonus points are only effective during a
competition (when more applications are submitted that allocations available). There
is no competition. Staff has not recommended bonus points.
Commissioners wishing to award bonus points must provide a written explanation for
doing so. Space is provided on the scoring sheets.
Park Place GMC memo page 9
ApPLICANT:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC. Represented by Stan Clauson, AICP
LOCATION, LOT SIZE, ZONING:
707 East Hyman Avenue. The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B, C
and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and is located in the Office (0)
Zone District.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Hannah/Dustin building (west building) - Office (also current use)
A-Frame (east building) - Commercial parking, affordable housing, accessory office.
REVIEW PROCEDURE:
Growth Management Scoring.
An application for non-exempt development requires a two step process: Review by
the Growth Management Commission and final review by the City Council.
Step One - A public hearing before the Growth Management Commission. After the
Community Development Director has determined that the application is complete,
the application shall be forwarded to the Growth Management Commission for
review and scoring at a public hearing. The Growth Management Commission shall,
by resolution, recommend to the City Council award of development allotments in
accordance with the scoring
Step Two - A public hearing before City Council. Notice of the hearing shall be by
publication, posting and mailing. The City Council, following a public hearing, shall
by ordinance allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants.
Actions required for approval of allotments. Since the Growth Management Quota
System applies throughout the Aspen Metro Area, no growth management allocation
shall be awarded unless the City Council and Board of County Commissioners both
accept the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Growth Management Commission find the Park Place
CommercIal Parking Facility meeting or exceeding the necessary threshold score for
development allotment.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission
Resolutio~, Series of 2003, finding the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
meeting the necessary threshold scoring for development allocation."
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A
Development Application
m\~ ~ ~~
CO(Oy
W~
U>>.~J. ()V'
vwt ~ \\ ~V\f.>kJ.
<1V'--
Park Place GMC memo page 10
~
ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY GRO\VTlIMANAGEMENTCOMMISSION
RESOLUTION No.M
(SERIES OF 2003)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPENIPITKlNCOUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDINGCITYCt)UNCILAPPROVE
COMMERCIAL GROWtlIMANAGEMENTALLOTMENTSFORA
COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITYANDOFFICE'Bt.TtLDING'[O'CATEIlON
LOTS A, B, C, AND D, BLOCK 105, CITY ANDtOWNSltEOFASPEN,PITK:IN
COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
(the Project) from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, John Cooper Managing Partner, owner
and applicant, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, for a Growth Management
allocation of 4,000 square feet of net leasable space for a proposed commercial parking
facility housing ninety-nine cars, two affordable housing units, and an accessory parking
attendant office, and an existing office building; and,
WHEREAS, the parcel of land is described as Lot A, B, C, and D, Block 105,
City and Towntsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, also described as the Hannah-
Dustin Condominiums according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 78
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, and is currently developed with an "A-Frame"
structure, 707 East Hyman Avenue, generally located on Lots C and D, and the "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring Street, generally located on Lots A and B. Both are
currently office buildings. Minimal changes are proposed for the Hannah Dustin
Building and site. The commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the A-Frame;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304 and 260470 of the City of Aspen Land
Use Code, land use applications requesting allotments from the Growth Management
Quota System are reviewed and scored by the Aspen/Pitkin COUlIty Growth Management
Commission at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the
Community Development Director, and members of the general public. The scoring is
then forwarded to the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Aspen City
Council and development allotments may then be allocated by Ordinance by the Aspen
City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the
Community Development Director, and members of the general public; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, the City Parking Department~ the City
Transportation Department, the City Zoning Officer, City Parks Department, the Aspen
Building Department, the Environmental Health Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 1
~
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 11, 2003, the
Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission considered the noted
recommendations and testimony offered by the general public, considered the project for
initial and final scoring (score summary attached), found the proposal meeting or
exceeding the necessary scoring, and recommended, by a _ to _ L-~ vote, City
Council allocation of 4,000 square feet of commercial development allotment for the Park
Place Commercial Parking Facility proposal, subject to the conditions of approval listed
herein. '
NOW, THEREFORE BElT RESOLVED by the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth
Management Commission that the City Council should allocate 4,000 square feet of
commercial development allotment for the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
proposal, subject to the following conditions of approval:
Section 1: Parkine Spaces andParkine Garaee
Parking spaces within the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and not used
for storage or other similar non-automobile related purposes without amending the
Growth Management approvals.
Three (3) total parking spaces shall be allocated to the two on-site affordable housing
units. (One space for the one-bedroom unit and two spaces for the three-bedroom unit.) If
the residential units are transferred separate from the remaining property interests, the
parking space allocated to the residential unit shall be conveyed in fee as part of the
ownership interest in the residential unit.
.A minimum of nineteen (19) spaces shall remain available to the general public for public
parking. General public shall be persons with no ownership interest in the Project. These
spaces may be individually transferred as long as they remain available to the general
public.
The remaining parking spaces may be sold, transferred, or leased by the owners thereof
on adaily or long-term basis. These parking spaces may be used to satisfy parking needs
of future commercial expansions on- or off-site and may be sold or leased to third parties
for use as remote residential parking.
The parking garage and parking spaces shall be considered an approved commercial
parking' facility and an approved remote parking facility as such terms are used in the
City's Land Use Code. Parking spaces may be physically reconfigured, with approval
from the Community Development Director, to accommodate additional or fewer parking
spaces such that a total change of no greater than five (5) parking spaces from that
depicted in the Growth Management application occurs. Conversion of parking spaces to
non-parking uses shall require a Growth Management review.
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 2
^
Section 2: Affordable Housine Units & Emplovee Audit
The Project shan include one (1) one-bedroom Category One affordable housing unit and
one (1) three-bedroom Category 3 affordable housing unit as described in the Growth
Management application. The one-bedroom unit shall have one (1) associated parking
space within the parking garage. The three-bedroom unit shall have two (2) associated
parking spaces within the parking garage.
The two affordable units shan be exempted from the Growth Management Quota System
and counted towards the growth ceiling for affordable housing.
The affordable housing units shall be either transferred as "for-sale units" to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
Guidelines or, if the units are to be rented, a legal instrument permanently ensuring their
affordable status acceptable to the City Attorney shall be provided. The City shall accept
a nominal property interest (1/1 0 of 1 percent undivided interest) or other reasonable
means of assurance.
Residents of the affordable housing units shall meet the minimum oCcupancy and all
other qualification criteria in the APCHA Guidelines, as amended. The rental structure of
the affordable units shall not exceed a maximum rental rate of Category 2 for the one-
bedroom unit and Category 3 for the three-bedroom unit as such rates are defined in the
APCHA Guidelines, as amended from time to time. Rental tenants shall be qualified by
APCHA.
The Subdivision Improvements Agreement shall include a methodology of determining
actual employee generation of the Project after one complete year of operation and the
manner of providing mitigation of any additional employee generation. The project is
providing housing for 4.75 employees. According to the City's requirement of providing
mitigation for 60% of the employees generated, this housing mitigates a total generation of
7.9 employees. Additional mitigation shall be required for any actual employee generation
in excess of7.9 employees. The methodology shall include an audit process and timeline, a
method of selecting an auditor, the method of determining acceptable mitigation if
additional employees are generated, and be acceptable to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority.
Section 3: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
The building permit application shall comply with all requirements of the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District. Following are specific requirements applicable to this
project:
1. If a back-up generator is used, compliance with fuel tank requirements will be
necessary.
2. Containment systems for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system are necessary.
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of 2003. Page 3
,~
3. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
4. If water is used to clean the garage, there will need to be floor drains. Floor drains
will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will require an oil/sand separator. In
case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must be sized to accommodate fire
flows.
5. The Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay
applicable fees.
Section 4: Enerey Code & Fire Protection Reauirements
The building permit application shallindude/depict:
1. The structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and
.for the residential area (res-check).
2. The requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units shall
be fulfilled.
3. The plans shall include a fire sprinkler system that complies with NFPA-13 and
NFPA-72. The plans shall include standpipes.
4. The building permit plans shall include an emergency access plan acceptable to
the Fire Marshall and a ventilation plan acceptable to the Fire Marshall.
5. The building permit plans shall be reviewed by an independent consultant for
compliance with applicable fire protection codes and regulations. The applicant
shall coordinate this review and determination of an independent consultant with
the Fire Marshall. Review fees may be assessed.
Section 5: Noise Ordinance Compliance
The project shall comply with the city of Aspen noise ordinance, as amended from time
to time. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Project shall be checked by
the City's Environmental Health Department for compliance under a range of expected
operating conditions. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued if the Project
exceeds the City's noise limitations. The Project shall not operate without a Certificate of
Occupancy.
The design and construction of the Project shall take into consideration the concerns and
requirements of noises exceeding the City's noise ordinance, including proper noise
mitigation methods and adequate provision for necessary modifications of the building to
meet the City's noise limitations.
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 4
Section 6: Oueuine Vehicles alone Hvman Avenue
The parking garage operator shall not permit or encourage patrons to vacate their cars
until those cars are fully located on-site within the designated entry/exit parking bays.
Queuing cars shall remain occupied.
Section 7: Operations Plan and Annual Report
The Project shall operate according to the approved Operations Plan, attached as Exhibit A.
The Operations Plan may be amended from time to time according to the procedures for
amending a Conditional Use, Chapter 26.425 of the Land Use Code.
The Project operator shall submit to the City an annual operations report containing:
· A profile of the past year's use of the parking spaces, including how many spaces
were available to the public per day (a minimum of 19 spaces are required to be
available to the public) and typical day and evening capacity rates during "on"
seasons, "off' seasons, and during significant events.
· A report on the scanning system or other system used to determine owner usage.
· Typical peak hour and typical activity during peak hour.
· Top 20 peak usage days and a report on what operating issues were associated with
those days and how those issues were addressed.
· A summary of any complaints received and how those complaints were addressed.
The annual operations report shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission as
an information item (not for any specific action). As a result of the City reviewing the
annual report, or at any other time, the City may request the operator and property owner
improve certain operational issues to conform to the requirements of the approved
Operations Plan.
Interpretation matters or disagreements between City staff and the Project owner regarding
the intent, wording, or enforcement of the Operations Plan shall be resolved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission. The Project owner may appeal an adverse determination made by
the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the intent, wording, or enforcement of the
Operations Plan to City Council, pursuant to the procedures of Chapter 26.316, Appeals, of
the City Land Use Code.
Section 8: Enforcement
The City may enforce the provisions of this approval, including the provisions of the
approved Operations Plan as may be amended from time to time, by appropriate means
including, but not limited to, temporary or permanent revocation of the conditional use
approval.
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 5
^
Section 9:
All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Growth
Management 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.
The approvals granted herein shall run with the land and all conditions and limitations of
this approval shall apply to the property owner, or his successors or assigns, and any
property management company or independent operations company acting on behalf of the
property owner.
Section 10:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall
be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions thereof.
APPROVED by the Growth Management Commission during a public hearing on
November 11,2003.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION:
City Attorney
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
C:\home\Current Planning\CASES\Park ]lace\GMC_ Reso.doc
Attachment A - Operational Prospectus
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 6
1""'\
Operations Prospectus
Page 1
Exhibit A to GMC Resolution No. _, Series of2003.
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
doworight impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and getit" type renting, owners can
put their spaces on and off the rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase oVer time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing the operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility.
Components of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. Subject to an audit, the employee housing units will fully mitigate for any
employee generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility.
Use of Spaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owner.
~,
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
Exhibit A to GMC Resolution No. _, Series of2003.
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system. Underthis system, the owner's vehicle will beseanned with a bar
code in order to maintain locati.on of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's .
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrival. However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management shall retain 19. spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking availability. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will only be a daily rate for
parking. During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell discounted single-day parking
in order to encourage persons to park and leave their vehicles all day, i.e., come in the
morning and leave it till the end ofthe day for one price so long as they exit only once.
Longer rentals to non-owners, such as weekly and monthly rentals, will not be permitted.
Such rentals would interfere with the daily parking function, and potentially obstruct
availability of spaces for owners.
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not sufficient to staffthe facility, it will be dosed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m. Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past
these hours of operation during high season, unless reviewed by the City to accommodate
some special need. Special longer hours may be established for event parking in
conjunction with City parking and traffic management activities. Examples of these
special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of July fireworks. Owners and users
will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles.
Parkine Tvpes
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the basic method of usage. Examples ofthis
include day skier parking, day business parking, and night dining/shopping parking.
Nineteen ofthe 99 total spaces shall be available at all times for daily parking. Other
spaces shall also be available when not in use by their owners.
· Off-season. During times of low and off seasons, the intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day. It will
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
~
Operations Prospectus
Page 3
Exhibit A to GMC Resolution No. _, Series of2003.
and exit for a fixed price of up to 11 hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course ofthe day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in the core.
· Longer-term. Owners and non-owners may occupy up to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed. However, this longer-term parking
may not be held empty for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public day perking when not actually in use by owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are sold, there will be an Owners' Association
created for owners who will pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and other
necessary expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the
space to the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible that some buyers would
buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding
current yields on other investments.
Manaeement of buildine bv the development eroup
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected that fees in the range of 25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
.would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
The vast majority of the costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
Replacement of the development eroup
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management ofthe parking facility. Subsequent owners of the management group would
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
Exhibit A to GMC Resolution No. _, Series of2003.
assume any land use conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facility or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, there will be the investor/buyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 ofthe
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Operations Plan defined in this prospectus may be amended through the City of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process.
=.
Via Hand Delivery '.' . ..... .'.
Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Hendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 S. Galena Street' .
Aspen, CO 81611
;_\
HERBERT S. KLEIN
hsklein@rof.net
LANCE R. COTE.
cote@rof.net
MADHU B. KRISHNAMURTI
madhu@rof.net
. also admitted in California
Re: Park Place Parking Garage Commercial GMQS Application.
Dear Chris and Honorable Members of the Commission:
I represent the 700 E.Hyman Condominium Owners' Association (the "Association")
concerning the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility application for a commercial GMQS
allocation for a parking structure to be located at the corner of Spring St. and Hyman Avenue.
Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend your scoring hearing on this matter on November 11th and
am providing you with my comments in writing.
