HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20060131 AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
4:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
I. COMMENTS A. Commissioners
B. Planning Staff
C. Public
II. MINUTES
IlL DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Sky Hotel Redevlopment, (continued from 1/17/06)-Chris
Bendon
V. BOARD REPORTS
VI. ADJOURN
01/23/2006 14:48 2515480 ROXBORO ROYALTIES IA
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen., Colorado 81611
January 23, 2006
Attention: Jasmine Tigre, Chairman
To Ms. Tigre and the Members of the Commission:
It is with great dismay that I write this letter to you. My family has owned a
condor-dnium in the Chateau Chaumont for over 30 years and I have spent many happy
years growing up with Aspen from the 1970's onward.
It is discouraging to find that our recently arrived neighbor the Sky Hotel wishes to
expand and enlarge their structure to our detriment with no apparent gam in the number
of hotel rooms. To whose benefit is this construction: certainly not the coa:nriauni which
of
will be dwarfed and overwhelmed by the massive structure, and certainly not the City
Aspen which will not gain any hotel accommodation from this development.
I come every year to ski in Aspen with my husband and children. We enjoy the
proximity to the mountain and town site that our condominium brings us. Over the past
years we have already lost much of the view and sunlight from our unit due to
developments around us.
1 acknowledge the reality that growth and development must occur but I have always
believed that Aspen is the kind of town that will not allow that growth and development
to occur to the detriment of the neighborhood and well being of the neighbors.
To every argument against this development there is the argument that they are within
their legal right to build this structure. To this I say that just because it is within the legal
boundaries does not make it right. Is Aspen a town that cares only about what is legal or
are we more concerned about what is right for us as a community?
The character and flavor of Aspen has always been built upon a population that cares
about the future. We make great efforts to control the loss of historic and "old" Aspen.
If we hadn't done this we would long ago have turned into one of those ski resorts we
know and hate so well. I'm referring to those resorts that are constituted of endless miles
of massive condominium and hotel blocks.
Suavely our structure constitutes one of Aspen's earlier buildings and as such deserves the
respect of our community_ We do not want to "ghettoize" our smaller more quaint
buildings. It is important that we keep a vision of Aspen that ensures future development
is harmonious and compatible with that which has gone before.
QI,-i
01/23/2006 14:48 2515480 ROXBORO ROYALTIES IA PAGE 03
This new development will create the effect of "A Great Wall" surrounding the base of
Little Nell .... it is over double the size of the current structure. Is this what we want for
the base of our beautiful mountain?
if we continue to build these great monolithic structures we will lose all the character that
we are so famous for. There is nothing bannonious or compatible about this building.
This is a clear instance where bigger is not better. Surely we can do better.
�ncerely,
Esther Lill
72 Woodgate Close SW
Calgary, Alberta
T2W 4C 1
Ph (403) 251-5210
Email: lillest2@yahoo.ca
�J
f
January 23 ,2006
To the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
130 south Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado, 81611
Attn: Jasimine Tigre
Re: The Proposed demolition and expansion of The Sky Hotel
To the members and associates of the planning .and zoning commission
My name is Betsy Rockett and I am the owner of Unit #20 in the Chateau
Chaumont and a 35 year resident of Aspen and I have owned this
condominium for over 15 years.
It has been brought to my attention that the Sky Hotel has plans to tear down
their current building and to expand and construct a new one .. .
This redevelopment or modernization of the old Hotel will greatly impact
both the The Chateau Chaumont and The Chateau Dumont dramatically
which are across the alley or Dean Street. With this letter I am asking for
some consideration on your part and all involved parties that this expansion
and demolition can be done with thoughtfulness and end up being
compatible and in accordance with the two existing Chateaus that were built
in 1968 and are still hopefully considered an important part of Aspens
history and architecture ... These buildings have been around a long time and
should be respected as such...
I have no objection the Sky Hotels right to expand and modernize as long as
it is done with sensitivity to these long time neighbors and their
surroundings .
Both Chateaus have beautiful gardens and flower baskets during the summer
that need sunlight to flourish and be enjoyed by the occupants. Both
Chateaus also have patios that owners and renters alike use in the summer
with Bar B Q's providing outside dining,,, that would all but be destroyed
with a looming building in front of them as proposed now, by blocking their
views of Ajax Mountain and reduce necessary warmth and sunlight.
From what I have been told and read they have expansion plans to double
the square footage from 44,000 square feet to 100,000 square feet. That
seems a bit overwhelming to me and would require an increase in height
from what is now an approximate 25 feet to 42 feet. ( I'm especially
referring to their proposed new east wing) thus completely blocking all
views from both Chateaus. The dean street alley is only about 20 feet wide
right now, which is hardly wide enough for vehicles to pass as it is..
Parking is tight and limited for both Chateau buildings to 3 cars each in the
alley parked against the buildings horizontally. The Sky Hotel takes up the
r.
majority of parking which is done diagonally making the alley even
narrower. Plowing in the winter is always a challenge just trying to get all
these cars moved..
Maybe all permanent and overnight parking for the Hotel and Chateaus
should be limited to the under ground garages if there is to be
some give and take ...
The huge trash truck can just now barely squeeze through the Dean Street
Alley to service the dumpsters for the the Hotel, the Chateaus and for the
Glory Hole..
More important however,,,, Emergency vehicles and the large fire trucks are
always in jeopardy with not being able to pass through the alley especially if
they try to enter from Durant Street because of the already crowded
conditions. These buildings are very close together and a fire in either one
of these buildings or the Hotel could be disastrous if the fire trucks couldn't
get through because of already crowded conditions.. Some of this limited
access is partly due to the Sky Hotels diagonal parking situation mentioned
before. But there are also laundry trucks stopped in the driveway at times for
over 15 minutes . There are restraunt supply trucks parked temporarily, not
to mention the steady stream of guest vehicles and hotel service vehicles.
Then there's property management vehicles, the maids vehicles and God
only knows what other vehicles that are parked in front of the Hotels Durant
Street entrance . But they all end up in the alley and are all trying to get
through in any direction possible, some ending up having to back out ...It's
a mess all the time . Very busy and congested.
I can only imagine the added stress and impact in the Dean Street Alley
with the proposed new huge expansion plans of the Sky Hotel. If approved
as submitted it would be only about 32 plus feet from the existing Chateaus
after the final setbacks. I don't see a good fit here at all. Then add to this a
double amount of traffic that would be required to service a bigger
operation all again , in the alley .. It is just not going to work well and
creates a dangerous restriction for emergency trucks.
I feel very strongly that a new proposal needs to be submitted. One that
reduces this new structure in size and height. A proposal that fits in better
and is the same height as the existing Glory Hole Condominiums next door
to the East. This is approximately 28 feet high. That way all the neighbors
across the Dean Street Alley from the new Sky Hotel , especially The
Dumont wouldn't be dramatically hurt by totally losing their views of Ajax
Mt and still be able to sit out in their patios and enjoy the views and the
sunlight especially in the winter. The garden level units of these two
buildings especially the Dumont would really be left in the dark if a large 42
foot high building is put in front of them and moved in closer
I think the Sky Hotel and the planning commissioners need to
consider all of these issues regarding the current proposed expansion plans
by the Hotel and give some consideration to a much smaller and more
sensitive scaled down version that would compliment the area and not
offend anyone„ It can be done and done well but there needs to be a
compromise here primarly with the new proposed size and height. Especially
the height.
I do not think expansion plans of any hotel or buildings in Aspen
should dimish anothers quality of life or create adverse conditions for
neighbors during the process or after it's finished.. This current new
proposed plan by the hotel is too large and too high and too close to already
existing buildings . It will create discord and is asking too much.
I believe in Aspens growth and re -development.. I still believe, even after
all these years of change and growth, that Aspen has remained a beautiful
place compared to other resorts that have developed and re developed. But I
must say as a long time Aspen resident ,I hate to see some of Aspens old
architectural history gone ( I'll miss the Skiers Chalet) but that's progress
and a right to development by developers...If done with reasonable plans
and considerate ideas especially with existing neighbors and surroundings,
it's great and a benefit to all.. An end result that is... "a benefit to all" is
better than an end result that is a " deterrent to all..
The Chateaus Dumont and Chaumont have both been renovated and have
been up graded themselves over the last few years. I think we have tried to
stay in character with their original appearance and have been considerate to
our neighbors as has The Glory Hole Condominiums who also just 2 years
ago beautifully re -did their building and kept it at its original height so not to
block all of our views .It was greatly appreciated. All of these buildings as
is the Sky Hotel are just steps away from the Little Nell Hotel and Gondola
and beautiful Ajax Mt. which is a valued and treasured focal point in Aspen.
So great consideration should be taken not to block or obstruct this
privileged view and the Aspen Mountain sky line any further.. Thank -you
very much for your consideration of this matter
Very Truly Yours,
Betsy Rockett
Owner of Unit 20
Chateau Chaumont ............ e-mail BARocketgaol. com
Mailing address: 377 CR 217
Durango,Co. 31303
_ity of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission,
kftn: Jasmine Tigre,
Paradise Trading Pty Ltd,
No 19 Chateau Chaumont.
>airman.
130 S Galena St,
kSPEN Co 8161.
)ear Ms Tigre,
RECEIVED
JAN 2 6 2006
ZE: Re -development proposal for Sky Hotel. ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Ne are the owners of Chateau Chaumont No 19 and are writing to object to height of this development on the northern side of Dee
3t and also to the proximity to the roadway.
attended the meeting on Tuesday 17th January and made a brief submission.
ks I understand it, the Council has made changes to the regulations for the development in Lodge zones as an encouragement to
)uild additional accommodation in the Aspen town core and the Sky Hotel application is the first under the proposed new
-egulations.
