The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.610 S West End St.0058.2005.ASLUbl 0 5, u)25-t EAA St 6*Â·6-Â§.1.L~si,wwtiff PUD Amen ment -Case 0058.2005.ASLU â‚¬ 1-A W 1 MAT P C O 'l â‚¬ E 4 g PUBLIC NOTICE 0f DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL ' Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site spedfic development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of As- pen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: The Gant Condominiums also known as 610 West End Street, by order of the Community Development Director on August 29, 2005. The Applicant received approval of an Insubstantial PUD Amendment request to 1) replace the exist- ing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) make landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around Bulklings A, B, C. J, and K of the condo- minium complex. For further information contact Jennifer Phelan, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Asppi, Colorado (970) 429- 2759. s/ City of Aspen Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on Septem- ber 11, 2005. (3050) cor-) ana an amendment to the Aspen Kecrea- tion Center's GMQS exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow f?r the construction of a 136 squareâ€¢,oot office space and a 295 square foot meeting room within the Aspen Recreation Center; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440 of the Land Use Code. City Council may approve an amendment to a Specially Planned Area during a duly noticed public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hear- ing, and after considering comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Cori- munity Development Director, and recommenda- tions from relevant referral agencies: and, WHEREAS. pursuant to Section 26.470.040(D)(3) of the Land Use Code, City Coun cil may approve a GMQS review for an essential public facility during a duly noticed public hear- inK after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, and after considering comments from the general public, a recommen- dation from the Community Development Direc- ton and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; aRd, WHEREAS, the Chy Engineering Depart- ment, Building Department, and the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval: and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hpnrina M A,10,1/ 9 90(15 the Planning And Zon City of Aspen Community Development Dept. CASE NUMBER 0058.2005.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735-12-4-61-101 PROJECT ADDRESS 610 W WESTEND ST PLANNER JENNIFER PHELAN CASE DESCRIPTION PUD AMENDMENT REPRESENTATIVE ALAN RICHMAN 920-1125 DATE OF FINAL ACTION 9/13/2005 CLOSED BY Denise Driscoll 2003 PLUMBING OR ELECTRICAL REGISTRATION FORM 1 CITY OF ASPEN & PITKIN COUNTY 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5090, (970) 920-5526 #3018 GIGAWATT ELEC)(RIC, INC. 312 AABC F ASPEN, CO 81611 \ (970) 925-8608 â‚¬21 aâ‚¬ los State Contractor License #: 0011 5 Expir tion Date>9=fae State Master's License #: 3 99~4\\ Ex iration Date: 12/2 2/05 Master's Name: 1--10 u...>a r <r~ \t~- , 1~~(3 U C a_-/ Master's Mailing Address: 3 (42 1.~\ A - AC> As pe,Â« 0 0 2 lu>i i Master's Telephone:~9 7 0 ) 9 4 - 9,~99/ Office faxnumber:(970 )350--4-4- 1.-t-5,+ ~ ****** PLEASE ATTACH COPIE OF CURRENT STA<LICENSECS) ****** There is no fee for this registration. dfi[-t*i,ULA - c Off 1.-A- 6~ 4~ Signatnlre of Applicant ~ Application approval: M_jrÂ« ail C (043 Building Official ~ Date DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order. hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070. 'Development Orders . and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights". of the City of Aspen " Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Orden unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights. this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470. but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Gant Condominium Association, 610 West End Street, Aspen. CO 81611 Property Owners Name, Mailing Address and telephone number The Gant Condominiums. also known as 610 West End Street Legal Description ancl Street Address of Subject Property The Gant Condominium Association ("Applicant") has applied for an insubstantial PUD amendment to 1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy: and 2) make landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around Buildings A, B, C, .I, and K of the Condominium Complex Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Gant Condominiums Insubstantial Amendment, Series of 2005. 8/29/05 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) September 11.2005 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) September 12.2008 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) iIi Issued this 12 day of September, 2005, by the City of Aspen Community Develipil~; Â£t~tor. Chri>Tiendon Community Development Director MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner RE: Gant Condominiums Insubstantial PUD Amendment DATE: August 22,2005 11111111111 Ill 111111-111111111 lilillil i Page: 1 cf 6 514269 09/01/2005 0124; j APPLICANT: SILVIA DAVIS FITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 Gant Condominium Association LOCATION: 610 West End Street ZONING: R-15 with a PUD Overlay REVIEW PROCEDURE: Insubstantial amendments to an approved PUD may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.445.100(A), PUD Insubstantial Amendments. REQUEST: The Gant Condominium Association ("Applicant") has applied for an insubstantial PUD amendment to 1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) make landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around Buildings A, B, C, J, and K of the Condominium Complex. AUTIIORITY TO APPLY: The Condominium Association has represented to Staff in the application that they have the ability to represent the individual owners within the condominium complex pursuant to the Gant's condominium documentation. The Applicant has also represented in the application that a majority of the unit owners within the Gant Complex voted in favor of making the improvements proposed in this application. Therefore, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 16.304.040, Initiation of application for development order, the Applicant has the authority to apply for a PUD amendment