The Association opposes this project for many reasons, all related to the unacceptable
impacts it will create to the residential properties which surround it. The members among you from
the City of Aspen Planning Corninission, have already heard our concerns during their consideration
of the PUD and Conditional Use permit hearings completed just a couple of weeks ago and, in
response to the neighborhood outcry against this project, voted to recommend denial of this
. application. I
We wish to inform the Growth Management Commission, and in particular, its County
members who have not heard our concerns, of the significant and incurable conflicts this parking
structure will create in its neighborhood and to .remove the gloss that the GMQS application casts on
the warts of this project.
Our primary concerns relate to the functional problems that are posed by the site plan, which
places six stories (three above grade and three below grade) with almost lot line to lot line coverage
on a 6000 square foot lot, leaving insufficient space on the lot to accommodate arriving and
departing vehicles. It is clear that there will be a problem with cars queuing across the sidewalk and
onto the street, creating gridlock and obstructing .pedestrian usage, especially during peak times,
IThe project was also vigorously opposed by the neighboring Benedict Commons residential project and the Bell
Mountain Residences Association as well as several other neighbors.' .
such as morning and late afternoon hours during ski season. We ask that you carefully review the
site plan and closely question the. applicant on these points. While this project might have merit in
another location on a larger lot, it is a disaster as proposed.
We also have serious concerns about the noise generated from the project. The noise study
submitted by the applicant does not report the noise levels at the property line, where measured by
the City Code. However, it does report that the noise levels within the structure will exceed the
permissible levels established by the City Noise Ordinance.
We also object to the aesthetics of the building, which is simply a large, square box with
little articulation of design elements and no open space. Although the application touts the benefits
to. the City in providing parking for owners of the condominiumized spaces and the public, the
applicant would only commit to a guaranty that merelyl9 of the 99 spaces will be available for
public use. Hardly a public benefit worth the degradation to the neighborhood.
The GMQS scoring criteria assigns points in several/categories that relate to our concerns
about traffic congestion, the pedestrian street scape, architectural design and visual impact. Included
within the category of Quality of Design, are separate scoring criteria for the exterior quality of the
building, the quality of the site design, amenities (including useable open' space and pedestrian
ways), visual impact, and trash and utility access.
More information supporting our concerns follows along with comments on how they relate to the
GMQS criteria and scoring. .
1. The Traffic Report. The applicant has provided a traffic study from Felsburg Holt &
Ullevig, dated August 28, 2003. The report indicates that Hyman Avenue experiences
approximately 3,500vehicles per day ("vpd") in the summer and 2300 vpd in the winter. The report
measures the increase in projected traffic generated by the project and finds that the increase in
traffic is not significant. However, the report does not analyze the impact on traffic flows due to the
operational characteristics of the garage. Clearly, 3500 vpd is a lot of traffic. The garage will
require both right and left turning movements for cars entering and exiting the facility. The report is
silent on the effect of these turning movements on traffic flow. Cars heading west on Hyman, will
need to make a left turn into the garage. The application indicates that this small site only has the
capacity to queue four cars at one time and this assumes that all available space is used for arriving
vehicles, with no consideration about departing vehicles. When cars are already queued at the
entrance, these vehicles will either wait until the entrance clears, or they. will circle the block. In
either case, traffic flows will be adversely affected. Similarly, vehicles traveling east on Hyman will
have to make a right turn. The entrance is close to the intersection. and when cars are backed up at
the entrance, these vehicles waiting to enter will block traffic coming on to Hyman Avenue.
The Association has engaged Kathleen Krager of the firm of Bowers & Krager, Inc., traffic
Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
November 5, 20()4
Page 3
engineers, to evaluate the applicant's report. Her analysis is attached hereto at Exhibit A and it
identifies the deficiencies that render. the applicant's report meaningless with respect to traffic
conflicts caused by the operational realities of this project.
The applicant's report attempts to evaluate queuing and states that the time required to park
each car is 90 seconds "from the time the vehicle drives onto the lift to the time the lift returns for
the next vehicle. " .' However, this does not take into account the time it takes to unload people, skis,
kids, etc., nor the time it takes to check in or to retrieve forgotten items. These activities are clearly
part of the calculus of the time it takes a car to enter and clear the queuing area, but are totally
ignored by the report. We estimate. that these activities will take three to five minutes, depending on
how busy the attendant is. Thus, the total time is more like five to seven minutes per car, not 90
seconds. The report suggests that payment will occur on pick up, however, that takes time as well
and when the four spaces needed for queuing vehicles entering are full, cars cannot leave. When
questioned about this atarecentPlanning Commission hearing, the applicant stated that during peak
usage for arriving vehicles arriving cars would have a priority and people picking up their cars
would have to wait.. We do not believe that people paying well over one hundred thousand dollars
for their parking space will be so accommodative. Our traffic report also addresses this from a
purely functional perspective ~d correctly points out that: "The proposal to hold exiting vehicles
while allowing vehicles to enter the garage will result in numerous operating problems, including the.
likely potential that vehicles will needtoleav~ theJacility to make room for entering vehicles."
The applicant's report also assumes that 80% of the users will be members of the public, not
owners of the spaces, and that they will be parking for long periods of time, thus reducing the
number of operations and the traffic generation of the facility. The applicant has not proposed a
method of assuring 80% public use,2 only that it will sell spaces for over one-hundred thousand
dollars and try to allow for public use when those spaces are not being used. At those prices, we Can
confidently assume that the buyers are not going to sacrifice their ability to use the spaces whenever
they want in order to gain a few dollars per hour of parking revenue from public use, which income,
is likely to be exceeded by the cost of tax accounting for these meager sums. The notion of long
term use of the facility is not supported by any facts. These assumptions of the report are critical to
its analysis and are simply rpade up, having no reliable foundation.
Simply put, the project raises graveconcemsabout the location of this garage near the
intersection and its potential for grid-lock, blocking turning movements, snarling traffic and creating
inconvenience and safety problems for pedestrian use of the sidewalk. The report does not address
these at all and its failure to account for them along with its unsupported assumptions about the
composition of users and the length of parking stays, renders its conclusions erroneous.
2During the City Planning Commission review, the applicant offered to guaranty that only 19 of the 99 spaces will
be available for public use.
City of Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
November 5, 2003
Page 4
2. The Noise Report. The applicant submitted a noise study dated Aug. 27, 2003, from
Gary Ehrlich, Senior Acoustical Engineer. The report was done on, what we are told is, the only
other facility in the U.S. using this technology. The equipment was located in a private parking
garage and sound measurements were taken near the garage overhead door. The equipment was
operated without any cars on the lift. Onthe last page of the report it states:
"It can also be seen that the sound level in the garage was typically between 50
and 65 dBA, and occasionally reached 70 to 80dBA."
If these sound levels exist at the property line (where measured under the City Code), they
would exceed the maximum sound level~ for this zone district allowed under the City's Land Use
Code ("Code"), and the project could not be approved.
The relevant Code provisions are found in Article 18 (the "Noise Ordinance"). Section
18.04.040 limits the maximum allowable noise inthislandusje districtt055dBA between the hours
of 10:00PM and 7:00AM and 65dBA between the hours of 7:00AM and 10:00PM. So when the
report says the sound level is "typically between 50 and 65 dBA," it is saying that the garage will,
depending on the hours of use, typically violate the Aspen Municipal Code noise ordinance! When
the report says the noise levels "occasionally reached 70 to 80dBA," it is saying that occasionally
the noise reached levels that are deemed harmful! 3
Viewing the charts submitted with the report makes it clear that the Noise Ordinance's night
time 55 dBA limit is exceed most of the time and sound levels between 60 and 70 dBA are reached
about half the time. (See Figure 1 attached to the report). Furthermore, since the report was based on
the lift being operated without a car, we can only assume that the noise generated from this
equipment when it is under full load (e.g. when 5-6000 pound SUV's are on the lift) can only be
higher, not lower. .
To provide the Commission with some reference for these noise levels, a sewing machine
operates around 60 dBA,'a washing machine around 70 dBA and an alarm clock at 2 feet is about 80
dBA.4 Front loaders, backhoes, tractors, concrete mixers, moveable cranes, generators and
compressors operate in the 70-80dBA range.5 .
3Levels of75 dBA for outdoor activities and 65dBA for indoor activities are considered to generate "severe noise
impacts" by the Federal Highway Administration. See:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/regions/Northwestirp&s/environmentallaae/policies.htm#anchor6
4American Tinnitis Association at www.ata.org
5Reitze, Environmental Law, Chapter Three B- I 9
As previously mentioned, the noise report was not done at the property line and the applicant
has stated in prior public hearings that the garage lift will operate with the doors closed. Without a
study of the noise that escapes the building, all we know is that the lift equipment exceeds
permissible noise levels.
3. Specific Comments on Scoring Criteria. The following. are brief statements concerning
certain of the specific scoring criteria that we request you take into consideration in your
deliberations. The paragraph numbers track with the scoring section of the Code:
1. Quality of Design:
a. Architectural Design: The facility is a big box. It exceeds the height limits in its zone and is not
compatible architecturally, or with respect to its mass and scale, with neighboring properties. We
believe it represents a totally deficient design and should receive a score of zero.
b. Site design: There is virtually no open space and the site is almost entirely covered by the
building. Most importantly, the operational characteristics of this project are not accommodated by
this small site. Circulation is neither efficient nor safe as incoming and outgoing vehicles need to
cross the sidewalk and, as discussed in detail above, are likely to be parked across the sidewalk and
line up onto the street during peak usage. Based on the criteria of the scoring, this aspect must be
determined to be a totally deficient design, with a score of zero.
d. Amenities: There are no amenities. There is no useable open space. Although the application says
that pedestrian safety will be enhanced by the construction of new sidewalks, the parking garage use
and the operational problems associated with it render the sidewalks unsafe and frequently unusable.
This reflects a totally deficient design and should earn a score of zero.
e. Visual Impact. The building is out of scale with the neighborhood. Its mass Will block views
looking towards Aspen Mountain. Its almost 100% lot coverage provides no relief along the street
and its placement, with hardly any setback, directly next to B.enedict Commons, will shut out light
and air from many residential units. Again, this deserves a score of zero.
f. Trash and utility areas. As if to accentuate the deficiency of its design, the application states that
there is no room on the site for a trash area and its dumpster will be located on the adjacent property.
Again, this deserves a score of zero.
2. Availability of Public Facilities and Services.
c. Public Transportation/roads. The project will substantially alter in a negative way, existing
automobile and pedestrian traffic patterns, creating safety hazards and overloading the existing street
system. Another zero, please.
We appreciate your consideration of our concerns and thank you for your time in reviewing
this letter.
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
By:lcLL~ct?::t~
.' .. .... . Herbert S. Klein ....;)
Attachment
. .
700 E Hyman condo assn\gmqs-Lt-2(hklI04).wpd
Mr.. Herbert S. Klein
Herbert S. Klein & Associates
201 North Mill Street, Suite 203
Aspen, Colorado 81611
970 925 8700 fax 925 3977
RE: Propa::ed Park Place Parking Garage at 707 East Hyman in Aspen, Colorado 406/hkdoc
Per your request, I have reviewed the Park PIaa3 Commerci~1 Parking Facil ity Appli cation to de-
termine potential traffic impacts. Unfortunately, theapplication is completely lacking in informa-
tion regarding traffic operations, and I am unable to offer any profe$ioral opinion based on the
information contained in the'application. To provide any form of traffic review,the following
information must be provided: .
Dear Herb:
1. Anticipated si!e trip generation for daily and peek hour trips
2.' EXisting Street traffic volumes at peak times of operation
3. Level of Service analyses for entrance/exit at peek periods
'. 4. Average time from entering the garage until the next car can enter the same elevator
5. Queue analysis of waiting vehicles during peek periods
6. Parking Summary of the num~r of spaa:s provided for apartment/office users and employ-
ees of the garage
Although the application provides some information on expected daily trips, it dces not provide a
Complete unders1anding of the assumptions used to determine the anticipated daily trips. Both the
assumptions and data to support the assumptions need to be revie'Ned. No peak hour trip gereration
has bgen provided, which is critical in determining both the access operations and queuing charac-
teristics of the site.
Furthermore, J would recommend that all traffic analyses be completed with the a$Umption that
one bay is designated for ingress and the other bay is designated for egress. The proposal to hold
exiting vehicles while allowing vehicles to enter the garage will result in numerous operating prob-
lems, including the likely potential that vehicles will need to leave the facility to make room for
entering vehicles.
899 Logan Street, Suite 210 Denver, CO 8020,-,15+ TC,0,)4+b-2b26 FC,0,)4+b-0270
Finally, the site plan should identify the queuing arl3a for waiting vehicles to verify that vehicles
waiting to enter the garage will not impact the sidewalk.
When this information bec:nmes available from the applicant, I will be happy to review it. Without
the additional information, it 'is not possible to determine the traffic impacts of this application, and
the City of Aspen should not approve the proposal.
Sinrerely,
~~~
Kathleen L. Krager, P.E., PTOE
Transportation Engineer
fax and mail
""
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Aereement iOT Payment of City of Aspen :OC,,-e]OPijjent AiijlUcstion Fees
CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and John Cooper. Managing Partner. Hvman Avenue Holdings. LLC
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for
Park Place---Commercial Parkin!;! Facilitv. 707 East Hvman A venue. Aspen
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agr~s that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of
2000) establishes a :fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a
condition precedent to a determination of application completeness.
3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the :full extent of the costs involved in processing the
application. APPLICANT and CITY.further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT
make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on
a monlhly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or
approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make
additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY
agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process
APPLICANT~S application.
4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete
processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission andlor City Council to enable the
Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration,
unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision.
5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its rightto
collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial
depOSIt m fue amount of$ 2.5"20 which is for 12 hours of COiiimtitiity De'V'elopmeI1t staff
time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT sban pay additional monthly
billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, inCluding
post approval review at a rate of$205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. S'ucb periodic payments
shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT.further agrees that failure to pay such
accrued costs sball be grounds fur suspension of processing, and in no case win building permits be issued
untiIalI costs associated with case processing bave been paid.