;hateau Chaumont and Chateau Dumont were approved to have their front entrances facing Dean St and this is their main access
Joint. Both buildings have enjoyed views of Aspen mountain since construction and this continued expectation has been
:hreatened by the changes in planning regulations.
the Planning changes would seem to be suitable to a situation where a standard road width and distance between buildings of
)pprox 65ft exists. Under these circumstances, views are not substantially obstructed and the shadow effect would not dominate
:he access way and adjacent buildings.
n Dean St where the distance between buildings would be narrowed to 32 ft, both the impact on views and the shadow effect are
totally unacceptable.
Jnder present conditions the sun reaches the roadway (covering 1 Oft width with sun) and shines on the full face of the Chateau
)uildings in winter time giving reflective warmth from the buildings. This was checked by myself at 1.00pm on Thursday 19th
January 2006.
f the Sky Hotel is permitted to increase height to 42ft and narrow the space between buildings to 32ft, no sun will enter the street
and a shadow will be cast well up the buildings covering almost the entire height of the buildings.This would result in the productior
)f a dark canyon and a miserable situation.
In addition, all trees in the street would be removed leaving a roadway with no beautification_ Is this the way we want to see the
4spen of the future?
The problem potentially goes furhter.
If Aspen Alps were to re -develop under the proposed regulations, the same effect would be created: another canyon of similar or
lesser width and the views from Sky Hotel obscured along with the corresponding shadow effect.
Aspen Visitor Accommodation.
The Sky Hotel presently has 90 bedrooms. The two Chateau buildings have between 90 and 100 bedrooms, most of which have
been substantially upgraded and are let for holiday accommodation. Our particular unit is managed by Frias Properties who provide
a Hotel style service - daily room service, concierge, a bottle of wine on arrival etc.
1/25/2006
Page 2 of 2
The effect of approving the Sky application would be to upgrade 90 rooms with no increase in numbers and to downgrade up to
100 rooms with no compensation to the owners. Why would the Council want to encourage this?
We --e you to require modifications to the project to lower the height.along Dean St to the level of the Glory Hole building (approx
271 Iid to increase the setback from the northern boundary to allow more open space and landscaping, to maintain the integrity of
Dean St and the entrances to the two Chateau buildings.
Yours Sincerely
Bruce Jeanes.
Sole Director
Paradise Trading Pty Ltd
1 /25/2006
Todd Vieregg
Chateau Chaumont #14
Aspen
9251414
c/o Coates Reid & Waldron
720 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611
January 25, 2006
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Attn: Jasmine Tigre, Chairman
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Sky Hotel
Ladies and Gentlemen:
RECEIVED
BAN 26 2006
BUILDING � qp RN MENr
I have owned Chateau Chaumont Unit Number 14 for 3 0 years and am currently a
Director and the President of Chateau Chaumont Condominium Association. I urge the
Commission to reject the the East Wing component of the proposed Sky Hotel redevelopment
because the proposed new East Wing is too high and too close to the existing Chateau Chaumont
and Chateau Dumont buildings ("Chateaus") for the following reasons:
1. The proposed 42 foot high North wall of the proposed massive East Wing would
be 32.5 feet from the existing South walls of the Chateaus, which would result in
the East Wing blocking all sunlight from the surface of Dean Street and a large
portion of the South walls and windows of the Chateaus for most of the winter;
the developers stated, incorrectly, at the January 17 meeting of the Commission
that no direct sunlight currently reaches to the surface of Dean Street — on very
recent very sunny days direct sunlight reached such surface for several hours each
day (it is unfortunate that the January 17 site inspection by members of the
Commission occurred on a very overcast day when there was no direct sunlight
anywhere in Aspen.) The quality of life for residents in the Chateaus would be
seriously degraded by the denial to them of sunlight. The proposed East Wing is
just too high.'..way too high ... and very inconsiderate of Chateau residents.
2. The Chateaus were built in the late 1960's in accordance with the applicable laws,
and the fronts of the Chateaus were constructed and approved as being on Dean
Street. Twenty-one units in each Chateau have their only entrance on Dean
Street; the other four units in each building have their entrances on Durant
Avenue. This is not a matter of "not in my back yard:" its a matter of "not in
2
my front yard."
3. Dean Street is 20 feet wide and has no adjacent sidewalks (Dean Street is used
for pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic.) A conventional street in Aspen is 55
feet wide and sidewalks on each side of such a street are currently required to be
five feet wide, which would result in separating buildings facing each other by at
least 65 feet, which would result in buildings not impairing the sunlight and air
circulation nor would such a separation amplify noise resulting from ordinary use
of the space between such buildings. The proposed 42 foot high East Wing would
create a narrow canyon which would greatly amplify such noise from ordinary use
of Dean Street, and materially and seriously degrade the quality of life in the
Chateaus.
4. There are three 3-bedroom and eighteen 2-bedroom in each Chateau which front
on Dean Street, so each Chateau has 45 bedrooms in the Dean Street units, a total
of 90 bedrooms. The Sky Hotel currently has 90 bedrooms and is proposed to
have 90 bedrooms after its renovation. The upgrading of the Sky Hotel 90 bed-
rooms will degrade the 90 Chateaus bedrooms. And it is unfair to enhance the
rentability and value of the 90 Sky Hotel bedrooms by decreasing the rentability
and value of the 90 Chateaus bedrooms.
5. And most, if not all, of the Chateaus units have been substantially and expensively
upgraded to make them more attractive for short-term rental guests as well as for
their owners. The Chateaus compete for short-term rentals with the Sky Hotel and
all other lodges in Aspen. If the Sky Hotel proposed redevelopment is approved
it will gain a competitive advantage relative to the Chateaus by upgrading
the Sky Hotel rooms by degrading the Chateau rooms. When Chateau owners up-
grade their units, they do so without degrading the units of any competitor.
6. The Sky Hotel can upgrade its rooms in its present building, just as the Chateau
owners upgraded their units, without degrading any competitor.
7. And I know of no evidence that the Sky Hotel rooms need upgrading ... is its
occupancy rate lower than the occupancy rate of, say, the Little Nell Hotel?
8. If the East Wing is approved as proposed, it would establish a precedent for
future proposed redevelopments. The North wall of the Aspen Alps building
nearest to the proposed East Wing is about 30 feet from the proposed South
wall of the proposed East Wing. So if the Aspen Alps ever proposes to re-
develop that building to a height of 42 feet, it would create the same adverse
consequences for the new East Wing units as the East Wing is proposing to
create for the Chateaus. The owners of those East Wing units would surely
urge that the Aspen Alps should not be permitted to do to them what they
did (propose to do) to the Chateaus, and the same precedent might be raised for
3
other proposed redevelopments in Aspen. If approved, Aspen could become
a city of dark, noisy, dismal, stagnant narrow streets separating unreasonably
high buildings which would be very inconsistent with the current charming and
reasonably scaled Aspen which we all love and cherish.
9. The new ordinance should be applied only to streets of conventional width
in order to preserve the quality of life and character of Aspen for which it is
deservedly renowned.
Please reject the proposed East Wing portion of the Sky Hotel proposed redevelopment.
In addition, at the invitation of Sky Hotel developer Sonny Vann and architect Les Rosenstein, I,
'.'huck Frias and Tim Clark of Frias Properties met in the architects' office on January 12 to discuss
;ome changes they had made to their proposal. We were told by the Chateaus attorney, Michael
loff nan, that the issues of height and setback were not to be discussed. Messrs Frias, Clark and I
)bjected to:
➢ The proposed change in the direction of traffic from entering from Durant
Avenue, as is currently the case, to enter from Original Street, because
exiting onto Durant is more dangerous than exiting on Original Street
because there is angle parking on Durant, making visiblility of oncoming
traffic more difficult (there is parallel parking on Original Street) and
Durant has a lot more traffic than Original Street;
➢ The proposed vacation of the west end of Dean Street, because, although
there is no structure or specific use currently proposed for that land, it
cannot be predicted what might be proposed for it in the future.
Mr. Van said that those matters were not important and that they would not object to leaving the
traffic direction as it now is and would not press the vacation issue, which, he said, was a
"housekeeping" matter and intended to merely "square off' the property.
We also mentioned that the Chateaus had a prescriptive easement for entrance and egress to the
:'hateaus over the current "roadway —alley-street" (whatever it is) over the land owned by the Sky Hotel
;ast of its building and west of the Dumont building, which connects Durant _Avenue with Dean Street-
qr. Vann acknowledged that "there probably is" such a prescriptive easement.
We point out that the easement cannot be moved east ten feet (as proposed) or at all without the
consent of the Chateaus. We are willing to discuss that matter with the developers. We do point out,
iowever, that if the City of Aspen approves moving the easement (and we recognize that we may have
:o get a court order confirming the existence of such easement, if the developers do not agree that we
izve such a t), then the City would be taking a property right of the Chateaus without
,ompensation which is contrary to the US and Colorado constitutions. So we don't believe that any
approvals should be granted until the easement matter is resolved_
0
Also please review and consider carefully the architectural renderings presented by Attorney
Michael Hoffinan at the January 17 meeting, which show clearly how the proposed 42 foot high East
Wing structure would deny sunlight to Dean Street and the Chateaus, and the report of Traffic Engineer
David Leahy which recommends moving the Sky Hotel parking entrance and delivery/trash/utility
service away from the east side of the Sky Hotel.