CITY OF ASPEN
By:
Julie Ann Woods
Community Development Director
By:
/'
Date:
RET~N~ORP~RMAN&NTRecORD
Billing Address and Telephone Number:
Required
John Cooper. Mana2ine Partner
Hvman Avenue Holdin.!!"s. LLC
402 Midland Avenue Aspen 81611
379-3434
:\support\fornis\agrpayas.doc 6/05/03g
~
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOne};
REQUIRED BY SECnON26.304.060(E),ASPENLAN]) lJSE 'CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
707 East Hvman Avenue
, Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
Tuesdav.ll November
, 200J
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, F.L. (Stan CI~uson) (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirem~nts of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the folloWing manner:
-L Publica(ion of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
-L Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,
waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and
twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one
inch in height. Said notice was posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public
hearing and was continuously visible from the 26 day of October, 2001, to and
including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
---1L- Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contai~sthe information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) days prior to the
public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid
U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property
subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the
public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid
U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, muni(;ipal government, school,
service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns
property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the
development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than
~~y (60) days pw>r to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and
governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
, .-...
/......,..,-
N/ A Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the, requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names arid
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall
be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
s~
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowl dged before me this
of _ . tVa1J~'-"" , 200~ by -
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFI'ItI~.~SEA(~
.~. "'..., '" ......, ...... """" ",',-.
My commission expires: ~...~~ ~. c~::.
~ c~r=.~.::.:/
TTACBMENTS:
~F THE PUBLICATION
'F THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
o GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
j~
,,--....
ATTACHMENT 7
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
"
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
, Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBUCHEARING DATE:
,:00_
STATE OF COLORADO
)
) ss.
)
County of Pitkin
I, .:j ~V0eS [)VjJ-J- (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Sectio1126.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land U seCode in the following millmer:
~'publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of illl official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attachedheref'
, Posting Ofnotice:13Y postiIlg of notice, which form wasobtaideclfrorl1tl1eC
, COlllQ'lUlutypevelopment Department, which was made of suitable,
.w1t;rffrbl6f mrirerials, wluch was not less than twenty-two (22Tii1Clles'wrae
land twenty-six(2b) inches high, and which was composed of letters not
,..1ess than one incli i~l height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days
,;','prior to tlle public likaring and was continuously visible from the _ day of
,"" '. I', 200_, to and including the date andtfine()fthe public
he?-ring. A phoidgY-aph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Yj!'"
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Lillld Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid D.S: mai! to. illlY federal agency, state, count~, municipal govenune~t,
school, serVice dlstnct or other governmental or quasI-governmental agency~hat
owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to theu
development application. The names and addresses ofpropeliy owners shall be
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no mor,e than
sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and
governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
~
~
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient)egal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall
be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public
inspection in the plaIming agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such aInendments.
,/"
~D~
S' nature
~:~i
The fOreg~Affidavit of Notice., " was ackno.,wledged be ore l~lethi, s
of 0 " ',' ,200 ~by ~~~.:S ::"I .
"EDCbMMERClAi:
H MANA(lEMENI
REVIEW. NOTICE IS
: public hearing will be her~.'
. r 11, 2003, at a meeting to
e t ,,,'ASpen/Pitkin Counir
Growth Ma~agement Comm.lsslo!) :,,t:t,.h~ f(}rm~!,
Youth '" 455 Rio qr~nde' Pface, As-
. p';-ri, Col' der an application sl,lbn:llt-
ted by Hyman Avenue Hpldings. LLC, for a co111-
'n1e;:t:i'arde~ropmenCrIghfa"ocation from the
City,~'gr~Wth' management 'quota system: ' The'
property Is 'described, as, bO,tsA, ~':<::'.an,,<;l ~!i\~
Block, 105', 'City and Townsite of Aspen, 'and com,
monly known as 707 East Hyman Avenue, cur-
'rentIy an "A-Fnime" structure; 'and 300 SOu!~..
, " Street, an 'office, building also known,.. .the~
'oul\<lI,ig, The proposal. includes
> c,.: ...
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
'I/~01o.~
A TT ACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
f"l
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: PARK PLACE AUTOMATED COMMERC~ PAJ.U(lNG GARAGE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM SCORING REVIEW. I
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, November
11, 2003, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth
Management Commission at the former Youth Center Building, 455 Rio Grande Place,
Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application submitted by Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC,
for a commerciw, development right allocation from the City's growth mana.gement quota
,system. The property is described as Lots A, B, C, and D of Block 105, City and
Townsite of Aspen, and commonly known as 707 EastHyman Avenue, currently an "A..
Frame" structure, and 300 South Spring Street, an office building also known as the
"Hannah Dustin" building. The proposw includes the construction of an automated
commercial parking facility housing ninety-nine (99) cars, an accessory office, and two
affordable housing units on the A-Frame site and no changes to the Hannah.Dustm
building.. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community
Development Department, 130 S. Gwena St.., Aspen, CO. (970) 920-5072.
s/Jasmine Tvere. Chair
AspenIPitkin County Growth Management Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on October 18,2003
City of Aspen Account
Smooth Feed Sheets™
Use template for 5160@
312 HUNTER LLC 50%
c/o CAROLYN A BARABE
790 CASTLE CREEK DR
ASPEN, CO 81611
610 EAST HYMAN LLC
C/O KRABACHER LAW OFFICES PC
201 N MILL ST STE 201
ASPEN, CO 81611
AJAE L TO PARTNERSHIP
1501 N PIERCE #112
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72207
ALEXANDER THOMAS L
715 E HYMAN AVE # 27
ASPEN, CO 81611
ANDERSON ROBERT M & LOUISE E
1021 23RD ST
CHETEK, WI 54728
APPEL ROBERT
APPEL HELEN IN JOINT TENANCY
700 PARK AVE 18-A
: NEW YORK, NY 10021
!
ARTLA L TO PARTNERSHIP
WM C KING
,31 WINDING WAY
l VERONA, PA 15147-3853
ASPEN B COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
EMMY LOU BRANDT C/O
! 316 SOPRIS CIR
I BASALT, co 81621
ASPEN SQUARE VENTURES LLP
C/O M & W PROPERTIES
205 S MILLST STE 301A
ASPEN~ CO 81611
I ATHLETIC CLUB MGMT SYSTEMS INC
720 E HYMAN AVE
SUITE 001
ASPEN, CO 81611
, BARTLETT KATY I
: 715 E HYMAN AVE #18
ASPEN,Cd81611,~2066
BAUM ROBERT E ASPEN RES TRST
PO BOX 1518
STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262
, I
I'
i
BELL MOUNTAIN QUALIFIED
RESIDENCES
CONDO ASSOCIATION LLC
320 S SPRING ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
BELL MTN LODGE LLC
320 S SPRING ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
BERMAN PETER J & ROCHELLE L
10021 ORMOND RD
POTOMAC, MD 20854
BERSCH BLANCHE C
TRUSTEE OF BERSCH TRUST
9642 YOAKUM DR
BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210
~ BERSCH TRUST
: : 9642 YOAKUM DR
; I BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210
I I
BISCHOFF JOHN C
502 S VIA GOLONDRINA
TUCSON, AZ 85716-5843
!
BOGAERT FAMILY TRUST
PO BOX 300792 .
ESCONDIDO, CA 92030
BRADLEY MARK A
PO BOX 1938
BASALT, CO 81621
BROWN SCOTT M REV TRUST 50%
320 N 7TH ST
, ASPEN, CO 81611
BRZOSTOWSKIROBERT
715 E HYMAN AVE - APT 20
, 1 ASPEN, CO 81611-2096
I
BUCKHORN ARMS LLC
730E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
CALGI RAYMOND 0 & ANNE A
134 TEWKESBURY RD
SCARSDALE, NY 10583
CAMERON JAMES 77.5%
4504 BELCLAIRE AVE
DALLAS, TX 75205
CARR WILLIAM F TRUSTEE
64 DOUBLING POINT RD
ARROW SIC, ME 04530
CAVES KAREN WHEELER
1 BARRENGER CT
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A LLC
BLDG 421-G MBC
ASPEN, CO 81611
CHOOKASZIAN DENNIS
1100 MICHIGAN
WILMETTE, IL 60091
SAVERY@
Address labels
laser
5160@
Smooth Feed Sheets ™
CITY MARKET INC
CITY MARKET 16-ATTN SHELDON REAL
PO BOX 5567
DENVER, CO 80217
COATES TAIT DAVIS FIBIO 22.5%
i 4504 BELCLAIRE AVE
DALLAS, TX 75205
COOPER SPRINGS LLC
393 N COLUMBIA AVE
COLUMBUS,OH 43209'
CORTRIGHT KEVAN J 1/3
CIO CORTRIGHT REALTORS
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO, IA 50701
CUTTS JAMES & KAREN 1/3 INT
PO BOX 321 .
ASPEN, CO 81612
DALY FRANK & ANNETTE
1555 ASTOR ST 44W
CHICAGO,IL 60610
DIBRELL CHARLES G JR & FRANCES
24 ADLER CIR
GALVESTON, TX 77551-5828
(OLJLDNERKLJRTP
, ! 708 E HYMAN AVE
I ASPEN, CO 81611
ELLERON CHEMICALS CORP
710 NORTH POST RD #350
HOUSTON, TX 77024
FEHR EDITH B REVOCABLE TRUST
294 ROUND HILL RD
GREENWICH, CT 06831
.AVERY@
f"*\
CLEMENT FAMILY TRUST
CLEMENT KENNETH L & CHRISTINE 0
TRUSTEES
PO BOX 709
BIG BAR, CA 96010
i
I ' COLEMAN FAMILY TRUST
278 AL TA VISTA AVE
LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
COORS PHYLLIS M QPRT
WILLIAM SCOTT COORS TRUSTEE
I 15481 W 26TH AVE
GOLDEN, CO 80401
CRAFT LESTER R JR
2026 VETERAN AVE
LOS ANGELES, CA 90025-5722
DAIl:' Y CONNIE M
715 E HYMAN AVE #14
ASPEN, CO 81611
DAMSCHRODER TIMOTHY R & ROBIN S
2297 TRILLIUM WOODS DR
ANN ARBOR, MI 48105
I (DILL FRED H
411 BROOKSI DE AVE
i RED LANDS, CA 92373
EDGE OF AJAX INC
PO BOX 2202
ASPEN, CO 81612
ETTLlN ROSS L
715 E HYMAN AVE # 7
ASPEN, CO 81611
FERRY NATALIE
PO BOX 166
GLENCOE, IL 60022
l
Address labels
Use template for 5160@
COATES NELlGH C JR
720 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
COLOSI THOMAS W
715E HYMAN AVE APT 6
ASPEN, CO 81611-2099
CORTRIGHT KEVAN J 1/3
3806 PHEASANT LN
" WATERLOO, IA 50701
CURRIE VICKIE
5847 BELMONT AVE
DALLAS, TX 75206-6803
DALY CAROL CENTER
155 LONE PINE RD C-11
ASPEN, CO 81611
DEVINE RALPH R
715 E HYMAN #13
ASPEN, CO 81611
DODEA NICHOLAS T
715 E HYMAN AVE #19
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA
19900 E3EACH RD STE 801
JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469
FAMA ANTHONY REV TRUST 50%
320 N 7TH ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
FIGHTLlN JONATHAN 0
715 E HYMAN #46
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
laser
5160@
Smooth Feed Sheets™
FIVE TREES LOT 15 LLC
C/O FOUR PEAKS DEVELOPMENT
1000 S MILL ST
ASPEN, CO 81611-3800
FLY MARIE N
7447 PEBBLE POINTE
W BLOOMFIELD, Ml 48322
GILBERT GARY
1556 ROYAL BLVD
GLENDALE, CA 91207
HABER WILBUR A
HABER SANDRA
20409 KISHWAUKEE VALLEY RD
MARENGO,IL 60152
HEMP SUZANNEH & MARLY P JR
TRUSTEES
FOR THE SUZANNE HEMP LIVING
TRUST
15470 POMONA RD
BROOKFIELD, WI _53005
HOFFMAN JOHN S 111
715 E HYMAN AVE #16
ASPEN, CO 81611
(-
HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP
C/O M & W PROPERTIES
205 S MILL ST STE 301A
ASPEN, CO 81611
JOHNSON BARBARA WEAVER LIVING
TRUST
PO BOX 3570
LAS CRUCES, NM 88003
KASHINSKI MICHAEL R
0343 GROVE CT
ASPEN, CO 81611
KELLY SIMON P TRUST 50%
COITHE BUCKHORN ARMS LLC
ATTN: JOHN HOFFAMN 111 732 E
COOPER AVE ,
ASPEN, CO 81611
SAVERY@
~
i !
! '
FLINT MARILYN TRUSTEE
3945 KIRKLAND CT
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48302
FURNGULF L TO
A COLO JOINT VENTURE
616 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
GODBOLD EDMUND 0
· 524 COLONY DR
HARTSDALE, NY 10530
HAYLES THOMAS
715 E HYMAN AVE #5
ASPEN, CO 81611
HENDIRCKS JOHN AND BONNIE 1/2 INT
254 N LAUREL AVE
DES PLAINES, IL 60016
, !
I HUNKE CARLTON J
4410 TIMBERLINE DR SW
I FARGO, NO 58103
JACOBS NORMAN & JERI
2105 HYBERNIA DR
HIGHLAND PARK, IL 60035
JOYCE EDWARD
11 S LA SALLE ST STE 1600
CHICAGO,IL 60603-1211
KEENAN MICHAEL E & NOLA
265 S FEDERAL HWY BOX 332
DEERFIELD BEACH, FL 33441
KIEFER KAREN B TRUST 1/4
2130 NW 95TH ST
SEATTLE, WA 98117-2425
Address Labels
Use template for 5160@
FLOWERS JUDY R
, 715 E HYMAN AVE #1
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
GARRISON LELAND M TRUSTEE
4802 E SECOND ST SUITE 2
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE
455 CITY FRONT PLAZA
CHICAGO, IL 60611
HELLINGER PROPERTIES L TO
1849 WYCLIFF DR
ORLANDO, FL 32803
HENDRICKS SIDNEY J
6614LAKEVILLE HWY
, PETALUMA, CA 94954-9256
HUNT SARAH J
715 E HYMAN AVE #22
ASPEN, CO 81611
JOFFE LIVING TRUST
21320 DEERING CT
CANOGA DARK, CA 91304-5017
KANTAS NICOLETTE
715 E HYMAN AVE #15
ASPEN, CO 81611
KELLY NORA 0 TRUST 50%
C/O THE BUCKHORN ARMS LLC
732 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
KOPP ROBERT L 50%
34425 HWY 82
ASPEN, CO 81611
Laser
5160@
~,~ .~
.
Smooth Feed'Sheets™
Use template for 5160@
KRAJIAN RON
617 E COOPER AVE #114
. ASPEN, CO 8.161,1
KUTINSKY BRIAN
7381 MOHANSIC DR
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301
LANDIS JOSHUA B
715 E HYMAN AVE #4
ASPEN, CO 81611
LANDRY ELIZABETH J
PO BOX 3036
ASPEN, CO 81612
LAZY J RANCH LLC
C/O W R WALTON
PO BOX 665
ASPEN, CO 81612
LEGNAME RUDI
202 STANFORD AVE
MILL VALLEY, CA 94941
LEMOS BARBARA LIVING TRUST 1/31NT
, PO BOX 321
ASPEN, CO 81612
L1EB MADELINE TRUST
800 E HYMAN AVE 'itA
ASPEN, CO 81611
LONG GERALD P & PATRICIA 0
TRUSTEES
490 WILLIAMS ST
DENVER, CO 80218
LOUDERBACK JACQUELINE M & JOHN
719 E HOPKINS AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
MARTELL FRED & BARBARA
702 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
MAVROVIC ERNA
, 530 E 72ND ST APT 15-C
i NEW YORK, NY 10021
MAYLE KENNETH 0
715 E HYMAN AVE #3
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
MCFADDEN GORDON K
I 18519 E VALLEY RD
KENT, WA 98032
MIKI
PO BOX 566329
MIAMI, FL 33256
MOEN DONNE P & ELIZABETH A
8 CABALLEROS RD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
I MONGE EDWARD P & VICTORIA L
, 23284 TVVO RIVERS RD #11A
. BASALT, CO 81621
MYSKO BOHDAN 0
C/O ABERCROMBIE & ASSOC
418 E COOPER AVE
i ASPEN, CO 81654
N S N ASSOCIATES INC
11051 W ADDISON ST
FRANKLIN PARK, IL 60131
NATTERER HELEN
57 BURNBANK ST
NEPEAN
ONTARIO K2GOH2 CANADA,
NELLIS CHAD
13316 BEACH AVE
MARINA DEL RAY, CA 90292
NELSON BRYAN LEE
715 E HYMAN #21
ASPEN, CO 81611
NETHERY BRUCE
715 E HYMAN AVE #25
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
NEUMANN MICHAEL
7381 MOHASNIC DR
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301
NIELSON COL STEVE & CAROL 0
501 S FAIRFAX
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314
NOONAN JOHN C
715 E HYMAN AVE #9
ASPEN, CO 81611
PATIO BUILDING COMPANY LLC
PO BOX 1066
ASPEN, CO 81612
) i \,
,i (
! '
PEARSON REBECCA J
1610 JOHNSON DR
STILLWATER, MN 55082
PE"TERSON CHRISTY
62 LAKE SHORE DR
~ ' RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270-4054
PHILLIPS STEPHANIE
985 FIFTH AVE
NEW YORK, NY 10021
SAVERY@
Address labels
laser
5160@
.
Smooth Feed Sheets™
PITKIN EXCHANGE HOLDINGS OF
ASPEN LLC
601 E HOPKINS 3RD FLOOR
ASPEN, CO 81611
RED FLOWER PROP CO PTNSHP
545 MADISON AVE STE 700 ~
NEW YORK, NY 10022
ROARING FORK PROPRIETARY LLC
2519 E 21ST ST '
TULSA, OK 74114
RUBENSTEIN ALAN B & CAROL S
57 OLDFIELD DR
SHERBORN, MA 01770
SAKSON DREW
POBOX 1625
CARBONDALE, CO 81623-4625
SCHNITZER KENNETH L & LISA L
4023 OAK LAWN AVE
DALLAS, TX 75219
SHARP TERRI L
715 E HYMAN AVE #12
ASPEN, CO 81611
SIMMONS RICHARD P & DOROTHY P
1500 LAKESHORE DR APT 18 A
CHICAGO,IL 60610
STETSON SUSAN
715 E HYMAN AVE #11
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO 1/2
, 489 ROSE LN
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
SAVERY@
PORTE BROOKE
3520 PADDOCK RD
WESTON, FL 33331-3521
REICH DANIEL S TRUST 20%
6 RINCON ST
IRVINE, CA 92702
ROGER RICHARD R
4300 WEStGROVE
ADDISON, TX 75001
RYERSON GEORGE W JR
715 E HYMAN AVE #17
ASPEN, CO 81611
SANDIFER C WESTON JR & DICKSIE LEE
2836 WOOD DUCK DR
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
, SEGUIN JEFF W & MADALYN B
PO BOX 8852
ASPEN, CO 81612
SHERWIN GREGORY
2990 SHADOW CREEK DR
BOULDER, CO 80303-1751
SMART EDWIN J
PO BOX 799
ASPEN, CO 81612
STRIBLING DOROTHY &
WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135
PO BOX 40062
JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062
TERMINELLO DENNIS J & KERRY L
656 RIDGEWAY
WHITE PLAINS, NY 10605-4323
Address labels
Use template for 5160@
RAHLEK LTD
DOUGLAS ROGERS
2200 MARKET ST
GALVESTON, TX 77550-1530
REICH MELVIN L TRUST 80%
, 4609 SEASHORE DR
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
, :
ROSS JOHN F
, 7600 CLAYTON RD
: ST LOUIS, MO 63117
SAHR KAREN M
715 E HYMAN AVE #8
ASPEN, CO 81611
SCHEINKMAN NANCY
715 E HYMAN AVE #23
ASPEN, CO 81611
SEGUIN MARY E TRUSTEE OF TRUST
4944 CASS ST #1002
!! SAN DIEGO, CA 92109-2041
SHUMATE MARK
1267 STILLWOOD DR
ATLANTA,GA 30306
SPRING STREET PO
C/O GULFCO L TO
616 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
TAYLOR E NORRIS 1/2
602 E HYMAN AVE #1
ASPEN, CO 81611
TREUER CHRISTIN L,
981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N
LITTLETON, CO 80122
laser
~.~..'. ~..~ ." ".~
5160@
Smooth Feed Sheets ™
TROUSDALE JEAN VICK
611 E HOPKINS AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
VOTIS GEORGE T
GALT INDUSTRIES C/O
, 767 5TH AVE 5TH FL
NEW YORK, NY 10153
WALLING REBECCA
350 BLANCA AVE
TAMPA, FL 33606
WEIGAND FAMILY TRUST 23/100
150 N MARKET
WICHITA, KS 67202
WElL NANCY
1404 23RD AVE
GREELEY, CO 80634
WILLOUGHBY MARIAN V TRUST
12322 RIP VAN WINKLE
HOUSTON, TX 77024
WOODS FRANK J III
205 S MILL ST STE 301A
ASPEN, CO 81611
YOUNG RICHARD C 1/3
C/O CORTRIGHT REALTORS
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO, IA 50701
SAVERY@
Use template for 5160@
VICENZI HEATHER L
715 E HYMAN AVE #10
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC
C/O GARFIELD & HECHT PC
601 E HYMAN AVE
!, ASPEN, CO 81611
i;
WACHTMEISTER EDWARD TRUST
6223 WHITEHALL FARM LN
WARRENTON, VA 20187-7247
, WALLEN MERT
'i 36 OCEAN VISTA
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
WAVO 1998 TRUST
C/O WM VAN ORSDEL
443 SW 6TH ST
DES MOINES, IA 50309
WARNKEN MARK G
, 1610 JOHNSON DR
I ,STilLWATER, MN 55082
!
WEIGAND N R
WEIGAND M C
150 N MARKET
WICHITA, KS 67202
WEIGAND NESTOR Rill 50/100
C/O J P WEIGAND & SONS IND
150 N MARKET
WICHITA, KS 67202
WHITTENBURG J A III 80%
620 S TAYLOR
AMARILLO, TX 79109
WILKIE MICHAEL 1/2INT
254 N LAUREL AVE
DES PLAINES, IL 60016
WITHAM RICHARD 1/3
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO, IA 50701
WITHAM RICHARD J 1/3
C/O CORTRIGHT REALTORS
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO,IA 50701
YERAMIAN CHARLES
PO BOX 12347
ASPEN, CO 81612
YOUNG RICHARD 1/3
3806 PH EASANT LN
, WATERLOO, IA 50701
I ZENSEN ROGER
ZENSEN MARIANN
313 FRANCES THACKER
WILLIAMSBURG, VA 23185
Laser
5160@
Address labels
. ,..~,..,",~~"'.~ .~,....:,
co
MEETING DATE: November 11, 2003
NAME OF PROJECT:
GROWTH MANAGEMENTSCOlUNG-
707 East Hyman - PARK PLACE
CLERK:
Jackie Lothian
STAFF:
Chris Bendon
WIT~ESSES: (1) Stan Clauson, Jeffrey Halferty, Ron Erickson, John Fightlin,
ScottBrown, Hanna pevny, Fred Martell, Katie Bartlett, Mike Roffman, Mark Tye,
Carl Hecht, Sam Alexander, Gary Snyder, John Westownsend
EXHIBITS: 1 Staff Report (x) (Check If Applicable)
2 Affidavit of Notice ( x) (Check IfAppIicable)
3 Various maps, drawings
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve GMC Resolution #1, 2003 fhIding the
park Place Commercial Parking Facility located 707 EastlIyman met the necessary
threshold scoring for development allocation with the additional c()lldHions:the
window casements shall be color coated or not mill finished and a walkway between
the parking garage and the Hannah Dustin building shall be provided to permit
project residents to access trash receptacles in the alley. Seconded by Peter Martin.
VOTE:
YES '9
NO 1
RUTH KRUGER YES X NO
ROGER HANEMAN YES.X NO
JACK JOHNSON YES X NO
PETER MARTIN YES X NO
JOHN HOWARD YES X NO
JOHN ROWLAND
YES _X_ NO
MICHAEL AUGELLO YES _X__ NO
ERIC COltEN
YES_X_ NO
STEVESKADRON
PETER THOMAS
YES
NO X
YES _X_ NO
GMCVOTE
,...;,;;"",.,
~
W\j ~ (5 ~\ W'1L{+ ~'
l CW-< Mr ~ ~k (}vv\VC, k )
~2 G(~ WI ~ ~ vW ~ r ( ~
~ ~ 7f- {.Nt ~~.D .,~
r~ ~~ c-:.!.pL ~~ ~
,(~~ ~ ~LL'>I r~...v\.-( F~
eke. \ <s ~~ ~ ~
~k~ ~ o--ll ~ v-~~ ~
~ tvz..-r:A- -rJIG ~ "Yf~ ~ ~ CNv -<:.
(l-(\-C'~
15 September 2003
STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, LLC
Planning. Urban Design
Landscape Architecture
Transportation Studies
Project Management
Chris Bendon, Senior Long-Range Planner
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
200 EAST MAIN STREET
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
TELEPHONE: 970,925,2323
FAX: 970,920,1628
E-MAIL: clauson@scaplanning.com
WEB: www.scaplanning.com
Re: Request for GMQS Allocation of Com.m.ercial Square Footage
for the Park Place Parking Facility
Dear Community Development Staff.
On behalf of Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, we are writing to request that the City of
Aspen conduct the necessary reviews to provide a GMQS allocation of COmmercial
square footage for the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility, for the property described
as Lots C and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, located on East Hyman
Avenue between Spring Street and Original street.
The site currently contains an A-frame structure h()USing office uses. That structure has
an existing commercial net leasable of927 s.t:. The Park Place Parking Facility is a rack-
storage facility, without muhiple floors. Our analysis was reviewed with the Community
Development Zoning officer and determined that the proposed facility would have a
commercial net leasable component of approximately 4,836 s.t: The additional
commercial net leasable would therefore be 3,909 s.t: Since we are currently in the
review process, and minor changes may be dictated by that process, we are requesting a
commercial net leasable allocation of 4,000 s.t:, with the provision that the exact
allocation would be determined as part of the final PUD process for this facility.
This application is intended to supplement our earlier application for Conditi()nal PUD
approval and other related approvals for Park Place, along with subdivision of Lots A and
B from Lots C and D. The PUD is intended to provide for the redevelopment of Lots C
and D as an automated commercial parking facility that will entail the use of mechanical
elevators and platforms to store cars in designated compartments. The structure will
accommodate 99 vehicles total. It will also contain a small office space and two (2) deed
restricted affordable housing units with a total of four (4) bedrooms.
It is understood that this further application is submitted only for the GMQS allotment of
commercial square footage. Any approvals granting the requested allocation of .
commercial square footage through the OMQS process will be contingent on the parking
facility receiving approval through the PUD and Conditional Use process. However,
PUD approvals relating to the subdivision request will not be contingent upon this
subsequent GMQS review.
PLANNING AND DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR COMMUNITIES AND PRIVATE SECTOR CLIENTS
Chris Bendon, Aspen Community Development Department
15 September 2003
Page 2
This project has previously gone through Sketch Plan Review pursuant to Section
26.304.060 B2 of the Aspen Land Use Code on 21 October 2002, at which time the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council had an opportunity to preview
the project and provide comments. It is also in the process of being heard by the
Planning & Zoning Commission for its Conditional PUD and related approvals. Several
supplementary reports recently provided to the P&Z, but not in the original application,
are provided as appendices to this application. These include a traffic study and noise
analysis. The 1986 AspenlPitkin County Transitffransportation Development Plan,
which supports parking development in this area, has not been included here. Please
refer to the Conditional PUD application for this document.
The proposed Park Place Commercial Parking Facility will bring the subject property into
compatibility with the mixed use development that has occurred in the neighborhood.
The property is currently under~utilized and without streetscape amenities along Hyman
Avenue. Moreover, surface parking on the property adds a chaotic appearance to the
area. The proposed facility would correct these issues, while the entire downtown core
would benefit from additional parking in this location. The parking facility will reduce
demand for the limited on-street parking in Aspen and will compensate for employee
generation by incorporating two affordable rental units. '
We look forward to an opportunity to present this application, which we believe will
enhance the downtown Aspen experience for tourists and residents alike. We remain
ready to answer any questions that you or the review boards may have regarding the
application.