Thank you for considering carefully the foregoing concerns, and I urge the Commission to
(a)reject the East Wing portion of then proposed Sky Hotel proposal,
(b) require that the traffic direction (entering from Durant and exiting onto Original) be
unchanged from its present direction,
(c) deny the vacation of the west portion of Dean Street, and
(d) require that the underground parking entrance, delivery/trash/utility service be on the west
side of the Sky Hotel ... not on the east side, as proposed.
Very truly yours
Resolution No. 36
(SERIES OF 2005)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION GRANTING GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM
APPROVAL, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL, AND
CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL, AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE THE SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR A REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
SKY HOTEL, 709 EAST DURANT AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
Parcel ID:2737.182.80001
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Aspen Club Properties, LLC, (Applicant), represented by Sulllly Vann of Vann
Associates, requesting approval of ten (10) free-market residential growth management
allotments, three (3) affordable housing growth management allotments, Commercial
Design Review, Conditional Use approval, Subdivision approval, Condominiumization
approval, vacation of a portion of an alleyway, reconsideration of Ordinances Nos. 12,
Series of 1961; 2, Series of 1962, and 3, Series of 1962, and vested rights for a period of
five (5) years for the redevelopment of the Sky Hotel; and,
WHEREAS, the Property is legally described as the Woodstone Iim
Condominiums, according to the condominium map thereof filed with the Pitkin County
Clerk and Recorder March 11, 1983 in plat book 14 at page 45 through 49, inclusive, as
reception number 248609, and as further described in the Condominium Declaration for
Woodstone Condominiums recorded March 11, 1983, in book 441 and page 814 as
reception number 248608; a non-exclusive ingress/egress easement described in an
unrecorded easement agreement, notice for which was given by short form easement
agreement recorded April 25, 1977 in book 327 at page 777; and, Encroaclunent License
Agreements recorded in book 316 at page 232, book 425 at page 907, book 425 at page
913, book 425 at page 919, and book 498 at page 909. The property is approximately
42,645 square feet and is zoned Lodge. The property is commonly kilown as the Sky
Hotel and is addressed as 709 East Durant Avenue, Aspen, CO. The property owner is
Aspen Club Lodge Properties, LLC; 1000 Potomac Street, NW, Suite 150; Washington, DC
2007; represented by Sunny Value of Vaim Associates, LLC; 230 East Hopkins Avenue;
Aspen, CO 81611; and,
WHEREAS, the site currently contains 90 hotel units, ancillary commercial space,
and underground parking in a structure of approximately 44,000 square feet of Floor Area.
The proposed development includes 90 hotel units, 10 free-market residential units, 3
affordable housing units, ancillary commercial space, and underground parking in a
structure of approximately 103,200 square feet of Floor Area as defined by the City of
Aspen; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral
comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 1
Department, Fire, Streets, Housing, Enviroiunental Health, Parks and Water Departments
as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and,
WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development
Department reviewed the application according to the standards of review for each of the
requested land use approvals and reconunended approval with conditions; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040 of the Land Use Code, Growth
Management Review approval may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission
at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community
Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.425 of the Land Use Code, Conditional Use
Review approval may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Conunission at a duly
noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community
Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.412 of the Land Use Code, Commercial
Design Review approval may be granted by.the Plaiuiing and Zoning Commission at a
duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community
Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.480 of the Land Use Code, Subdivision
Review approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing
after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission Community,
Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304 of the Aspen Land Use Code and during
a regular meeting on November 15, 2005, continued to November 29, 2005, and
continued to January 17, 2006, the Plaiuling and Zoning Commission opened a duly
noticed public hearing to consider the project and where the recommendations of the
Community Development Director and comments from the public were heard and
approved the request for ten (10) free-market residential growth management allotments,
three (3) affordable housing growth management allotments, Commercial Design
Review, Conditional Use approval, and reconunended City Council Subdivision approval
by a _ to_ (_-_) vote, with the findings contained in Exhibit A of the November. 29,
2005 staff memorandum and the conditions of approval listed hereinafter.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows:
Section 1: Growth Management Allotments
The Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.470 — Growth
Management — hereby grants to the Sky Hotel redevelopment project ten (10) free-market
residential allotments and three (3) affordable housing allotments, subject to the
requirements listed hereinafter.
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 2
Section 2: Commercial Design Review Approval
The PlamZing and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.412 — Conunercial Design
Review — hereby grants the Sky Hotel redevelopment project Conunercial Design review
approval, subject to the requirements listed hereinafter.
Section 3: Conditional Use Approval
The Plaluzing and Zoning Conunission, pursuant to Chapter 26.425 — Conditional Use —
hereby grants the Sky Hotel redevelopment project Conditional Use approval for the
project's cafe, lounge and bar, and sundries shop, subject to the requirements listed
hereinafter.
Section 4: Subdivision Recommendation of Approval
The Plaluzing and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.480 — Subdivision — hereby
recommends City Council grant Subdivision approval to the Sky Hotel redevelopment
project, subject to the requirements listed hereinafter.
Section 5: Zoning Compliance
Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the project shall be compliance with the Lodge Zone
District requirements, including but not limited to Lot Area and how former rights -of -way
shall be treated for this property and non -unit space limitations, if applicable.
Section 6: Trash/RecyclinIZ Area
The applicant is encouraged to make sure that the trash storage area has adequate wildlife
protection and the make sure recycling containers are present wherever trash compactors
or dumpsters are located due to the City's new recycling ordinance requiring haulers to
provide recycling in the cost of trash pick-up.
Section 7: Noise Abatement
The Applicant shall investigate, with the assistance of a sound engineer, alternatives for
the installation of a sound barrier along the southeast portion of the pool and patio area
sufficient that noise levels for people, music, and private events at the Sky Hotel can be
kept at the proper levels of 60db during 7 am to 9 pm and 55db during 9-pm to 7 am for
the neighboring property owners.
Section 8: Affordable Housing
The applicant shall provide three Category 2 affordable housing units as depicted in the
application dated September 15, 2005. These units shall be considered frill mitigation for
the development proposed in said application.
A Certificate of Occupancy for the Sky Hotel project shall not be issued until such time as
Certificates of Occupancy for the deed restricted affordable housing units, which are
required for mitigation, have been issued.
The employees to be housed in the deed -restricted units shall meet the qualification criteria
contained «7ithin the APCHA Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time.
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 3
The applicant shall structure and record a deed restriction for the affordable housing units
such that an undivided 1/IOth of 1 percent of the property is deed restricted in perpetuity to
the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; or until such time the units become ownership
units; or the applicant may propose any Other means that the Housing Authority determines
acceptable.
The affordable housing units shall be deed -restricted as rental units but will allow for the
units to become ownership units at such time the owners would request this change and/or
at such time the APCHA deems the units out of compliance over a period of more than one
year. At such time, the units. will be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specified in
the deed restriction at the Category 2 maximum sales price. At such time if the units
become ownership units, these units will establish an independent homeowners association.
Section 9: Additional Trip Generation and PM10'Mitigation Plan
In order to reduce the impacts of additional trip generation and PM 10 generated by the
project, the project shall provide a shuttle service for use by the owners/guests of the
residences/hotel, purchase an electric vehicle for use by owners/gusts of the project,
provide secure and covered bicycle storage, or the hotel and homeowners associations(s)
shall join the Transportation Options Program. The Subdivision Agreement shall specify
which of these options shall be implemented. The project shall be subject to impact fee
or mitigation requirements adopted prior to application for a building permit and any of
the above options shall be credited towards any fee or mitigation requirement.
Section 10: Subdivision Plat and Vacation Plat
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision and Right -of -Way Vacation Plat. The Plat
shall comply with current requirements of the City Coininunity Development Engineer and
shall include:
1. The final property boundaries and disposition of lands.
2. The location of Revocable Encroachments for physical improvements within
public rights -of -way with reference to agreements and licenses for such
improvements.
3. The location of utility pedestals with access easements for the utility provider.
Transformers and pedestals shall be located outside of the public right-of-way
unless licensed.
4. The applicant shall provide the final approved Subdivision line data or survey
description data describing the revised street and parcel boundaries to the
Geographic Information Systems Department prior to applying for a building
permit. The final building location data, including any amendments, shall be
provided to the GIS Department prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 4
Section 11: Subdivision Agreement
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision Agreement binding this property to this
development approval. The Agreement shall include the necessary items detailed in
Section 26.480.070, in addition to the following:
1. Revocable Encroaclunent agreements and licenses for physical improvements
Within public rights -of -way with reference to their locations depicted on the
Subdivision Plat.
2. Any required fee to offset City expenditure for project -related off -site drainage
improvements. This fee shall be determined by the City Engineer and prorated with
other properties receiving such benefit.
3. In order to secure the performance of the construction and installation of
improvements in the public rights -of -way, the landscape and public facilities
performance security shall include and secure the estimated costs of proposed
right-of-way improvements.
4. A license agreement to use the alley, or a portion thereof, adjacent to the project
site for construction staging including a fee to use the land at a rate of $1.25 per
square foot per month for the time period in which the land is to be occupied for
construction staging.
Section 12: Impact Fees
Park Jn7pact. Fees of $41,039 shall be assessed. Amendments to the Project or to the fee
schedule adopted prior to issuance of a building permit shall require a new calculation.
The following fee total is based on the current fee schedule:
Park Fees — Proposed Development:
90 Lodge Units (studio units) @ $1,520 per unit
=$136,800
3 one -bedroom residential units @ $2,725 per unit
= $8,175
10 three -bedroom residential units @ $3,634 per unit
= $36,340
3,683 s.f. of commercial space @ $1,785 per 1,000 s.f.