Very truly yours,
Stan lauson, AICP, ASLA
STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, LLC
Attachments:
A. Land Use Application Form, Dimensional Requirements Form, Project Overview,
and Standards Report
B. Traffic Study, prepared by Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig
C. Noise Analysis, prepared by Wyle Laboratories
D. Vicinity Map
E. Property Survey
F. Architectural Plans and Elevations
G. Landscape Plan
H. Architectural Rendering
I. Letter of Authorization
J. Legal DescriptionlProof of Ownership
K.. Pre-application Conference Summary,' dated 3 June 2003
PROJECT:
lAND USE ApPLICATION
ATTACAMENTA
Name:
Location:
APPlICANT:
Name: John Coo , M . Partner; H
Address: 402 ~i\Yetll1e, CO 81611
Phone #: 970379-3434
S, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name: Stan Clauson ~es, LLC
Address: 200 East Main S~t, CO' 81611
I>@@#: 97097.5-2323
TYPr: Of' Ae,Pb~Arl9"": (please checkalltJuitapply):
o Conditional Use 0 ' Conceptual Pun
o Special Review 0 Final PUD (&PUI>Amendmefit)
o Design Review Appeal 0 Conceptual SPA
[8] GMQS Allotment '. 0 Final SP A(&'sPAArrtendoient)
o GMQS Exemption D Subdivision
o ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream 0 Subdivisi9DBXemption (inCfudes
Margin, HaThUnLlke Blu1f, condominiumization)
Mountain View Plane
o Lot Split
o Lot Line A<ljustment
o Conceptual Historic Devt.
o Final Historic Development
o Minor Historic Devt.
o Historic Demolition
o Historic Designation
o Small Lodge Conversion!
Expansion
o
o
Temporaty Use
TextlMapAmendn1ent
o Other:
E>O$nNG~=( 'on of . . vals, etc.)
E~ property consists of Lots A, B, C, &, D; TownstteB109l{JPS.,. tQ~ A~llW~ an()ffice building,
KnownastheHannah-DustinB . . LotsC&DC()~@A-~~ir1Q:Qige~..~~
uses, 11lOdifications, etc.
Lots A &,B vvoul4J~.,~~.ifulll LQm C & D. Lots C & D would be.~Joped as a rack-stDrage
C<>Illll1erCiaI . 'fuC'.
H."e you attached 'the folloWing1
~Pre-App1icationC()nference Summary
~ Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement
.~ Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Fonn
~ Response to Attachment #3, MinhnUl11 ~~~ol19>Ilt~S
~. Response to Attachment #4, SpecifiC SUbnliSSion Contents
~ Response to Attachment #5~ Review Standardsfor Your Application
Fi:ESDuE: $ 2.520.00
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM
Project: Park Place. - COmmeJ:cialParkiI1gF~ility
Applicant: John Cooper,. Managing Partner;Hyman.AYeJlu~l:IQldings,1-LC
Location: 707 East Hyman Avenue; Lots C & D, Blo~lc 105, ASpen Townsite
Zone District: Office (0) "
Lot Size: I..()tsA, n, c,aridb~12.00()s.ttobeSu~diVig~.!1lt<)2JQ~ Qf6,OOO s.f.each
Lot Area: Lots C & D =6,000 sq. ft.
(for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within
the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot
Area in the Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable:
Nwnber of residential units:
Number of bedrooms:
Existin~:' 927 s.f.
Existing:Jl
Existing:Jl
Proposed: 4.836 s. f.
Proposed:--1
Proposed: -1..
Proposed % of demolition (HistoriC propettresortly):N/A
DIMENSIONS:
Floor Area:
Principal bldg. height:
Access. bldg. height:
On-Site parking:
% Site coverage:
% Open Space:
Front Setback:
Rear Setback:
Combined FIR:
Side Setback:
Side Setback:
Combinep. Sides:
Existing: 927s.f.
Existing: 20 ft.
EXlsi{ng: N1A
Existing: 20-30
Existing: N1A
Existing: N/A
EXisting: 10ft.
Existing: 15ft.
Existing: 25ft.
Existing: 5f/.
Existing: 5 ft.
Existing: 10ft.
Allowable: 6.000s.f.
Allowable: 25ft.
AJ1owabte:' ''lIft.
Required: 6
Required: N/A
Required: N1A
Required: 1 Oft.
Required:..' 1 ~ft.
Required: 45 ft.
Required: 5ft.
Required: 5ft.
Required: 1 Olt.
Proposed: 7.773s.f.
Proposed: 35 ft.
Proposed: -llf1..-
Proposed: 99
Proposed: N/A
Proposed: N/A
Proposed: 6.5ft.
Proposed;' Oft.
Proposed: 6.5 ft.
Proposed: sit.
Proposed' -1f.t..
Proposed: 8ft.,
Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Parking areas encroach in setbacks and on
City property. '
Variations requested: Floor area. height. front setback.. ,rear setbJlck.. and side yard
setbacks.
Project Overview
Park Place is a project that will address an essential need for off-streetI>arkit1~in A~en~s
commercial core. The Rio Grande parking garage is often full, while other off..street
parking in the business district is limited to private lots or spaces associated with
commercial buildings. It is evident that parking still remainS anissueili. ASpen tOday.
Park Place is intended to address this issue and offer some relief for the' cutrent
downtown parking situation.
As part of a 1986 study, the City adopted a plan to alleviate on-street parking by
constructing various facilities that WQuW provide parking and wouldanovv~y~s~ to
Aspen's commercial core. The Rio Grande parking garage was builtas a result of that
plan. Although intended as a comprehensive solution with several components, the
remaining aspects of that plan were never realized, including the cOrtStruCtion of a
parking garage within the block surrounded by Cooper,SPnng'ffyma~ana<?f1gIDa1'
The proposed Park Place-Commercial Parking Facility is located within this designated
block.
Park Place will make 99 parking spaces available near Aspell's conlIl1ercial core and
within walking distance to the Silver Queen Gondola. ,The facility will bea state-"of-the-
art facility that will use an automated vertical lift to stack vehicles within an enclosed
grid. This system will enable Park Place to achieve the most efficient use of space on a
modest sized property. Each space will be available for purchase, making parking
available to the owner whenever it is needed. WIient:6.at space is nofUiinzed, iiWllI
become available and rented to the public. , Not only. Will tmshelp to satisfy the parking
needs of local business workers and long term visitors, but it will r~lieve on-street
parking congestion in the city limits.
As demonstrated in the following GMQS applicatio~ Park Place will provide an essential
community benefit. The structure will accommodate two deed restricted residential units,
with a total of four bedrooms, situated along the streetscape to etllphasize the residential
components of the surrounding area. The project will also provide a sidewalk along the
front of the property, complete with fu1rlandscapingand ornamental tree plantings. This
will alleviate a current gap in the pedestrian infrastructure, which will integrate the
project as part of the neighborhood and create cohesiveness.
-1
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 1
Land Use Code Standard Report
Offered below are r~sponses to relevant standards as identified in the Lal1d Use Code:
1. ResDonses to Section 26.480.080 (0 (1) DeveloDment allotment and aDD"catton
procedures
a. How the proposed development shall be connected to the public water system
including information on main size and pressure; the excess capacity available in
the public water system; the location of the nearest main; andthees1;unatedwater
demand of the proposed development.
Response: The proposed development will connect with the city water system via Hyman
Avenue, which according to the City of Aspen Water Department is operating at a
pressure of approximately 70 PSI This is well above the typically required 35 PSI for
development in the area. The Water Department did not anticipate a problem providing
the required water supply to the Park Place project, as the daily demand would be
generated from the residential units only and a public restroom available to patrons and
employees.
b. How the proposed development shall be connected to the public sewage
treatment system; the access capacity available in the public sewage treatment
system; the nearest location to the building site ofatl'unk or connecting.sewer
line; and the expected sewage treatment demand of the proposed development.
Response: Park Place will be connected to the public sewage system located along
Hyman Avenue. The applicant will pay any necessary connectionfees associated with
the proposed development. The structure will contain. two resideniialunits, with a total
of four bathrooms and two kitchens, along with a public rest room serving the office
facflity. Additionally, drainage from parked vehicles will be accommodated with
appropriate oil and silt separation. This demand can adequately be accommodatedby the
existing City of Aspen sewage system.
c. The type of drainage system proposed to handle, surface, underground and
runoff waters from the proposed development, and the effect of the development
on historic drainage patterns.
Response: The Park Place facility will provide drywell drainage systems for building and
surface run-off in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineering Department.
The building will have a flat roof and cover the greater part of the lot, with no significant
effect on drainage patterns in the area.
d. The type of fire protection systems to be used (such as hydrants, sprinklers,
wet standpipes, etc.); and the distance to the nearest fire station and its average
response time).
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 2
Response: Park Place will be located less than four blocks from the nearestfire station,
which means that average response time in case of an emergency will be almost
instantaneous. The nearestfire hydrant is located at Hyman Avenue and Spring Street,
which is less than 100 feet from the proposed Park Place facility. Internal fire
suppression systems will be provided as required by the NFP A and the City Fire
Marshall. Standpipes will be provided on site. Construction will be subject to more
stringent 3-Hour fire ratings.
The interior and exterior walls of the parking structure will be fire proof to meet the
standards of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and a fire wall will be placed between
the parking area and the residential units. An emergency generator will be installed as
part of the system to protect against electrical failure. Approved sprinkler systems,
illumination systems, evacuation/roof access, hose bibs, and alarms will be implemented
and installed to the satisfaction of the Aspen Fire Protection District. Appropriate
ingress/egress will be providedfor both residential units as required by ihe {]iilform
Building Code.
e. The total development area of the proposed development, the type of housing
development proposed; total number of units andbedfooms,ilic1l1dmg employee
housing; and a tabular analysis outlining the proposed development's compliance
with the dimensional and use requirements of this title.
Response: The development will include a Category 1, one bedroom rental unit as well
as a Category 3, three bedroom rental unit. The dimensional requirements of the units
meet the standards of the PUD application submitted for this development.
f. The estimated traffic count increase on adjacent streets resulting from the
proposed development; and description of the type and conditiOn of I'oadSto serve
the proposed development; the total number of vehicles expected to use or be
stationed in such development; the hours of principal daily use on adjacent roads;
the on- and off-street parking to be supplied to the proposed development;
location of alternate transit (bus route, bike paths, etc.); any automobile
disincentive techniques incOrPorated in the proposed development; whether roads
or parking areas will be paved; and methods to be used for snow and ice remOval
on streets and parking lots.
Response: It is important to understand that a parkingfacility is not considered a traffic
generator, considering people do not designate a parking facility as a point of
destination. Traffic generation for the Park Place facility will only result .from the
affordable ho~ing components of the project. The total traffic generation is estimated to
be less than 5 trips per day per residential unit, which is actually less than is generated
by the office space that currently occupies the lot. Trips will be reducedfurther if these
residential units are occupied by employees of Park Place. A trqffic analysis has been
appended to this application.
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 3
g. The method by which affordable housing will be provided, in conformance
with the provisions of the AspenIPitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines,
and a description of the type and amount of housing to be provided.
Response: Affordable housing will be provided on site and situated along the streetscape
to enhance the residential aspects o/the neighborhood As mentioned above, the Park
Place development will include a Category 1, one bedroom rental unit as well as a
Category 3, three bedroom rental unit. At least one unit is intended for occupancy by
employees of Park Place.
Response to Section 26.470.100 Growth ]\fan~u!elDeltt S~orin2 Criteria -
Commercial and office develo~ment (C) Criteria. " '" "',
A development application requesting development allotments for commercial or office
development shall be assigned points by the Growth Mariagement' Commission pursuant
to the following standards and point schedules:
1. Quality of design (maxinlum eighteen (18) points). Eacli development shall be
rated based on the exterior quality of its buildings and the quality ofits site design, and
assigned points according to the following standards and considerations:
o - A totally deficient design
1 - A major design flaw
2 - An acceptable (but standard) design; or
3 - An excellent design
The following features shall be rated accordingly:
a. Architectural design (maximulll three(3) iX>ints). Considering the
compatibility of the proposed development (in terms of scale, siting, massing,
height, and building materials) with existing, neighborhood developments.
Response: The proposed Park Place facility was designed to enhance the aesthetic
qualities of the neighborhood by incorporating modern architecturalfeatureswith a
variety of materials to compliment existing development of the area. The office and
residential units will be built along the fafade of the building to enhancing the mixed
uses that already exist in the neighborhood. Since the utility components of the Park
Place facility will be almost entirely hidden from the streetscape, a score of 3 is
requested
b. Site design (maximum three (3) points). Considering the quality, character,
and appropriateness ofthe proposed layout, landscaping, and open space areas,
the amount of site coverage by buildings, the extent of underground Utilities, and
the arrangement of improvements for efficiency ofcircuIation, including access
for service, increased safety and privacy, and provision of snow storage areas.
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Pa.ge 4
Response: The space required for the parkingfacility allowed no additional square
footage for open space. However, the property will be greatly improved by adding a
sidewalk with landscaping (including cottonwood trees) along Hyman Avenue. All
utilities will be placed underground and access will be provided from either Hyman
Avenue of the rear alley. Snow storage may be accommodated on the a4iacent property,
which will be formalized in an access agreement. The applicant would request a score of
2 for this section.
c. Energy conservation (maximum three (3) points). Considering the use of
passive and/or active energy conservation techniques in the construction and
operation of the proposed development, including but not limited to insulation,
glazing, passive solar orientation, efficient heating and cooling systems and solar
energy devices; the extent to which the proposed development avoids wasting
energy by excluding excessive lighting and inefficient wood burning devices; and
the proposed development's location with regard to the potential for solar gain to
result in energy conservation.
Response: The northern orientation of the site does readily lend itself to solar utilization.
The residential units will be designed to comply with the Aspen/Pitkin County Effzcient
Building program and will incorporate efficient low flow fixtures, lighting, heating
systems, as well as energy effzcient glazing and insulation systems. The applicant
requests a score of 2.
d. Amenities (maximum three (3) points). Considering the provision of usable
open space, pedestrian and bicycle ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters, and
other common areas for users of the proposed development.