= $67574
Total
= $1871889
Park Fees — Credit for Existing Development:
90 Lodge Units (studio units) @ $1,520 per unit
=$136,800
5,630 s.f. of commercial space @ $1,785 per 1,000 s.f.
= $10,050
Total Credit
= ($146,850)
Total Park Impact Fee Due = $41,039
School Land Dedication Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the
unimproved land divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis.
The applicant shall provide and the City of Aspen shall verify the unimproved land value
of the lands underlying the Project and determine the applicable dedication fee. The
subject subdivision is not conducive to locating a school facility and a cash -in -lieu
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 5
payment shall be accepted. Amendments to the Project or to the fee schedule adopted
prior to issuance of a building permit shall require a new calculation.
Section 13: Water Department / Electric Department Requirements
The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title
25, and with applicable standards of Municipal Code Title 8 (Water Conservation and
Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of
Aspen Water Department.
Soil nails will not be allowed in the City ROW. There a several options available to
provide water service to the project which need to be resolved prior to building permit
submission.
It is unclear if the electric service is in the City service area or Holy Cross. This detail
needs to be researched and resolved prior to building permit submission. The City would
prefer to serve this hotel.
Section .14: Sanitation District Standards/Requirements
The applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and
regulations, including the following:
1. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and
specifications, which are on file at the District office at the time of construction.
2. Applicant's engineer will be required to give the district an estimate of anticipated
daily average and peak flows from the project.
3. A wastewater flow study will be required for this project to be funded by the
applicant.
4. All clear water connections are prohibited (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio
drains), including entrances to underground parking garages.
5. On -site drainage and landscaping plans require approval by the district, must
accommodate ACSD service requirements and comply with rules, regulations and
specifications.
6. On -site sanitary sewer utility plans require approval by ACSD.
7. Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all new and remodeled food
processing establislunents.
8. Oil and Sand separators are required for public vehicle parking garages and
vehicle maintenance facilities.
9. Glycol snowinelt and heating systems must have contaiiunent provisions and must
preclude discharge to the public sanitary sewer system.
10. Plans for interceptors, separators and containment facilities require submittal by
the applicant and approval prior to building permit.
11. When new service lines are required for existing development the old service lines
(5) must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to
specific ACSD requirements.
12. Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system.
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 6
13. Generally one tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements
may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line.
14. Permanent improvements are prohibited in areas covered by sewer easements or
right of ways to the lot line of each development.
15. All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
16. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the
planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or
treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the
downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional
proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area
of concern in order to fund the improvements needed.
Section 15: Pre -Construction Meeting
Prior to Building Permit Submission, a meeting between the following parties shall be
conducted: Developer/Applicant, Project Architect, Prime Contractor, City Staff Planner,
Community Development Engineer, Building Official/Plans Examiner. The purpose of
the meeting is to identify the approving ordinance and any amendments, identify
conditions of approval, discuss the Construction Management Plan, identify the timeline
for plat and PUD/SIA agreement recordation, identify the types of building permits
necessary and the development activities that can be conducted prior to receiving a
building permit, review any critical timeline issues, review the steps and timing of the
building permit process, discuss responsibilities of all parties in getting permits, changes,
etc., and review the Building Department checklist.
Section 16: Construction Management Plan
Prior to application for any Building Permit, Foundation Permit, Access Infrastructure
permit, Demolition permit, etc., the applicant and the City shall agree upon a Construction
Management Plan for the project. For the City, the plan shall be reviewed by the
Coinniunity Development Engineer. The Plan shall include:
1. A construction management and parking plan meeting the specifications of the City
Building Department. Spring Street shall be the primary hauling and delivery route.
2. An estimated construction schedule with estimated schedules for construction
phases affecting city streets and infrastructure and provisions for noticing
emergency service providers, neighbors, the City Streets Department, the
Transportation Department, City Parking Department, and the City Engineering
Department. Street closures concurrent with significant public events shall be
avoided to the greatest extent possible.
3. A notice to be sent to neighboring property owners describing the general schedule
of the project and the contact information of the general contractor. The City
encourages open communication between project representatives and the neighbors
such that day-to-day issues can be resolved without involving the City.
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 7
4. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan which includesJut is not limited to fencing, watering
of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove
mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent
windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. For projects
greater than one acre in size a filgitive dust control plan must be submitted to the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environinent (CDPHE), Air Quality
Control Division.
5. Recycling, in addition to trash, facilities for the period of construction.
Section 17: Buildina Permit Requirements
The building permit application shall include/depict:
l . A signed copy of the final Ordinance granting land use approval.
2. A letter from the primary. contractor stating that the approving Ordinance has been read
and understood.
3. The conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover page of the building permit
set.
4. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District.
5. A right-of-way improvement plan depicting physical improvements to the right-of-way
including design specifications and profiles. The "landscape forecourt" shall be
redesigned to permit greater pedestrian traffic past the property. All improvements shall
comply with the City's requirements for accessibility.
6. A landscape plan showing location, amount, and species of landscape improvements
with an irrigation plan for approval by the City Parks Department.
7. A utility plan meeting the standards of the City Engineer and City utility agencies..
8. A grading/drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado
licensed Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on -site during and after
construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be
required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used in
designing any drainage improvements. Off -site improvement shall be done in
coordination with the City Engineer.
9. A fireplace/woodstove permit. In the City of Aspen, buildings may have only two gas
log fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and unlimited numbers of
decorative gas fireplace appliances per building. New buildings may NOT have wood
burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel.
10. An asbestos inspection report. Prior to remodel, expansion or demolition of any
public or commercial building, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc., the
CDPHE Air Quality Control Division must be notified and a person licensed by the
state of Colorado to do asbestos inspections must do an inspection. The Building
Department carmot sign any building permits until they get this report. If there is no
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 8
asbestos, the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos
removal contractor must remove it.
11. A tree removal permit, as applicable.
12. A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Enviroiumental Health Department which
addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads, perimeter silt fencing, as -
needed cleaning of adjacent rights -of -way, speed limits within and accessing the site,
and the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance during
construction. The applicant shall wash tracked mud and debris from the street as
necessary, and as requested by the City, during construction. Submission of a fugitive
dust control plan to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Enviroiument Air
Quality Control Division may also be necessary.
13. A study performed by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer demonstrating how the
required excavation of the site may be performed without damaging adjacent
structures and/or streets. The City will not approve of soil nails into public right-of-
way or utility easements.
14. A construction site management and parking plan meeting the specifications of the
City Building Department.
Prior to issuance of a building permit:
1. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid.
2. The location and design of standpipes, fire sprinklers, and alarms shall be
acceptable to the Fire Marshall.
Section 18: Noise During Construction
During construction, noise callllot exceed maximum permissible sound level standards,
and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 am and 7 pm, Monday
thru Saturday. Construction is not allowed on Sundays. It is very likely that noise
generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on
the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measures to minimize
the predicted high noise levels.
Section 19: Condominiumization
Condominiumization of the Project to define separate ownership interests of the Project is
hereby approved by the City of Aspen, subject to recordation of a condominiumization plat
in compliance with the current (at the time of condo plat submission) plat requirements of
the City Conu-nunity Development Engineer.
Section 20:
All material representations and conumitmenfs made by the developer pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission 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.
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 9
Section 21:
This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the salve shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
CPrtinn 77.-
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for ally
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.
CPvtinn 11.
That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Resolution, to record a copy of this
Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on , 2005.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
David Hoefer, Asst. City Attorney
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
CAhome\Current Planning\CASES\Sky Hotel\Reso.doc
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 10
26.710.190 Lodge (L).
A. Purpose. The purpose of the Lodge (L) Zone District is to encourage construction, renovation, and
operation of lodges, tourist -oriented multi -family buildings, high occupancy timeshare facilities, and
ancillary uses compatible with lodging to support and enhance Aspen's resort economy. Free -Market
residential units within this zone district shall be permitted, but not required, to be used as short-term
tourist accommodations. The City of Aspen encourages high -occupancy lodging development in this
zone district. Therefore, certain dimensional incentives are provided in this zone district as well as
other development incentives in Chapter 26.470 — Growth Management.
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Lodge (L) Zone District:
------� 1. Hotel or Lodge.
2. Timeshare Lodge.
3. Exempt Timesharing.
4. Offices and activities accessory to timeshare unit sales (see Section 26.590).
5. Conference facilities.
6. Uses associated with outdoor recreation facilities and events.
7. Accessory uses and structures. (Food service for on -site lodge guests is an accessory use.)
8. Storage accessory to a permitted use.
---� 9. Affordable Multi -Family Housing accessory to a lodging or timeshare operation and for
employees of the operation.
.--- -�►10. Free -Market Multi -Family Housing.
11. Home occupations.
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Lodge (L) Zone Dis-
trict, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425:
----� 1. Retail and Restaurant Uses.
2. Neighborhood Commercial Uses.
3. Service Uses.
4. Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses.
5. Public Uses.
6. Academic Uses.
7. Child Care Center.
8. Commercial Parking Facility, pursuant to Section 26.515.
9. Affordable Multi -Family Housing not accessory to a lodging or timeshare operation.
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted
and conditional uses in the Lodge (L) Zone District:
1. Minimum lot size (square feet): 3,000
2. Minimum lot area per dwellingunit nit (square feet):
a. Multi -Family residential — 3,000 square feet.
b. Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, and Exempt Timesharing — no requirement.
3. Minimum lot width (feet) 30.
City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005.
Part 700, Page 41.
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 5.
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 5.
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 5.