Response: As mentioned previously, the applicant is committed to incorporate a
sidewalk along Hyman Avenue. Pedestrian sqfety will be improved and the aesthetic
quality of the neighborhood will be enhanced with the incorporation of a sidewalk
incorporating landscaping and tree plantings. A score of 3 is recommended since the
proposed development will result in a significant visual enhancement of the area.
e. Visual impact (maximum three (3) points). Considering the scale and location
of the building(s) in the proposed development to prevent infringement on
designated scenic viewp1anes.
Response: The previously submitted PUD application for Park Place requests a height
variance to 35 feet for the parking structure, which will be similar to that of the adjacent
Benedict Commons building. The residential unIts situatedalcmg HymanAvenuewill
comply with the City's height limitation of 27 feet.
f. Trash and uti1i~ access areas (maximum three (3) points). Considering the
extent to which required trash and utility access areas are screened from public
view; are sized to meet the needs of the ' proposed development and to provide for
public utility placement; can be easily accessed;a1low trash bins to be moved by
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 5
service personnel, provide users with recycling bins, and provide enclosed trash
bins, trash compaction or other unique measures.
Response: Most of the trash generatedfrom Park Place will be associated with the two
proposed residential units and therefore the needfor trash services will be minimal.. The
applicant is willing to provide an easementfor the placement of a Park Place dumpster
.on the adjacent Hannah Dustin building site. A score of 2 is requested for this section.
2. Availability of public fa~ilities and sef!ices,(maximum ten (!O) points). Each
development application shall be rated on the basis of its impact upon public facilities
and services by the assigning.pOints accordfug tothe folloWing standards and
considerations:
0- Proposed development requires the provision of new public facilities and services at
ihcreasedPublic expense;
1 - Proposed development mayby handled by existing publicfacilities and services, or
any public facility or service improvement made by the applicant benefits the proposed
development only, and not the area in general; or
2 - Proposed development improves the availability of public facilities and services in
the area without increased, undue public expense.
In those cases where points are given for the simultaneous evaluation of two (2) services
(i.e., water supply and fire protection)the determination of points shall be made by
averaging the scores for eaCh feature.,
a. ,Water supply/fIre protection (maximum two (2) points). Considering the
ability of the water supply system to serve the proposed development and the
applicant's cornmitmentto installany water system extension or treatment plant
or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development. Fire
protection facilities and services shall also be reviewed, considering the ability of
the appropriate fire protection district to provide services according tOestiililished
response time without necessary of upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of
available water pressure and capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the
commitment of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which may be
necessary to serve the proposed development.
Response: The existing water supply for the property is feed by a main on Hyman
Avenue, which will provide adequate supply for the project. The current pressure at this
location is 75 PSI
b. Sanitary sewer (maximum two (2) points). Considering the ability of the
sanitary sewer system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's
commitment to install any sanitary system extension or treatment plant or other
facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development.
Response: The project will be connected to the City of Aspen sewer system.
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 6
c. Public trans.portationlroads (IDaXimum two (2) points). Considering the ability
of the proposed development to be served by existing public transit routes. The
review shall also consider the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed
development without substantially altering existing automobile and pedestrian
traffic patt~ creating safety hazards or maintenance problems, overloading the
existing street system or causing a need to extend the existing road network and
consider the applicant's commitment to install the necessary roa.d system
improvements to serve the increased usage attributable to the proposed
development.
Response: The Park Place developmentWill be served by Hyman Avenue, which can
adequately accommodate the users of the parkingfacility. It has been cited in a City of
Aspen parking analysis, that vehicles have been observed to travel up to four times the
minimum length ofa trip in a prolonged effort to find available parldng space. It was
estimatedthat during peak hours, half the number of carS traveling on the street in Aspen
are searching for parking. More readily available parking can reduce traffic by reducing
the number of cars that are roaming the stre~ts in search of on-street Parking spaces.
The additional parking ameni~s will be provided to pUblic at absolutely no cost to the
City of Aspen. The applicant requests a score of2.
d. Storm drainage (maxhnU1l1 two (2) poitlts). Considering the degree to which
the applicant proposes to maintain histo~ drainage patterns on the development
site. If the development requires use of the City's drainage system, the review
shall consider the commitment by the applicant to install the necessary control
facilities and to maintain the system over the long-term.
Response: The existing drainage on the site will not be negatively qffected in any way.
Additional drainage intakes will be constructed in accordance with the requirements and
standards of the City of Aspen Engineering Department. The applicant requests a score
of2.
e. Parkfug (maximum two (2) points). Considering the provisions ofparking
spaces to meet the commercial, office, and/or residential needs of the proposed
development as required by Chapter 26.515, and considering the design of the
parking spaces with respect to their visual impact, amount of paved surface,
convenience, and safety.
Response: The Park Place parkingfacility will accommodate 99 vehicles, including
those associated with the residential units andofflCe space. This will serve adjacent uses
and those internal to the project while, at the same time, provide additional parking
opportunities for businesses, residents, and visitors in the Commercial Core. A score of
2 is suggested for this section.
3. Provision of affordable housing (lDaxilDum fifteen (15) points).
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 7
a. General. Each development application shall be assigned points for the
provisions of housing which complies with the. housing size~ type, income and
Occupancy guidelines of the City, and the provisions of the Affordable Housing
Guidelines.
b. Assignment of points. Points shall be assigned as follows:
(1) Zero (0) to sixty (60) percent of the additional employees generated by the
proposed development: One (1) point for ~h six (6) percent housed;
(2) Sixty-one (61) to one.hundred (rOO) percent of the additional employees
generated by the proposed development: Ten (10) points for the first sixty (60)
percent housed, plus one (l) point for each additional eight (8) percent housed.
Response: The employment generated by this proposed development is about 5 year-
round FI'E personnel. The proposed residential units include a total.of 4 bedrooms thus
accommodating 4 people. The applicant should be awarded 12 points for this section.
4. Bonus Points (maximum four (4) points). Bonuspoints may be assigned when it is
determined that a proposed development has not only met tOO. Substantive standards of
Sections 26.470.100 (A) through (C), but has also exceeded the provisions of these
Sections and achieved an outstanding overall design meriting recognition. An award of
additional bonus points shall not eXCeed ten (100 percent of the total points awarded
under Section 26.470.100 (A) through (C).
Response: No points are requested/or this section
Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
Land Use Code Standards Report
Page 8
ATTACHAmTB
FELSBURG
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
engineering paths to transportation solutions
August28,2003
Mr. Stan Clauson, AICP, ALSA
Stan Clauson Associates, LLC
200E. Main Street
Aspen CO 81611
RE: Traffic Analysis
Park PbJce Parking Garage
FHU Reference No. 03-169
Dear Mr. Clauson:
Felsburg Holt & Ullevig has prepared thisletterto sumrrtarit:et~~lrafflSil"T1pactsassociated with
the proposed 99-space Park Place COrTlrnerc:ialParking Facility (Park Place garage) to be
located at 707 East Hyman Avenue in Aspen, Colorado~T~i~l~tt~W~l.JrTlrTlCjfi:ze~ the existing
land use and traffic impacts associated with the smCjI! offIge.l:>pilqing and parking area curre/'ltly
on the site, the existing traffIc volumes on Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site., the number
of trips forecasted for the proposed garage, and the traffIc impacts to the adjacent streets
associated with those trips.
Existing Land Use
Currently, the site consists ofa 927 square foot A-frame offIce bpilding and small surface
parking lot that can CjccomrTlodateappro)(imately 15 vehicle~.OnCltypic:a1 day, this lot is used
to capacity. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Gen~rCltion,SixthE(jiti()n'Nas
used to forecast the existing daily andpeak hour trips associated with the office building. The'
existing parking lot trips were estimated based on inforrTlatio/'l prQvided by the City of Aspen for
the Rio GrandeParking Garage. In that garage during peak til11~softh~year, each space is
used approximately 1.5' each day; with the peak dem~md occurring be1'Neen1 t AM and 2pM,
which is outside of the morning and afterno()n peakhours ofadjaceht street traffIc (one. hour
between 7 and 9 AM and 4 and 6 PM). Since traffic impacts are typically measured. dlJring the
peak hour of street traffic, it was estimated that approximately 15 percent of the total daily traffic
would occur during those morning and afternoon peak periods. These characteristics were
applied to the existing surface lot on the site.
Table 1 shows the number of daily and peak hour trips currently associated with the site., As the
table indicates, the existing land uses on the site generate approximately 105 daily trips, 12 AM
peak hour trips, and 12 PM peak hour trips.
fhu@fhueng.cdm
Greenwood Corporate Plaza
7951 E. Maplewood Ave. Ste. 200
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 2
Table 1
Existing Trips Generated by the Site
Existing Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes on East Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site were obtained from the City.
Summer counts were conduced in 1997 and winter counts were conducted in 1994. These
counts were factored to 2003 conditions based on the traffic growth factor calculated by the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for Original Street (SH 82) immediately east of
the site. Based on this factor, Hyman Avenue currently experiences approxirrtatelY 3,500
vehicles per day (vpd) in the summer and approximately 2,300 vpd during winter. The summer
volume on Hyman is1 ,700 to 1,900 vpd lower than the summer Voll,Jme (>neither Cooper
Avenue (4,900 vpd) or Hopkins Avenue (4,700), one block north and south of the site,
respectively, and is approximately 3,000 vpd lower than the volume on Durant Avenue (6,500
vpd), two blocks north of the site. All four streets appear to have similar mixes of commercial
and residential land use. Thus, it appears that Hyman currently experiences traffic volumes that
are somewhat lower that the typical volumes on other local streets in the downtown area.
Proposed Land Use
As proposed, the site would be developed as a 99-space garage, with two affordable housing
units. The garage is consistent with the land use identified for the site in the Aspen/Pitkin
County Transitrrransportation DeveJqpment Program, 1986-2000 (Leigh, Scott & Cleary, 1986),
which identified a300-space parking garage for the site. To maximize space usage, a
mechanical system would be used to park cars. Drivers would park their caron one of two
mechanical lifts, exit the car, and the lift would move the car into an available spot.
Table 2 summarizes the trip forecast with the proposed land us~s., .ITE Trip Generation,6th
edition was used to forecast trips associated with the affordable housing. As for the garage,
based on our understanding of the operation, all of the garage spaces Would be available for
purchase or long-term rental by local residents. It was assumed that approximately 20 percent
of the spaces would be used by part-time local residents to store their vehicles when out of town
and thus would generally be unavailable for use on a daily basis. The remaining 80 percent (80
spaces) would be used on a daily basis by local residents, merchants, employees, and visitors.
These daily spaces would be in a mannersimilar to the Rio Grande garage; i.e., each space
used approximately 1.5 time each day, with apprOXimately 15 percent of the daily demand
occurring during the morning and afternoon peak hours of the adjacent streets. Based on these
August 28, 2003
,Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 3
assumptions, the proposed land uses would generate approximately 250 daily trips, 37 AM peak
hour trips, and 37 PM peak hour trips.
Table 2
Proposed Park Place Trip Generation
1
36
37
Traffic Impacts
Table 3 summarizes the net trips generated by construction of the Park Place Garage. These
trips represent the trips generated by the garage, minus the existing trips from the site. The
total represents the new trips that would' be added to Hyman Street. However, it should be
noted that these trips are not new trips to the downtown Aspen area, but rather represent
existing traffic that currently uses other parking locations. In fact, construction of the garage
may result in a minor reduction in overall tr~ffic in the downtown area, because some of the
vehicles that would use the garage currently circle the area in search of .on-street parking. With
the new facility, these vehicles would drive directly to the lot and be removed from circulation.
Table 3
Net Trip Generation from the Park Place Site
As the table indicates, Hyman Stre.et in the vicinity of the site would experience' approximately
145 additional daily trips as a result of the Park Place Garage. This represe~ts a. three percent
increase over the existing daily traffic volume on that block. The total daily traffic volume of
3,645 vpd on Hyman Street would still be approximately 1,250 vpdless than the daily volume on
Cooper Avenue and 1,050 vpd less than the daily volume Hopkins Avenue, one block north and
south of the site, respectively. Therefore, the parking garage would not change Hyman Street's
character as a lower volume local street in downtown Aspen.
"
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 4
Queuing
The estimated total time required to park each car using the lift system V\f()uld,pe approximately
90 seconds (from the time the vehicle drives onto the I.ift to the time the lift returns for the next
vehicle);thus, \oVit~t\yol.iftl?gJ()talof 80 vehiclE?S coulci. be parked each hour (3600 seconds/hour
/ 90 seconds/vehicle * 2 lifts = 80 vehicles/hour).' A waiting area with room for four vehicles
would be provided on the site for vehicles entering the garage and waiting for the lift., To
minimize queuing, these entering vehicles would be given priority with the lifts, and drivers
would pay upon exiting.
Based on projected peak period arrival rates and the lift processing time, during the morning
and evening peak hours of adjacent street traffic the maximum queue at the lifts would be two
vehicles, which would be contain~d vvithin the four-car storage area. During the busie.st hour of
the day (mid-day peak) during the busiest time of year, it is estimated that a maximum of half of
the daily spaces (40 spaces) would turn-over (40 trips in, 40 trips out). During these periods,
the maximum queue woUld be 4 vehicles, which also would be contained within the site.
Conclusions
Based on the results of the analysis, the proposed Park Place garage would generate
approximately .145 net d9ily trips from the site. This represents a three percent increase over
existing daily traffic volumes on that block of Hyman Avenue, but still would result in total daily
traffic volumes there that are significantly lower than the C)djacent local streets. The garage
could also result ina lowering of overall downtown Aspen traffic by reducing the number of
vehicles circulating for on-street parking spaces. Peak period queuing by vehicles entering the
site would be contained within the waiting area provided on site.
I trust this information is sufficient for you to make an informed decision on traffic impacts
associated with the project. If you have any further questions, please call.
Sincerely
ULLevlG
Je R , P.E.
Senior Transportation Engineer
08/28/2003 11:13
17734862438
Au, Z7 Og 11~Q1p
Gar~ EhrH ch
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
70$-S34-27S0
A TT ACRf1!NTC:
Phon... It
Phone ir
"'YlL.
Post-it" Fax Note 7671
To ..".....,
CoJDept.