7. Maximum height:
a) Multi -Family (as a single use): 28 feet.
b) Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed -use projects, with less than
one lodge unit per 500 square feet of Lot Area or an average lodge unit size greater than
500 square feet: 28 feet.
c) Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed -use projects, with one or
more lodge units per 500 square feet of Lot Area and an average lodge unit size of 500
square feet or less: 38 feet for sloped roofs. 42 feet for flat roofs. Also see Section
26.710.190.E.
8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): 10.
�i
,,C% 9. Pedestrian Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030.
10. Floor Area Ratio (FAR):
..._ o A. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt
Timesharing, and mixed -use projects, with one or more lodge units per 500 square feet
of Lot Area and an average lodge unit size of 500 square feet or less. This FAR sched-
ule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 3:1 for parcels of 27,000 square feet
or less in size and 2.5:1 for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet. Also see Section
26.710.190.E. i"
1. Retail and Restaurant Uses, Neighborhood Commercial Uses, Service Uses;
Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center:
.25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section
26.430.
--- 2. Lodge -units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space):
2:1, which may be increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section
26.430.
-- 3. Uses and facilities ancillary to a lodging operation (non -unit space):.5:1.
4. Commercial Parking Facility: 1:1.
—5. Affordable Multi-Fainily Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special
Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.
-- 6. Free -Market Residential or Large Lodge/Timeshare Units: An amount less than
or equal to 25% of the FAR of the total project including both unit and non -unit
space, but not including FAR devoted to parking. For example: If the total pro-
ject represents 10,000 square feet of Floor Area, then 2,500 square feet may be
free-market residential space or space devoted to lodge/timeshare units which
are not to be limited by the average unit -size limitation. This percentage may be
City of Aspen Lind Use Code. June, 2005
Part 700, Page 42
otherwise established for a project through a Plaimed Unit Development review.
Also see Section 26.710.190.F.
B. The following FAR schedule applies to Conunercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt
Timesharing, and mixed -use projects, with less than one lodge unit per 500 square feet
of Lot Area or an average lodge unit size greater than of 500 square feet. This FAR
schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 1.5:1 for parcels of 27,000
square feet or less in size and 1:1 for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet.
1. Commercial uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses;
childcare center: .25: 1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pur-
suant to Section 26.430.
2. Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space):
1: 1.
3. Uses and facilities ancillary to a lodging operation (non -unit space):.5:1.
4. Commercial Parking Facility: 1: 1.
5. Affordable Multi -Family Housing: .25: 1, which may be increased by Special
Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.
6. Free -Market Multi -Family Housing: .25: 1, which may be increased to .5:1 by
Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.
C. The following FAR schedule applies to multi -family (as a single use) projects estab-
lished prior to the adoption of Ordinance 9, Series of 2005, cumulatively, up to a total
maximum FAR of 1: 1. Receipt of a Development Order shall constitute the date the use
was established.
1. Affordable Multi -Family Housing: 1: 1.
2. Free -Market Multi -Family Housing: 1: 1.
D. The following FAR schedule applies to multi -family (as a single use) projects estab-
lished after the adoption of Ordinance 9, Series of 2005, cumulatively, up to a total
maximum FAR of .75:1. Receipt of a Development Order shall constitute the date the
use was established.
1. Affordable Multi -Family Housing: .5: 1.
2. Free -Market Multi -Family Housing: .5: 1.
E. Special Review for Density and Unit -Size Standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission
may approve an adjustment of the "density standard" and the "unit -size standard" and the project shall
remain qualified for the height, Floor Area, and Growth Management incentives associated with these
standards. The review shall be pursuant to the review procedures for Special Review, Chapter 26.430,
and the following criteria:
City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005.
Part 700, Page 43-
1. The density standard maybe amended by a maximum of 10% to one lodge unit per 550 square
feet of Lot Area. The average unit -size standard may be amended by a maximum of 10% to
permit an average unit size of 550 square feet. An adjustment in excess of these increases may
be approved through adoption of a PUD plan, but the project shall no longer be qualified for the
associated incentives.
2. The project includes a generous amount of non -unit space, amenities, and services for guests of
the lodging operation. This can include both internal and external amenities.
3. The project provides a range of unit sizes and configurations to be attractive to a broad segment
of potential guests. Flexible units are encouraged.
4. There exists a system or strategy for the project to maximize short-term occupancies.
F. Consideratio ns for Increasing the Percentage of the Project Used for Free Market Residen-
tial Space. A Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, or Exempt Timeshare project may exceed the twenty-five (25)
percent limitation on Free -Market Residential or large lodge/timeshare unit space with Plamied Unit
Development approval. In addition to the PUD criteria of Chapter 26.445.050, the following factors
shall also be considered:
l . The amount of iron -unit space, amenities, and services for guests of the lodging operation. This
can include both internal and external amenities.
2. Any lodge/timeshare units provided which are in excess of the minimum needed to achieve the
height and FAR incentives.
3. Any legal or physical limitation of the property such that additional incentive is necessary to
develop guest accommodations on the property.
4. The range of lodge unit sizes and configurations, including flexible units, which are attractive
to a broad segment of potential guests.
5. Any system or strategy for the project to maximize short-term occupancies.
(Ord. No. 41-2000, §§ 1, 2; Ord. 56-2000 §§ 7 (part), 13; Ord. No. 25-2001, § 5 (part); Ord. No. 21-
2002 §§ 5 and 6 (part); Ord. No. 9-2005, 2002)
City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005
Part 700, Page 44
MJan 26 2006 11:18AM TDA COLORADO
TDA
COLORADO
January 24, 2006
E. Michael Hoffman, P.C.
106 S. Mill St,
Suite 202
Aspen, CO 81611
3038256004 p.2
Transportation Consultants
Re: Sky Hotel Redevelopment Project, Opinion of Traffic & Parking Impacts
January 8, 2006 Site Plan Addendum
Dear Michael,
As requested, we have reviewed the Sky Hotel redevelopment Site Plan Addendum dated January 8,
2006. We issued our traffic and parking comment letter of January 16"' based on the Site Plan depicted in
the Aspen Club Lodge Properties Growth Management a-emption Application document of 9/15/05 ,
The new Site Plan addresses some but not all of the concerns we had with the September 2005 version.
The new Site Plan depicts a ong-lan, two-way ramp serving the underground hotel parking. The change
from a conventional two-way ramp was done apparently to afford a more realistic turning template for
trucks and fire apparatus at the corner of Durant Street and the north -south alley. The plan also adds a
landscape strip in the alley along the Chateau Dumont west property line.
Updated Assessment of Impacts to Chateau Owners
We still have an overall site access concern that the alleyway system is being asked to perform more than
can be provided safely and efficiently. Reducing the footprint of the parking garage access ramp does
achieve better circulation for emergency apparatus and Chateau owners but at the expense of conventional
access to underground parking. Questions I would pose are:
1. With one -lane, two-way operation are hotel guests, visitors and employees allowed to self -park or
will all parking access be limited to valet staff only?
2. Will the alternating one -lane ramp right of way operation be controlled by vehicle detection stop-
go signals, audible alarms, gates?
3. At alley level is the inbound lane physically separated from the outbound?
It is still not clear from this plan if hotel deliveries occur entirely within the "Back of House" space or just
back up to the overhead door. We stand by our previous recommendation that either the access to hotel
underground parking or access to the hotel service court is relocated to the Spring Street side of the hotel.
Relocating parking garage access to Spring Street would keep valet service from having to use a short
section of Durant Avenue and thereby reduce ped/vehicle conflict volumes along the Durant south
sidewalk.
820 16th Street Mail, Suite 424 • Denver, Colorado 80202 - (303) 825-7107 • FAX: 825-6004 • E-Mail: TDAColo@aol.com
Jan 26 2006 11:18AM TDA COLORADO 3038256004 p.3
E. Michael Hoffman
Page 2
January 24, 2006
Specific changes in adverse impact with the 118/06 Amended Site Plan are:
Sky Hotel Redevelopni ent Applicati on
Traffic Impact Opinion
Amended Site Plan
The requested 30-foot vacation of Dean Street is still excessive for the purposes stated, Space for the
transformer as shown on the Level 1 Floor Plan Sheet 07 could be achieved by vacating only that
portion that is shadowed by the wall surrounding the parking ramp well. This appears to be about 5
feet in the amended site plan. A 5-foot vacation would leave access to the delivery door in public
ROW and hence subject to restrictions on blockage. Again, it is not clear on the plan if delivery
trucks unload fully within the building or merely back up to or park along the door opening. If
minimal disruption to one-way Dean Street circulation is stipulated, the former rather than the latter
truck loading condition should prevail.
2. Provision of the landscape buffer along Chateau Dumont, if the curbline is carried all the way to the
Durant curb return as indicated Floor Plan Level 1 sheet 07, would reduce the proposed oversized
alley opening at Durant to about 32 feet, This is still very wide by alley standards (wider than Spring
Street at Durant) and presents a major increase for pedestrians as compared to the existing driveway
apron, If hotel parking access were relocated to Spring Street this opening could remain as a standard
alley curb cut.
3. There are no changes with this site plan that alter our previous concerns regarding c ective use of
Dean Street during hotel demolition and reconstruction.
Please give me a call if you have any questions on our updated access and circulation opinions:
Sincerely,
TDACoforadc, Inc.
David D_ Leahy, PE
Principal
fiffor-1 M M we
Paradise Trading Pty Ltd.
No 19 Chateau Chaumont
Aspen, Colorado 81611
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Attn: Jasmine Tigre, Chairman
130 S Galena Street
ASPEN, CO 81611
RE: Re -development proposal for Sky Hotel
Dear Ms Tigre:
We are the owners of Chateau Chaumont No 19 and are writing to object to height of this
development on the northern side of Dean St and also to the proximity to the roadway.