August: 27, 200:3
Mr. Jack L.itschewskr
Mid-American elevator Company'
5101 General Washington Drive
AI~a"dr;a~ Virg;rlia 22312.
Fax ~19' 7<:::> '2/S" ~ '7';;'
Fax #
Reference: Summit Grana pare - PLlrKing Machine Noise
This Jetter summarizes the noise level, measurements performed by Wyle
l.eboratorles at the Summit Grand Pare building in Washington, D.C.
This builcilng has a parking rrli;u::hirle. The resrdenl drives tht::ir vehicle;;: into" rOQm
#2. ~ The parking machine is then engaged. The platfonn in the room rotate.,;
slightlv and the vehjcle is towered to the appropriate level of the garage. Upon
exit, the r~sldent calls for the vehfcle. The parking machine uses a crane to
retri~ve the vehicle and prace it on a different platform. That platform is t/1en
~rsed up to "room #l fI, and the residel"lt: drives oui:.
Overa1r A-w~ighted and one-third octave Qand sound fevels were measured twice
each second in the lobby and in the garage as the parking machine was operated.
Sound fevels are often expressed fn one-third oct:~ve bands. The range of human
hearing is approximately from 20 to 20,OQO H2:. The A-weighted sound level ;s the
most commonly lIsed noise metric. The A-werghting Arter was designed to
simulate the frequency sensitivity Of the human eat at low to moderate loudness.
Two sounds wfth the same A-weighted Sound level Should be jUdgE" equally loud
by most people.
Sound levels were measured during brief periods between ~O;30 and 11=3() a.m.
on August 27, 2003. The measurements were not performed when people were
using the e'l:!vator's or lobby. OccaslonaIly, there was some noisefrol'l1 the
reception desk and office ar~a on the opposite side of the 'Qbby. Ambient noise
was generatfy attributable to street traffic, ventilationsystems1 and th~ distant
office workers.
The garage moasute:l'l1cnts were performed in the pmrking garage approximately
ten feet from the overhead door at the entrance to room #2 (the room that drivers
enter first before parking), Sound fevers were measured in the garaqe as the
machine was operated in the exit and entrance cycles. No vehicfe was on the
platform during the tests.
The lobby measurements were performed in the hallway between the reception
desk and the elevators. The door between that hallway and the garage was
closed. Sound levels were me~sured in each location during dlfferent cycles, not
simurtaneously.
Wylll ~I'flls, Ine. l:l1101 Jel'l'ersOll D\lf~tl J.t1~1'l\v.;1y. Sulle101, Arllnglllt!, VA ~oo3lJO.lf Tet 703/415-45!10, 'T'eletopy. 703t1l15.d558
"08/28/2003 11: 13
17734862438
Aw~ 27 03 11:0tp
G.a"'~ Ehrlich
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
703-534..2750
PAGE 02
p.4
Mr, L1tschewski
August 27, 2003
Page 2
Figure 1 shows the A~Wej9hted SOt,lnd level each haIr-second. It can be seen from
Figure 1 that sound levels were essentiaUy the same In the loO,?Y WiOl the parking
machine operating as without." It ~n .alsobe seen that:. the sound level in the
garage. W~H; tYpi~lIy betw~pn 50 and fi!; dBA.. and t'Icc2ls1()nalfy reached 70 1:0
SO dBA.
figure ~ Shows the frequency spectra averaged over the entire test period, aml
Figure 3. shows the frequency specl:ra averaged OVer the loudest five-second
p~~od. Again, it can.. be seen, thats()und levels were nearly identical wIth the
parking machine and without it in the lobby.
SubjectivelYJ the parkingrnaCflir'f;J was barely audible in tl1e lobby.
Please can me at 703/415-4550 ext. lS /1' you tequfre any additionaf information.
SfncerelYr
~~r~
Senior Acoustical Engrneer
"'*--
1218/28/201213 11:13
1
17734862438
o
~
o
l'.)
o
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
.~
......l..,
PAGE 03
1
j
I
I
31 '=
"
46
61 _
76 ;;
91
105
121 :
136.
151 ::
166 .
rn ~
3 181:
'C
iir 196
~ 211
8-
0228
"'"
I I + +
b b 'G) ~.
0' g ~iil
~~(t)(Q
" CDW
.0 ~ t 0
r:: 0 c
~. :e::::: ra""
:;:$ -. ....
<<J t1I:f I
m ar.o rn
;L ~ ~
..:< -
I 0<
L-
I
Overail'$ound Level, d8A
8
<3 ~
(0
u
'-n
(ii'
s::
..,
CD
-'"
.
J;lW
~
~
=
a:
CD
c.
en
o
c
::s
c:1.
r
I(Il
Gi
ti
m
~
Z"
P
0-
0)
CD
C')
o
::J
Q.
241 "
256
271
266
301 -
331
346
361 ~
376 -
391
~
o
.b-
o
(~
o
.r_...... ,...... ~ 'II::I>'~
dnn~TT ~n ~~ ~nH
08/28/2003 11:13
L...
17734862438
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
""'~,.
i')
o
Sound Level, dB
~ 8 ~
m
o
J , + +
r-r-G')G)
00 m m
C" C" .., ...,
:tT er ro m
'<'<(0\0
I . CD CD
O):l.IO
f;i g. ~ ~.!
~. (j)' s' ~ I '
m ;!. (t;1 ~!
~_ Ij
PAGE 04
-..J
o
co
o
.J!
(g
c
"'"
at
~
~
d)
ia
c
CfI
"Tl
Cil
~
l1)
:;,
n
'<
tn
"a
CD
n
....
;
C
J::
::s.
:s
(Q
....oj
~
fn
-
-~
.L.r-r-_e-n.l
l..IOI 1.../43 c:;,..ne~
dOO:!! EO L2 ~nH
08/28/2003 11:13
17734862438
r ....,.
0
I d8A
.20 Hz
25Hz
3.2 Hz
40Hz
0 50 H:z:
:3
co S::S Hz
.
;j. 80Hz
a
0 1'00 Hz
CO)
-
~ 125 Hz
co
CD
~ 1 eo Hz
Q.
fJ 200 Hz
=
- 250 Hz
a)
""I
." 315 Hz
(il
.Q
,s::: 400 Hz
~
;;1
~
:.< 500 Hz
Ii 630 Hz
800 Hz
1kHz
11<26 Hz
1 kf5 Hi:
2kHz
2k5 Hz
3k15 Hz
'-
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
PAGE 1215
J\.)
o
~
Sound Level:o dB
t:i E{
en
u
~
(..1
e
-n
6'
~
tiS
?
'"T(
i
.a
s:=
CD
~
n
'<
CI)
'"0
Q)
CO)
-
a
~
~
~.
r-
~
J:1.
QI
~
'TI
<"
(II
f
o
;:,
0-
"tI
CD
"'l
-.
o
a.
I
I
J
~tb~
~ m t:l" r:r
D) m t::r S
CQ <C "< """"
CD Q) J
~ b ~ ~
::t::. C 0" :::I.
::J ::l. iir ::]
co .a ::J (C
III - - m
s!!l ::1
...J ~
~
'--'
,)
---'-.. - _L,......._ ~I'"t I
40 ~ '[ .JLl3 P;...I1~e
dOD :t '[ SO i.~ ~"l:i
..::-'.'...-:-.....'...--:.....'..-. .:"':..":".-:,'.:,'
.:.. "'," . ,...,..--,.-.... ..,....... ...,
<...":....:.:-:...'.:',. "..-:-,::',,'.:-:.,'.-" '- ", ',,' <
,,~OUNDPRESSURE
(25J~t~~~:~~~ ~ JlPa
100000000
~~~~~>
",' i"ii , . '.. . , 10000
Conliersational Speech
$()t)I\AP'.'PR'ESSORE 'I..EVEI..
140 dB
1 000000
130
~ ... ~ .. ~ '" Firecrac
120
10000000
Rock 1> > ~ ~ .. ~ 110
Group
100 ~
\" \.~)..~
l'?f~r7'Y'T
100000
80
70
~ .. ~ ~ ~ ,~ Business Office
60
so
~~~~~~
Library 1 000
40 ~ .. Living Room
30
100
20
.. i .. '4 .. 1 Wood
10
20 0
ATTACHMENTr>
300 South Spring Street
Vicinity Map
co....
....
';.c:
:. 0.....
>>ETJ : :11
_ 0 - . .
~. Sco2!l!
...c ..-liB
..A..
: 1:11
u..
I-
Z
W
~
<(
l-
I-
<
~w
0:0
<<
a.....JI
a..
i If
- %0
l F-g
. ;
1181
-0 C',) _
c:u::
!
I
I
~
I
i
Ii
I
I
I
..
I
...
i
---"'-~"-'~- -'---.-------~.._;;.c~c'._.._____-'""_.,;_".~_ ~._
J
I
W
I-
Z ,"" "i!i'" ,",
W ',~, ~
.~. ,f"4,
0 {K, I
u z ~ ~. 1i
<( ~ > ..I{ I
0 w
i >-
I- z J '" .
.... -< * ~
< I ! r ...
t:a <
... '.. :; "
< ~t: '~ L
:z ~ ~ ri~ ~
~ lii ! -j~ ~ z
~ ~
Co:) ~ i i!i v -' ~
~ I > ~oo ~
i w w ~
,~ i <! ~
;: u.
,
,
o@ 4
I 0
i
" ,
~
~-
~':'!!:!. ,.,
.,,,,,.~.
o
~~
, ....
!... ......
~~
",0
..... 'l:),
Q~
~O
~~
l.tJ
---- t:Q
~ '
,1)0 '001 _________
".a,. ___
. OS.., $ ______
l.tJ
::J
~
&q
;;..
<<;'
~..
<<;' 0'
~,.;
::.. :if
~ ~'
,...
'"
<<;'
l.tJ
'"
Q
....
----- -----
- 0',:---....
Y-!-.-. --. f' --- .'
l ____~- ~
----....' - -- ----- .:::----,
Q
...:t
- g
:> ~
A<
(,)
o :
~ .:
&l':l i;
:?'
::..
w
w
I-
Z
~
:c
u
'<
l-
f-
<
..c::Iz
/
,CI)
,~,
tc.,
"r:'"""-
~
%
Q
Z
-<
Q
Z
~
CJ
'~
IW
!
~
~ ~
:! I
J:
;:
~ ~
~ Ei
~ I ~
~ w ~ ~ w'"
~ h i ~
0$
...
4
r
1
~
!
J
~
,.
~
!i
i !
~ i
~ III ~
~ w
u.. t;~
! a
I:
:'~:'')~:;...
/
c
0...
CJ~
...,
t~
, 0
... 'C)
Q~
410
~CJ
41
.l:Q
[...,
c.,
~
41
o
, ------
; ---~
,00'00 I _______________._____.
"'''''.os.;., s _____
)
I::)
4J
::;;
~
4J
;,..
~
~..
~ '"'
~ ,~
;.. ~
:J:~
----__ Jl
---- i ___.~_
^
llJ"
::.>:l~
<~
r:(~
g
r....~
, ~
<~
s,
.~
""
o
....,
1:<,
CJ
o :
...:t .;
.0;, k
{?'
~
t>.,
4J
...:t
...:t
~'
~
" '
\
J. ~ ~}f.l. S
..
~
~
~
....,. w
",
"A!'O'lj .(jl'f)~
DlI[l~clS
',1
/f.thos
,
){
':.~
I"'.
c: .. 0-
Ct.....
;.-::
:0..0.....
;" ; elll
"': : ~ . .
~: : :~~
:: I!:~~
LL.
I-
Z
w
:E
:I:
U
<
l-
I-
<(
wilt
~o 1; i!Ej
a:c :- S
c.... If 81
0-0.. .2....,.
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
-it
t
I
I
....~
I I
I
I
I
I !
I
.
i I
I
I
..
I
'-'-~''''-'-''-~__':;;;m__.~,._'''''''';''>~'~_",.;:".",_~____,.
r<)
-l
-l
~
01
-
Z
r<) ~
-l :r
o
WI
L
N
-l
I I I I
_L-L_~
I
I
....toe
~ _~..r-~JP-~.,,~~~~
oL......
"',
"
I
~
!i
>
Ul
ill
~
z
~~""""L~~ ,-.,. L'""!o.
11 !
I: .... w i ~'i I
a... I
- . ~o- r .
...... I Ii
... 0.._ I I
:'0 ; ~II :~ iI i ... i I
I
~= :~..
-. .1:11 I
..... .
.. "A.'. a.. a.. ~ :I
~ !:ss
....K
I
...."
i
I
I
I
~. ,
T
!!f"""
~-~ r- ~ ~~.~,_~~,~~
-""""-~~
-,-,-Tl
___I 1 -----, 1
-1
<{
0
-
'"" I N I '"" I Z I
-1 -1 -1 <{
:r
0
ill
L 1
!
i=
~.
of
~
,\", "C(
W
i I
c: ..... W Ii Ii I
.. -- I
. ~o - ~l5 ..
- ...- Ii
>-. 0...... . -
;" :; dll D: >. 0 ... i I I I
<<r i I
,,= : ~ . .
e. m:11 I
.::... .. Q, . . ...JJ 18
- 1e:S~ 0. c.. a.i w I
e
-
do....
-'-'-1
-1
'<[I
0
('l) N ('l) Z
-1 -1 -1 '<[
I
01
ill
I:
~
i=
~
"'-, id
~
.;---._r-\_....'-\.../--L~~~
10 ~
.. .... w i tli~ I I
at-.. I
- . ~(,) ! ~I II
.&.... Ii
"'. 0.__ I I
=" ; 611 a:C ... i I
I
""= :.~.. flel
.. e:11 C.... I
,::...
- "... . . 0..0.. o i.
. ~:II
- Q.C
I
I
~1=1=.n
I
I
~I
~I
~I
--11
<[
o
-
z
-<q
:r:
o
w
1:'..!
I
~
i=
~
w
....
w
lii
W
't
.r~!t"'":. -, ~""'~~~,
~~~
"ff'-,f'
l3^3l 133CUS
'1(,
,,0-,09
,8=" 1 8
JJ\ild >1~\id ' l
"O-,Z
r"O-,>' 1
"O-,Z
f}-"'-'>'l--j
Ej
llX3 / ^~lN3
llX3 / ^~lN]
,,~8-,6t
~31S^S
~NI>1~\t'd
3lJIH3^
~..