I attended the meeting on Tuesday 17th January and made a brief submission.
As I understand it, the Council- has made changes to the regulations for the development in Lodge
zones as an encouragement to build additional accommodation in the Aspen town core and the
Sky Hotel application is the first under the proposed new regulations.
Chateau Chaumont and Chateau Dumont were approved to have their front entrances facing
Dean St and this is their main access point. Both buildings have enjoyed views of Aspen
Mountain since construction and this continued expectation has been threatened by the changes
in planning regulations.
The Planning changes would seem to be suitable to a situation where a standard road width and
distance between buildings of approx 65ft exists. Under these circumstances, views are not
substantially obstructed and the shadow effect would not dominate the access way and adjacent
buildings.
In Dean St where the distance between buildings would be narrowed to 32 ft, both the impact on
views and the shadow effect are totally unacceptable.
Under present conditions the sun reaches the roadway (covering 1 Oft width with sun) and shines
on the full face of the Chateau buildings in winter time giving reflective warmth from the
buildings. This was checked by myself at 1.00pm on Thursday 19th January 2006.
If the Sky Hotel is permitted to increase height to 42ft and narrow the space between buildings to
32ft, no sun will enter the street and a shadow will be cast well up the buildings covering almost
the entire height of the buildings.This would result in the production of a dark canyon and a
miserable situation.
In addition, all trees in the street would be removed leaving a roadway with no beautification. Is
this the way we want to see the Aspen of the future?
The problem potentially goes further. If Aspen Alps were to re -develop under the proposed
regulations, the same effect would be created: another canyon of similar or lesser width and the
views from Sky Hotel obscured along with the corresponding shadow effect.
Aspen Visitor Accommodation.
The Sky Hotel presently has 90 bedrooms. The two Chateau buildings have between 90 and 100
bedrooms, most of which have been substantially upgraded and are let for holiday
accommodation. Our particular unit is managed by Frias Properties who provide a Hotel style
service - daily room service, concierge, a bottle of wine on arrival etc. The effect of approving
the Sky application would be to upgrade 90 rooms with no increase in numbers and to
downgrade up to 100 rooms with no compensation to the owners. Why would the Council want
to encourage this?
We urge you to require modifications to the project to lower the height along Dean St to the level
of the Glory Hole building (approx 27ft) and to increase the setback from the northern boundary
to allow more open space and landscaping, to maintain the integrity of Dean St and the entrances
to the two Chateau buildings.
Yours Sincerely,
Bruce Jeanes.
Sole Director
Paradise Trading Pty Ltd
JAN-27-2006 11:09 FROM-COLDWELL BANKER RYE NY +9149678259 T-197 P.002/002 F-227
January 26, 2006
City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colo. 81611
Atten:Jasmine Tigre, Chairman
RE— Sky Hotel
Dear Jasmine,
I am the owner of Chateau Chaumont 17 and Chateau Chaumont 18_ I have owned the
units for 2 years and 7 years respectively. Members of my family use the condo 10
weeks in the winter and 2-3 weeks in the summer.
The proposed expansion and rebuilding of the Sky Hotel, in my opinion, will not only
significantly impact conditions in the Dean Street Alley which serves as the primary
access to both the CC and CD.
As envisioned, the narrow street and the virtual elimination of sunlight from 11/15 to
2/15 will create hazardous driving and walking. It will very difficult for emergency and
sanitation vehicles, to have normal access and will create unreasonable congestion.
The existing building guidelines do not take the special circumstances of Dean St_ into
account_ In previous correspondence it was mentioned that Chateau Chaumont and
Dumont have short term occupants and therefore our concerns are not really valid. The
Sky Hotel only has short term residents too_ Our concerns are very relevant.
I urge the committee to consider Aspen's image, and my above thoughts in their decision
making process. Aspen must be very careful not to become Vailevized. Aspen does not
need a progression of bigger and taller buildings destroying the existing qualities of its
downtown.
Very truly yours,
AEchael J_ N an
01/26/2006 17:40 FAX
12002/003
January 26, 2006
Gary L. Kantor, M.D., F.A.C.P.
2816 Vista Del Sol Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89120
Fax: 970..920-5197
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Attention: Jasmine Tigre,, Chairman
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Proposed Demolition and
Expansion of the Sky Hotel
Dear Ladies and Gentleman:
I am writing in opposition to some components of the design phase of the application for
demolition and redevelc,)pment of the Sky Hotel. I purchased a Chateau'Chaurnont unit,
731 East Durant, #15, Aspen, Colorado, 81611, in 1984 and have utilized the condominium
for personal and rental purposes. At the present time, I have been substantially increasing
my use of the condominium for personal use, spending approximately one month in
December and early January in the condominium with a scheduled return in the near
future. We are in the process of upgrading this condominium and I am extremely involved
in the property and concerned with the application of Sky Hotel.
The planned expansion! and elevation of the facility from approximately 25 feet to 42 feet
as well as the significant narrowing of Dean Street will be devastating to the properties of
Chateau Chaumont and Chateau Durant. This is complicated by the unusual specifics of
Dean Street. The new Lodge Incentive Ordinance was meaningful with reference to the
usual streets and sidewalks which comprise a total width of 60 feet. However, I am sure
consideration was not given to a street with a width of only 20 feet. The minimal width of
Dean Street thereby results in an unusual impact on the planned 42 foot proposed
elevation in the Sky Hotel application, an impact not anticipated by the current regulations.
A height of 42 feet would be far less significant if the street were in fact as wide as the
prevalent streets within the Aspen area. In fact, I am unaware of any other street that is
as narrow as Dean Street and certainly, this exceptionally narrow street should have an
impact on the consideration of the Sky Hotel application,
01/26/2006 17:40 FAX a 003/003
RE: City of Aspen
January 26, 2006
Page 2
The planned elevation of the Sky Hotel, so very close to the facade of the Chateau
Chaumont and Chateau Durant buildings, will place the latter condominiums in darkness,
preclude their visibility, substantially reduce their value, and create a variety of other
significant problems theft would not occur in a street with the usual transverse diameter.
It is my understanding that the City's Land Use Regulations allow the Planning and Zoning
Commission discretion requiring the applicant to propose changes consistent with the
surrounding neighborhood and to simultaneously minimize the negative impacts of their
construction in the end project on the neighborhood. Regardless of the current allowable
elevations for such a hotel, the narrowness of Dean Street results in -the planned project
creating a markedly negative impact on Chateau Chaumont and Chateau Durant. There
would be substantially less impact such of a project with an elevation of 42 feet, if the
street had the usual diameter,
The application is inconsistent with a development consistent with the surrounding
neighborhood and does not minimize the negative impacts on the neighborhood.
Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting designated for January 31, 2006, but
would be most appreciative of your considering: reducing the height of the structure along
Dean Street to that of the existing Glory Hole building, i.e., 28 feet or less, minimizing the
north facade further away from Dean Street to reduce the negative impact on the two
Chateau properties, and moving the delivery, trash, utility service of the hotel to the interior
of the structure rather than along the alley and Dean Street.
Having owned this property for approximately 20 years, I am saddened and very
disappointed at the potential . for significant damage to the property if the proposal is
accepted as requested
I am would be very appreciative of your consideration.
Very truly yours,
c�
Ga ntor, M.D., F.A.C.P.
Phone: 702-496-4450 ( cell)
702-898-7570 (fax)
l.aik _,aol.com
EXHIBIT A
STAFF FINDINGS
STAFF FINDINGS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT
26.470.040.A.7 — Remodeling or replacement of existing commercial or lodge
V� levelopment. Remodeling or replacement after demolition of existing commercial or
hotel/lodge buildings and portions thereof shall be exempt from the provisions of growth
management, provided that no additional net leasable square footage or lodge units are
created and there is no change -in -use. If redevelopment involves an expansion of net
leasable square footage or lodge units, only the replacement of existing development shall
be exempt and the expansion.shall be subject to Section 26.470.040.C.2 or 3. Existing,
prior to demolition, net leasable square footage and lodge units shall be documented by
the City of Aspen Zoning Officer prior to demolition. Also see Reconstruction
Limitations, Section 26.470.070, and definition of Net Leasable Commercial and Office
Space, Section 26.104.100.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
The proposed redevelopment uses existing lodge and commercial allotments. No
additional units or commercial square footage is proposed.
26.470.040.B.3. Incentive Lodge Development. The expansion of an existing lodge
J� or the development of a new lodge shall be approved, approved with conditions, or
denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria:
a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the
expansion, pursuant to Section 26.470.030(D), Annual Development
Allotments.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Thirty-seven allotments for free-market residential are available each year. One has
been granted so far this year (for a historic change -in -use), leaving 36 available.
b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community
Plan.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 1
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES
This property is located in the Lodge zone district and is described as "Lodging" in the
Future Land Use Map of the 2000 AACP. The property is within walking distance of
downtown, the Gondola, and other common tourist destinations and attractions. Staff
believes this mix of land uses — lodging, residential, and commercial — is compatible
with and an enhancement of the immediate area.
The 2000 AACP Economic Sustainability section describes what is necessary for
Aspen's economic base: "Essential to the long-term viability is the unique, varied,
high -quality, and welcoming experience Aspen offers to both residents and a diverse
visitor population. They demand a lively, small-scale downtown with diverse and
unique shops and varied choices of accommodations, including small lodges." Staff
believes this proposal is consistent with this philosophy statement.