880l
'Lj OS OLZ
_.3~JjJQ_"
,ll ,6
el3MOl f\
ell'vllS G) tcl
VJtJy V ^1~lJtJ JlJIH3^
17
"r8-,lg
co
GJ
I
en
"O-,g
'"'
lllll n
S'vI ell
I
,
--->.
o
o
I
o
,-..
o
I
o
o
VEHICLE
PARKING
SYSTEM
'0
I
-..
"'I
49' - SJ"
10'-0" 4 30'-4"
I STAIR
TO WE R
C] EDTHROOM BEDROOM
G 0
'"
I
"
'"
AP ARTM T UN
TWO LEVEL
BEDROOM
675 SO: FT
1
L
G,2 . PARK PLACE
1 II = 8 I
APARTMENT UNIT
KITCHEN'
D
51'-83"-
4
60'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
TWO LEVEL
LIVING AREA
J1"
':"
-----~-_.._--,~_.~_.---------,--~'_._----- ----- --...-...-,- ~-
o
I
o
o
-\
j
G
VEHI CLE
PARKING
SYSTEM
KITCHEN
BATHROO
60'-0"
BEDROOM
AP ARTMENT UNIT
1682 SQ, FT
LIVING AREA
THIRD LEVEL
I
3'-31"
4
- -,-
,{
o 8
APARTMENT UNIT
TWO LEVEL
IVING ROOM
ELEVATOR
~
ENTRY
PARK PLACE
1 II = 8 /
~(BOS OllON
,,6
I~ ,,6-,6t
t t
"t-,91 ,,01-,[1 I--
pL-,8T
,,[-,22
l
J T
./lIlI I ~
" I
I \
\ ) \ !I
./
n
II ~ \ 7
,[9 i:> t ,[
1\
J ~ I
,~
j' D
J , ~ ~1I ~
_.F rnm~
~
9
"
I-
Z
W
,~
U
<
l-
I-
ce
.
c
~
~
~
o
;. U
S x
;; .
~ 1
. g.
~ 0.
. -
5 a
~ 0..
&:~
<t L
"0 ~ t. (J
~ ~ f ~ ~Ol ....1: g
t;~, H u.-;: ~5r~
" ...~~ '8"3~;'l 3g'",~
~] l1,Iol>> r"'l<:t l~ ~~:g~
~~ ~~! r~o"
t~,,~ ~
~~
'~~, ~
~
~
~
.
~
s::
~~E
....<>3
o c.
UoOlS,.o).o
~~~~:a.
CIlo >Ul
zQ':...t......"<t
.'
L'" .
gi~~
~c...&.6
~~~~_t~
~3~~~~~
~dci..:agCQ
6uuewu""
~~~;.,~~~
~.bklLI~
..... ~...I/'l ..,...
.
E
.
~
t
E
o
L
'"
.
3
o
3
""
'2
""
.
""
o
o
.
c
t
o
u
'"
d
~
~
~
u
c
o
~
c
.
~
i
u
g
t;
r r
'" '
"- "".,
~ "
""'"'' ~
~, ',,-
""" ~
~,
:.-
f3
$
J:;;;;..
"<:
/<
~
:>.,
~
E-.
o
tJ
.
,
:i
a.
o
'"
""
o
o
.
c
t
.3
<0-
"
~
';
.
:j-
L
"
i5.
o
0.
~
..
~
d
'" u
l I
"~,~
,
'~
"
<r z <:t
b
to
o
......,
~
v
a
IE
:>.,
f:j
....:J
~
~"I ~o~
J,8:!llT
QJ.,S
{)NI((clS
o
llJ,f)OS
g
o
'"
~Qi
.El~
~ ~ 00
~ ~
~
eel
,.."..-j
P-.
Q.)
~
"1'"""1
Cfl
roo
~
ro
b
:"
Q)
~
oj
U
00
roo
~
eel
~
.....,
Q,)
Q,)
l-.
.....,
en.
b.ll
.S 0
l-. "0
~f
o
...c:-
....., 0
~ u
o
en.
Q)
(.)
CO
,.."..-j
~
~
~
oj 0
~o
M
C)
::l
rt.i
'"
!<
tl
@
ell,..
..:'"
is:::l- <l H
OJ!ii;o 1) f
~ 2';" R!l
d~8.~n
~..;ffi H~
Ii; 8 fa i;;.>;
M< i! :,~
,~\fi r
ill]
:I:
I-
Z
UJ
E
J:
U
<
.
r-
I-
<
,:'"
\
\
\
i
1.'7,'\.,,;"'
\' liV
\. :
~
, f\~,
i .'
I ,
i ,:;
, :1
d
I II
\ ; /
\. t
f /
I~
..
ATTACHMENT I
12 June 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Stan Clauson Associates
200 E. Main St.
Aspen, CO 81611
To Whom it may Concern:
As the Managing member if Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, I give Stan Clauson
Associates, LLC and his staff permission to represent us in discussions .with the City of
Aspen regarding the development of the Park Place garage at 707 E. Hyman Avenue in
Aspen, Colorado. .We have retained this firm to assist us ill the planning phase of project.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me.
Sin~~
J Cooper, Managing Partner
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC
ATTACHMERfJ
CITY OF ASPEN
WArn PAID
DATE ~~ C NO. )ct0~3
52 ,.:55 z:B ~~'
!-;rry OF ASPEN
HRErr PAID
DATE REP NO
f! .
01 ,j;~cV-~ lq~0s
WHEN RECORDEDREl'URNTO:
Name:
Hyman .Avenue Holdings, LLC
C/o Krabacher Sanders, PC
201 N. Mill Street, Ste. 201
Aspen, CO 81611
Address:
..,'".. "..:",,::;~>,,:;>;';':;';:\~".:,.,,;'
'., D~ ,~ loCO.CD
WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, ,made this28thdayofFebl1.lary.2003, between George A. Vicenzi Trust, as to an
undivided 25% interest and Alan J. Goldstein, as to an undivided 75% interest of the said County
of Pitkin and State of Colorado. grantor. and Hyman A venue Holdings, LLC, a Colorado Limited
Liability Companywhosele~al~dclr~~s is<:.B.Management, PO Box 1747,605 Sherman
Parkway Springfield, MO 65801-1747 of the said County of Pitkin and State of Colorado,
grantee:
~
~
WITNESSETH, that the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten dollars and other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,
has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey
and confirm, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. all the real property, together with
improvements. if any, situate. lying and being in the said County of Pitkin and State of Colorado
described as follows:
Lots A, B, C and D, Block 105
CITY AND TOWNSITE Op.ASPEN
1IIIIIIIIIilfll...~~..:",,,
SILVIA DAV1S PITKINCOUNTVCO R 21. Ite DS0e.C!le
also described as follows:
THE HANNAH-DUSTIN' C()~gM~~.according to the Plat thereof recorded October 2,
1985 in Plat Book 17 at Page 78 as ReceptiouN'o. 271969 and .as defined and described by the
Condominium Declaration for HANNAH-IJU$TIN CQNDOMINIUM recorded October 2, 1985
in B()ok 496 at Page 375 as Reception No. 271967.
COUNty OF PITKIN, StAtE OPCbtdRADd
also known by street and number as: 300 S Spring St., Aspen. CO 8161 I
FileNuni~~r:<lO()j~$
Stewart Title of Aspen. Inc.
o/ammty Deed - Photographic Retord (Extended)
Page I of2
lI~lll.ARATIONRE~tYEP.e2/2,a/2~.3, ,
. .-."....-...~-----~-...:,.----._--_.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the said Buyer, his personal representatives,
successors and assigns~ forever. The said Seller covenants and agre~s to andwit~ the Bl.lyer, his
personal representatives, successors and assigns, to WARRANT AND DEFEND the sale of said
property, goods and chattels, against all and every person of person whomever. When used
herein, the singular shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender
shall be applicable to all genders.
IN WITNESSWHEItE'OF, th.e Seller has executed this Bill of Sale this ::2.5 day of
r: e Jt:w11 /1-1q ,/j.. () () ~
I
STATE OF (6\0 ~ado
COUNTYOF ~)~'h){\
The foregoing instrumentwasacknowledged before me this C(~ day ofJ:e h
atQq> by George A. Vicenzi, Trustee of the George A. Vicenzi Trust
My commission expires
Witness my hand and official seal.
;/tmdJ &4/$1
Notary Public:
\"'" "'I
", ,~B~Jt',
~.... ~ ",,'1Ihhil, J).'If;,
.~. ...,~"o"'. b~"', '...n.-:'
~. f'~ 1"'-"r~'~-:.
..._= ~ ,,--'-
-" - - -,-
; ui. . ..... io!
.. ;Jl.,j), 'B' \o'h;J ::
." ."....'_"v "'" "'*'........
~ ~ ".,,.,,.,, ~ ~
'" Of: co\..o~~......
'1"HlI'"
tIrt t>>MMI$$IONE>Ci'IFiEs
AU(lU$T1.2006
File Number: 00030095
Stewart Title of Asllen. Inc.
Bill (If Sate - (Extended)
Page 2 of2
III'lnil'n;"111~~.;J.,..
stl.\lur I)lWlS PITKIN COOI'lf'f (;0 R :21. ee D .te. ee
STATE OF r1 tJ ~ I dd-'
COUNTY OF YY\ 6> h Y ()e....
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~.s- day of f ~
d.-&:lO:S , by Alan J. Goldstein
. Witness my hand and official seal.
n..~.; <_ .
.,9.Y ~ 'THERESA BOYCE
#' ....... '<, MY COI-WISSION f CC 936270
.. ~ .. ~,i!~lflES: May 25. 2004
~<t f,"'MOl" .",.Iludgel Notary SoJVi<ell
01'''. '.;=,'~'''' ,'_..'
~..,... .~...- -- .
. ..,,-.-
ftl"JI"II.....i,.....~~.~..~...
> 00<" ~I.Jt2/28/2~3 eUsep
..,.".."..' ee D -.ee
File Number: OO(}3009S
Stewart Title of ASpen. Inc.
Acknowledgement. Seller
Page 1 00
EXHIBIT 1
EXCEPTIONS
1. Distribution utility easements (including cable TV).
2. Inclusion ofthe Property within any special taxing district.
3. The benefits and burdens of any declaration and party wall agreements, if any.
4. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the
issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water.
5. Taxes for the year 2003 and subsequent years not yet due and payable.
6. Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuancebf the Patent for
the City and Townsite of Aspen recorded March 1, 1897 in Book Ij9 at Page 216 as
Reception No. 60156.
7. Tenns, conditions, obligations and prbvisions of Agreement by and between the City of
Aspen and Hannah Dustin BUilding. Associate~,a joint ",e~!llr~~~~t... 1911P ,iJ:l" iJ:l~jI1lJr1ent
recorded October 2, 1985 in Book 496 at Page 311 as}'{eception No. 271966.
8. Terms, conditions, obligations, provisions and easements of Easement Agreement recorded
August 24, 1972 in Book 266 at Page 229 as Reception No. 153522.
9. Tenus, conditions, obligations and provisions of Condominium Declaration for Hannah-
Dustin Condominiums as set forth in instnunent recorded October 2, 1985 in Book 496 at
Page 375 as Reception No. 271967.
10. Tenus, conditions, obligations and provisions of Subdivision Agreetnent ass~tforth in
instrument recorded October 2, 1985 in Book 496 at Page 409 as Reception No. 271968.
] 1. Easements, rights of way and other matters as shown and contained. on Plat of ffannah-
Dustin Condominiums recorded October 2, 1985 in Plat Book 17 at Page 78 as Reception
No. 271969.
IIIIIIIIIIII~!:~,~
SIL.VfRO'AVlS I'ITKfIllCC)(.IIilTVCO ' It 21..' . ' 'Del'0." "
FileNumbet: 00630095
Stl:\van Title ot' Aspen, Inc.
Wal'li!jjtyDeed .. Exhibit I (Exceptions)
"age I of 1
... ..~..._---....~.-.._~
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
OWNER:
TYPE OF APPliCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
ATtACHMENT K
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
James Lin~ 920.5095 DATE: 9.15.03
"Park Place" - Commercial Parking Garage GMQS Application
Stan Clauson, Brian McNellis, Jeffery Halferty
PeterForneU
GMQS Scoring Application
Owner is in the POO review process to construct a commercial parking facility and associated
affordable housing at 707 E. Hyman Avenue. The facility will use a fully automated
mechanical system for parking vehicles. In conjunction with the PUD, Subdivision, and
Conditional Use portions of the application that have already been submitted, a commercial
GMQS application is required. '
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.470.080 GMQS Development Allotment and Application Procedures
26.470.100 Growth Management Scoring Criteria- Commercial and Office Development
Review by: Staff, Growth Management Commission (PH), City Council (PH), Board of County
Commissioners
Yes, at both the Growth Management Commission and City Council. Applicant must post
property and mail notice at least 15 days prior to hearing. Applicant will need to provide proof of
posting and mailing with an affidavit at the public hearings.
Housing (other referral agencies are reviewing the POO portion of the application).
Planning Deposit, Major ($2,520 for 12 hours of staff time)
Housing Major was included in PlJD Application
$2520 (additional Planning hours are billed at a rate of $21 Olhour)
30
Public Hearing:
Referral Agencies:
Planning Fees:
Referral Agency Fees:
Total Deposit:
Total Copies:
To apply, submit the following information:
Proof of ownership.
Signed fee agreement.
Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and
telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf ofthe applicant.
Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current
certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colotap<>, listIDgt~enameS.,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.
Total deposit for review of the application.
Required Copies of the complete application packet and maps.
An 8 112" by II" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
Additional materials as required by the specific review. (Refer to cited code sections)
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. Please include existing
conditions as well as proposed.
Applications shl:i,I1 be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the
following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)~preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word fomat is preferred.
Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable.
Notes:
1. An estimate ,on employee demands should be included in the conceptual application in preparation fur theGMQS application. A
referral from Housing will be sought. A Housing Board meeting may be required.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Diselaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in natw'e only and isnot binding on the City. The summary is basedoncW'tent zonitt~, which is
subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that mayor may not be accurate. The suinmary does not create a
legal or vested right.