The Action Plan of the 2000 AACP called for a task force to identify ways to sustain
and improve the local economy. The number one recommendation of this task force
was to support the redevelopment of existing lodging facilities and the development of
,new lodging facilities. The proposal is consistent with this recommendation.
In 2004, the City completed an analysis of the downtown retail environment — the
"Frick and Beer Report." The report suggested a series of strategies including:
■ "Allow downtown to change: development, density, and diversity."
■ "Reduce non -retail ground floor."
■ "Pursue, stimulate and promote new downtown investments and
improvements."
■ "Projects to support residential life downtown."
The report suggested unbinding downtown and enhancing a multi -seasonal "body
heat" that a compression and a mix of uses could bring to downtown. Staff believes
this project is consistent with this vision of rejuvenation.
The City amended much of its Land Use Code after the 2000 AACP, the Economic
Sustainability Report, and the Downtown retail Analysis all suggested loosening the
regulations to allow to reinvestment and an urbanization of downtown. Staff believes
this project is consistent with the purposes of the Land Use Code revisions.
c) The project contains a minimum of one lodge unit per five hundred (500)
square feet of Lot Area and these lodge units average five hundred (500)
square feet or less per unit. These two standards (the density standard and
the unit -size standard) may be varied in some cases according to the
limitations of the zone district in which the project is developed and still
meet this criterion. (See zone district requirements.) Units developed in
excess of those necessary to meet the Lot Area standard shall not be
required to meet the average -size standard. For the expansion of a lodge
which is not being demolished/redeveloped and which does not currently
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 2
meet the Lot Area standard, only the average unit -size standard of the new
units shall be required in order to meet this criterion. Projects not meeting
the (tensity or unit -size standard shall be reviewed pursuant to
26.470. 040. C.2 — Expansion/New Commercial, Lodge, or 31fived Use
Development.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The project meets these two qualifiers. Minimum unit density needed is 85 and the
project has 90. The average unit size is 487 square feet, less than the maximum
average of 500.
d) Associated free-market residential development, as permitted pursuant to
the zone district in which the lodge is developed, shall be allocated on a unit
basis and attributed to the annual development allotment. Each unit shall
require the provision of - affordable 'housing, mitigation by one of the
following methods:
i) Providing an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) or a Carriage House for
each residential unit pursuant to Section 26.520, Accessory Dwelling
Units and Carriage Houses. The unit need not be detached or entirely
above grade to meet this criterion.
ii) Providing on -site or off -site Affordable Housing Units equal to 30% of
the free-market residential units (on a unit basis). The affordable
housing units shall be one -bedroom or larger and be provided as actual
units (not as a cash -in -lieu payment). Affordable housing units
provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7,
Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in
the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended.
Provision of affordable housing mitigation via units outside of the City
of Aspen shall require approval from City Council, pursuant to Section
26.470.040.D.2. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at
a lower Category designation.
iii) Paying an affordable housing cash -in -lieu fee normally associated with
exempt single family and duplex development, pursuant to the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines.
Notes: The City encourages the affordable housing units required for
the free-market residential development to be associated with the lodge
operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. An
efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for a lodge
component of a Incentive Lodge project may be approved as a credit
towards the mitigation requirement for the free-market component of
the project, pursuant to Section 26.470.050.A.1— Employee Generation.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 3
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The application proposes 3 affordable housing units. This complies with option ii,
above. The proposal is to limit these units to the Category 2 level, which is more
affordable than the required Category 4 level.
e) Thirty (30) percent of the employees generated by the additional lodge,
timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units, and associated commercial
development, according Section 26.470.050.A, Employee Generation Rates,
are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash -in -lieu
thereof. On -site affordable housing units shall be one -bedroom or larger
units. Employee mitigation shall only be required for additional
development and shall not be required for replacement development. The
Planning and Zoning Commission may consider unique characteristics or
efficiencies of the proposed operation and lower the mitigation
requirements pursuant to Section 26.470.050.A.1 — Employee Generation.
Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section
26.470.040. C. 7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as
defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as
amended. Provision of affordable housing mitigation via units outside of the
City of Aspen shall require approval from City Council, pursuant to Section
26.470.040.D.2. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a
lower Category designation.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The project does not proposed additional lodge units or additional commercial space.
The proposal is in compliance with this standard.
J) The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure
or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as
part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to,
water , supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities,
drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking,
and road and transit services.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The project has been reviewed by the City Engineer, Community Development
Engineer, and various utility agencies. With certain conditions of approval
recommended by these agencies, the project meets this standard.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 4
26.470.040.B. 7. Affordable Housing. The development of affordable housing deed
restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines
shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning
Commission based on the following criteria:
cc) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the
new units, pursuant to Section 26.470.030. C, Development Ceiling Levels.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Approximately 600 affordable housing allotments are available and this proposals
three units are accommodated within the Development Ceiling.
b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community
Plan. .
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Staff believes the project is consistent with the AACP (see staff commentary on page
two of this exhibit). The affordable housing units are above grade and appear to be
well -designed. One -bedroom units are preferred by the Housing Authority when
associated with projects of this nature.
c) The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority shall be required for this standard The Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the
Board of Directors.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
The project was reviewed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority staff and
Board. APCHA staff reports (verbally) that the project's affordable housing units
comply with the Housing Guidelines. A written referral memo was not ready for
publication at the time of printing this memo. One should be ready for the hearing.
Staff believes this criterion is met, subject to a condition of approval regarding the
continual affordability of the rental units.
d) Affordable Housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of
actual newly built units or bccy-down units. Off -site units shall be provided
within the City of Aspen city limits. Units outside the city limits may be
accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to 26.470.040.D.2.
Provision of affordable housing through a cash -in -lieu payment shall be at
the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission it on a
recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 5
Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these
methods.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The Affordable housing is required for mitigation and is in the form of on -site units.
e) The proposed units shall be deed restricted as `for sale" units and
transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority Guidelines. In the alternative, rental units may be
provided if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney,
ensures permanent affordability of the units.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The Units are proposed as rental units. The application proposes to transfer a nominal
interest to the APCHA to ensure the permanent affordability of the units. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 6
SUBDIVISION: STAFF FINDINGS
The Definitions section (26.104.100) of the Land Use Code explains that subdivision
approval is required whenever leasehold interests will be transferred. Section 26.480.050
states that a development application for subdivision review shall comply with the
following standards and requirements:
A. General Requirements.
a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan (AACP).
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
The proposed development is consistent with the AACP. The subdivision action is'
necessary to permit multiple residences on one parcel. There is no alteration of
the existing lot lines of the property. Also see staff comments on page 2 of this
exhibit.
b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land
uses in the area.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Staff believes that the subdivision is consistent with the character of existing land
uses in the area which operate in a similar manner — lodging, residential, and
cominercial in various mixed -use configurations.
c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of
surrounding areas.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Because the subdivision proposed here is all internal to the structure, staff does not
find that the subdivision will adversely impact future development of the
surrounding area.
d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance tvith all applicable
requirements of this Title.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES s
The proposed subdivision is in compliance with all applicable requirements of the
Lodge district and other chapters and sections of the Land Use Code.
B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 7
a. Land Suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land
unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep,
mutflorv, rockslide, avalanche or snow slide, steep topography or any other
natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or
welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Staff finds that the parcel is generally suitable for development considering all of the
above clangers. No known hazards of the property have been reported.
b. Spatial Pattern Efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to
create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature
extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
Staff finds that the proposed subdivision will iiot create spatial patterns that cause
inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities or
uiuzecessary public costs.
C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for
the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See,
Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met:
1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the
subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or
the goals of the community.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
No variations to the subdivision standards are proposed.
2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and
provide justification for each variation request, providing design
recommendations by professional engineers as necessary.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
No variations to the subdivision standards are requested.
D. Affordable Housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling
units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the
requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision
which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable
housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management
Quota System.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 8
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
The standards of Chapter 26.470 — Growth Management — are applicable and have
been addressed in the application. Staff finds the affordable housing requirement to
be met with the proposed three affordable housing units.
E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards
set forth at Chapter 26.630.
Applicability. School land dedication standards shall be assessed upon all new
subdivisions within the City of Aspen which contain residential units.
An applicant may make a cash payment in -lieu of dedicating land to the City, or
may make a cash payment in combination with a land dedication, to comply with
the standards of this Section. This section of the subdivision regulations requires
the dedication of land or the payment of an in -lieu fee for each new residential
unit in a subdivision.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards is required for the
residential dwelling units proposed. The applicant will pay cash in lieu of a land
dedication, which will be required at time of building permit.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 9
CONDITIONAL USE: STAFF FINDINGS
26.425.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses.
When considering a development application for a conditional use, the appropriate review
board shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable.
1. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and
standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone
district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other
applicable requirements of this Title; and
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The Conditional Use is for the development of the cafe, bar and lounge, and sundries
shop. These uses are conditional in the Lodge zone district because some areas of
the Lodge zone are not favorable for a high level of commercial activity. This
property, being located in a pedestrian area and effectively part of the downtown
retail environment is an appropriate area for commercial uses within a lodge. Staff
considers this project to be consistent with the AACP (see page 2 of this exhibit) and
considers the proposed commercial uses to be consistent with the AACP and with
the intent of the Lodge Zone.
2. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding
land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? __FYES
The immediate area contains a mix of lodging, commercial, residential, and
recreational uses. This project reflects the mix of uses in the immediate area and
staff considers the uses to be not only consistent but desirable.
3. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed
conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on
pedestrian and vehicular circulation,. parking, trash, service delivery, noise,
vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES
Staff expects off -site impacts will be minimal. The proposal is not expected to
generate significant noise, trash, odors, vibrations, or service deliveries that would
be unexpected in this mixed -use area. Traffic and pedestrian circulation are
improved with the proposal. Staff believes this design is sensitive to the surrounding
properties and enlivens this portion of Durant Avenue.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 10
4. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use
including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks,
police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical
services, drainage systems, and schools; and
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
Sufficient infrastructure exists to accommodate the use. Staff believes this criterion
is met.
S. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental
need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
The proposal actually reduces the amount of commercial space and, consequently,
the employee generation associated with the use. No additional affordable housing
is required for this conditional use.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 11
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW: STAFF FINDINGS
26.412.050 Review Criteria.
An application for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with
conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
1. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060,
Commercial Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a
more -appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the
development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site
constraints can justify a deviation from the Standards. Compliance with Section
26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not required but may be used to justify
a deviation from the Standards.
2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the
proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060,
Commercial Design Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to
the fagade of the building may be required to comply with this section.
3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located
within a Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual
Development Plan approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant
to Chapter 26.415. This criterion shall not apply if the development activity does
not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? __FYES
Staff finds the project to meet the Commercial Design Standards with no variations.
See detail of standards compliance below.
26.412.060 Commercial Design Standards. The following design standards shall
apply to commercial, lodging, and mixed -use development:
A. Building Relationship to Primary Street.
A street wall is comprised of buildings facing principal streets and public pedestrian
spaces. Consistent street walls provide a sense of a coherent district and frame an
outdoor room. Interruptions in this enclosure can lessen the quality of a commercial
street. Corner buildings are especially important, in that they are more visible and their
scale and proportion affects the street walls of two streets. Well -designed and located
pedestrian open spaces can positively affect the quality of the district, while remnant or
leftover spaces can detract from the downtown. A building's relationship to the street is
entirely important to the quality of the downtown pedestrian environment. Split-level
retail and large vertical separations from the sidewalk can disrupt the coherence of a retail
district. The following standards shall apply:
1. Building facades shall be parallel to the adjoining primary streets. Minor
elements of the building fagade may be developed at irregular angles.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 12
2. Building facades along primary streets shall be setback no more than the average
setback of the adjoining buildings and no less than the minimum requirement of
the particular zone district. Exempt from this provision are building setbacks
accommodating On -Site Pedestrian Amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030.
3. Building facades along primary streets shall maintain a consistent setback on the
first and second story.
4. Commercial buildings shall be developed with the first floor at, or within two (2)
feet above, the level of the adjoining sidewalk, or right-of-way if no sidewalk
exists. "Split-level" retail frontage is prohibited.
5. Commercial buildings incorporating a setback from a primary street shall not
incorporate a substantial grade change between the building facade and the public
right-of-way. "Moats" surrounding buildings are prohibited.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? __FYES
The proposal is parallel to the primary street (Durant and Spring are both primary
streets), has a simple physical relationship to the street with no split level or
detachment from the public sidewalk.
B. Pedestrian Amenity Space.
Creative, well -designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting,
and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment
atmosphere. Pedestrian amenity can take the form of physical or operational
improvements to public rights -of -way or private property within commercial areas.
On parcels required to provide pedestrian amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030 —
Pedestrian Amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity.
Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the Pedestrian
Amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic
Preservation Commission as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according
to the following standards:
1. The dimensions of any proposed on -site pedestrian amenity sufficiently allow for
a variety of uses and activities to occur considering any expected tenant and future
potential tenants and uses.
2. The pedestrian amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this
characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses,
shade trees, solar access, view orientation, and simple at -grade relationships with
adjacent rights -of -way are encouraged.
3. The pedestrian amenity, and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent
structures, rights -of -way, and uses, contributes to an inviting pedestrian
enviromnent.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 13
4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by
malls, sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from
the pedestrian environment.
5. Any variation to the Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity,
Section 26.575.030(F) promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity
requirements.
6. The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as
applicable, may reduce the pedestrian amenity requirement by any amount, such
that no. more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for well -
designed projects having a positive contribution to the pedestrian environment.
The resulting requirement may not be less than 10%. On -site provision shall not
be required for a reduction in the requirement. A mix of uses within the proposed
building that enliven the surrounding pedestrian environment may be considered.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES
The proposal meets the site's requirement for Pedestrian Amenity. The site currently
has less than the 25% requirement and straddles the boundary where pedestrian
amenity is required. The effective requirement can be and has been proportionately
lessened. The requirement is 6% of the site and approximately 9% of the site
qualifies for pedestrian amenity space. This is demonstrated on Exhibit 19 of the
application. In addition, the application proposes improvements to the public right-
of-way north of the site to create a "forecourt."
C. Street -Level Building Elements.
The "storefront," or street -level portion of a commercial building is perhaps the single
most important element of a commercial district building. Effective storefront design can
make an entire district inviting and pedestrian friendly. Unappealing storefront design
can become a detriment to the vitality of a commercial district. In order to be an effective
facility for the sale of goods and services, the storefront has traditionally been used as a
tool to present those goods and services to the passing pedestrian (potential customer).
Because of this function, the storefront has traditionally been as transparent as possible to
allow maximum visibility to the interior. The following standards shall apply:
1. Unarticulated, blank walls are prohibited. Fenestration, or an alternate means of
fagade articulation, is required on all exterior walls.
2. Retail buildings shall incorporate, at a minimum, a 60% fenestration ratio on
exterior street -level walls facing primary streets. (For example: each street -level
wall of a retail building that faces a primary street must be comprised of at least
60% fenestration penetrations and no more than 40% solid materials.) This
provision may be reduced or waived for lodging properties with no, or limited,
street -level retail, office buildings with no retail component, and for
Service/Commercial/Industrial buildings.
3. Building entrances shall be well-defined and apparent.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 14
4. Building entrances shall be designed to accommodate an internal airlock such that
temporary seasonal airlocks on the exterior of the building are unnecessary.
5. Non-traditional storefronts, such as along an alleyway, are encouraged.
STAFF FINDING: T DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The entrance of the building is well-defined and each fayade is articulated and
provides visual interest to the building. There is a limited amount of retail on the
ground floor and the fenestration ratio is appropriate given this amount of retail and
its orientation to the primary street.
D. Parking.
Parking is a necessary component of a successful commercial district. The maluler in
which parking is physically accoinmodated has a larger impact upon the quality of the
district that the amount of parking. Surface parking separating storefronts from the street
creates a cluttered, inhospitable pedestrian environment. A downtown retail district
shaped by buildings, well -designed storefronts, and a continuous street wall is highly
preferred over a district shaped by parking lots. Well -placed and well -designed access
points to parking garages can allow convenient parking without disrupting the retail
district. The following standards shall apply:
Parking shall only be accessed from alleyways, unless such access is unavailable
or an unreasonable design solution in which case access from a primary street
shall be designed in a manner that minimizes disruption of the pedestrian
environment.
2. Surface parking shall not be located between the Street right-of-way and the
building fagade.
3. Above grade parking garages in commercial districts shall incorporate ground -
floor commercial uses and be designed in a manner compatible with surrounding
buildings and uses.
4. Above grade parking garages shall not reveal internal ramping on the exterior
facade of the building.
STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The parking has been designed below grade and does not interfere with the
pedestrian environment along Durant.
E. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision.
When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the
building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one
building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 15
trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall
apply:
1. A utility, trash, and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley
meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060
Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Areas, unless otherwise established according to
said section.
2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the
alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the
alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary
when existing site conditions, such as a historic resource, dictate such
encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed.
J. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading
facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly
encouraged.
4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through
the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as
practical.
5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally
within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical
and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not
be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall
reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES
The Lodge district does not require a specific size for trash/recycle activities. These
facilities have been incorporated into the building along the alleyway. A portion of
the alleyway is proposed to be vacated and this would eliminate any need for
encroachments for utility pedestals. The mechanical equipment is proposed to be
handled in a manner that minimizes its visual effects.
26.412.070 Suggested Design Elements. The following guidelines are building
practices suggested by the City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances,
compliance with these practices may not produce the most -desired development and
project designers should use their best judgment.
A. Sign yge:
Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated
signage areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc. may minimize
new tenant signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a
public wayfinding function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block
design details of the building on which they are placed. Compliance with the
City's sign code is mandatory.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 16
B. Display tivindoiv,s:
Display windows provide pedestrian interest and can contribute to the success of the
retail space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide
this pedestrian interest.
C. Lighting:
Well -lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create
pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch
attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating
certain important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light
trespass should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided.
Compliance with the City's Outdoor Lighting code, Section 26.575.050, is
mandatory.
D. Original Toimsite Articulation:
Buildings spanning more than one Original Townsite Lot should incorporate fayade
expressions coincidental with these original parcel boundaries to reinforce historic
scale. This may be inappropriate in some circumstances, such as on large corner lots.
E. Architectural Features:
Parapet walls should be used to shield mechanical equipment from pedestrian views.
Aligning cornices and other architectural features with adjacent buildings can relate new
buildings to their historical surroundings. Awnings and canopies can be used to provide
architectural interest and shield windows and entryways from the elements.
STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I N/A
These standards are not required to be met, but can be used to justify a variance on
other standards. Signage and display windows are not advantageous on this project
due to the use being primarily lodging. The application proposes to be in
compliance with the City's lighting regs. No townsite articulation is apparent in the
design; however, this portion of the townsite was platted as a street.
Exhibit A — Sky Hotel Staff Findings Page 17