given that persons owning more than fifty (50) percent of the property subject to the application have consented to making the improvements requested herein. BACKGROUND: The Gant received an amendment to their original approvals in 1989 that provided them an allowance to expand "non-unit" space by 2,500 square feet over what existed pursuant to City Council Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989. According to the application and supporting documentation, there have been three (3) expansions of "non-unit" space in the Gant since Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989, was enacted. These above three (3) expansions totaled 2,118 1 square feet, leaving 382 square feet of floor area still available for "non-unit" expansion. In 2004, the Applicant submitted and was approved an application for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment for initial landscaping and building improvements around Buildings D, E, F, G and H. STAFF COMMENTS: In reviewing the request to remove and replace the canopy, the proposed canopy is not to be enclosed and would not count against the 382 square feet of available floor area referenced above. The proposed landscape improvements incorporated in this application include 1) enhanced landscaping around several of the buildings; and 2) new concrete pavers to replace the existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings; and 3) new stone-faced concrete walls to replace the existing railroad-tie walls; and 4) enhancement to the entry area will include a snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature. These improvements will be developed in phases in the next few years. Staff consulted with the City of Aspen Parks Department, City Engineer, City Building Department, and City Land Use Engineer (please see referral agency comments attached as Exhibit "C"). The Parks Department has indicated that for each individual phase the project manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree removals and excavation under the drip line. Additionally the improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler Ditch should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running. Staff has included conditions of approval to this effect. The Community Development Engineer and the City Engineer have been consulted on the request and are requiring that the Applicant provide a drainage plan prepared by a licensed engineer at the time of building permit submittal showing no increase in the historic runoff and r-0-w permit if work is undertaken in the r-0-w. Additionally a detailed landscape plan showing any grading changes will be submitted. Additionally the City Engineer is requesting that the Applicant upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city' s drainage inlet from the last drywell behind their driveway on the north side. Staff feels that the proposed landscaping and canopy improvements will enhance the aesthetics of the property. The area that is proposed for snowmelt has been a problematic area for the Gant and will provide additional driving safety. In total, Staff believes that the proposal meets the review standards for approving an insubstantial amendment to a PUD as long as the conditions of approval proposed herein are complied with. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed application meets the review standards for approving an insubstantial PUD amendment pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.100(A), PUD Insubstantial Amendments. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Community Development Director approve the proposed amendment to allow for 1) the replacement of the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) landscaping improvements (both hardscape and softscape) around Buildings A, B, C, J, and K of the Condominium Complex. 11111111111111- 1 1 -1111111111 lilli-1 514269 Page: 2 cf 6 09/01/2005 01:24' SILLIA DAVIS PITKIiÂ· Clu Tr CO R 31.00 D 0.00 2 APPROVAL: I hereby approve this insubstantial PUD amendment to allow for 1) the replacement of the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) the proposed landscaping and site improvements to the Gant Condominiums at 610 S. West End Street, with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall provide a separate tree permit, for both tree removal and excavation under the drip line for each individual phase the project. 2. The Applicant's improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler Ditch should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running. 3. The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt driveway and the stone accent autocourt as identified on the site plan titled: The Gant - Phase II-III Improvements - PUD Amendment. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or improvement to existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb, snowmelt driveway, and the stone accent autocourt. Any improvements outlined in phase II-III shall not increase the historic run-off. 4. A r-0-w permit is required if work is undertaken in the r-0-w. 5. The Applicant shall upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city' s drainage inlet from the last drywell behind their driveway on the north side. 6. The Applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan to the Parks Department for review and approval if any changes are proposed that are not shown on the submitted plan or were not represented during the site visit. 7. The Applicant shall apply for and obtain building permits prior to making any improvements to buildings or retaining walls. 8. All outdoor lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. The Applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan including cut sheets of the proposed fixtures for review and approval by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer in conjunction with building permit submittal. CACM PW ) Date3Â·M Â°04 Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ACCEPTANCE: I, as a person being or representing the Applicant, do hereby agree to the conditions of this approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of my knowledge. lillilllilli--1 - 1111'llililil ~ 514269 PageÂ· 3 of 6 09/01/2005 01:24P SILkIA DAVIS PITKI 1 -LL TY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 , J \44 ~ Uf| / vvIn pholli CAmpbÂ¢11, Cbneral Manager Gant Condomjejwh Association, Inc. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A --Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B --Application Exhibit C --Referral Comments lilli- 1111- - 1- --11111 lilli lillil 09/01/2005 01:24P 514269 Page: 4 of S SIL~,IA DAVIS PITKI Du TY C) R 31.00 D 0.00 4 111.1 lili - 11- - lillill'lllili 1 -1 09/01/2005 el.244 Review Criteria and Staff Findings 514269 Exhibit A Page- 5 of 6 SILFIA DAf.S FITKIB 23_ -Y CO R 31.00 D 0.00 Insubstantial PUD Amendment. 1. A change in the use or character of the development. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe that the proposal will significantly change the character of the development. In fact, Staff feels that the proposal will beautify the aesthetics of the site by updating many of the hardscape landscaping features. Moreover, the Parks Department has reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and believes that it is appropriate so long as the Applicant amends it per the concerns that were outlined in the decision notice. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. An increase by greater thanthree (3) percentinthe overallcoverage of structures onthe land. Staff Finding: The proposed improvements will not change the overall coverage of structures on land. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. Staff Finding: Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not affected by this amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this request. 4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of tlie approved open space. Staff Finding: The amount of open space will not be reduced by the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent ofthe off-street parking and loading space. 5 Staff Finding: The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number of parking spaces. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-of-way for streets and easements. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing changes to right-of-way widths. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing to increase the gross leasable floor area of a commercial building. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the development. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing a change in the residential density. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirenzents. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe that the proposed amendments are inconsistent with a condition of approval or representation made in the property's original approval. Moreover, the Applicant has not proposed to vary the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Staff finds this criterion to be met. lilli- 1111111 11 111 lilli .11 1. 09/01/2005 01:24F ~~-~ 514269 ~ Page: 6 of 6 SIL\,IA [AVIS PITKI: DOU Tr CD R 31.00 D 0.00 6 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY ASPEN 514269 ATT: JENNIFER arichman@sopris.net, 11:19 AM 8/26/2005, No Subject To: arichman@sopris.net From: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: CC: Bcc: Attached: C:\Documents and Settings\jennifep\My Documents\Current Planning\610 S. Westend (Gant)\Staff Report.doc; Alan - Chris asked me to make these changes. They are included in the attachment. The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt driveway and the stone accent autocourt as identified on the site plan titled: The Gant - Phase 11- 111 Improvements - PUD Amendment. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or improvement to existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb, snowmelt driveway, and the stone accent autocourt. Any improvements outlined in phase 11-111 shall not increase the historic run-off. Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 arichman@sopris.net, 10:43 AM 8/26/2005, No Subject To: arichman@sopris.net From: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: CC: Bcc: ~ Attached: Alan - The engineer and I have been trying to come up with language that satisfies his concerns. Here is what we came up with. You may want to speak to Alex Evonitz personally (429-2768) if this won't work for your client. The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt and the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or improvement to existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb and gutter, snowmelt, and the autocourt. If any improvements outlined in phase 11-111, which are not included in the drainage plan, are found to increase the historic run-off, a detailed drainage report shall be required by the City. Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 Page 1 of 2 X-Sender: alexe@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri 26 Aug 2005 10:36:55 -0600 To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Alex Evonitz <alexe@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: drainage language X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean The language looks appropriate if we clarify the section referencing phases ii and iii as we discussed. As I mentioned I will be glad to be the sounding board if question do arise...ave At 09:30 AM 8/26/2005, you wrote: The eyes are glazing over............... The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt and the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or improvement to existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb and gutter, snowmelt. and the autocourt. If any improvements outlined in phase II-HI. which are not provided a drainage plan, are found to increase the historic run-off. a detailed drainage report shall be required by the City. At 08:34 AM 8/26/2005, you wrote: Good Morning, I did tweak things a little that I hope will ease some of the Owners anxiety. Let me know if they would like to discuss the wording and or the intent...good luck! ave At 01:56 PM 8/25/2005, you wrote: What about this wording? The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for all areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt, including the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatability or improvement to existing drainage patterns. If any modifications are found to impact the historic run-off. a detailed drainage report may be required by the City. Ifthis becomes necessary that report will need to fulfil the standard requirements for the City of Aspen in the areas of improvement/redevelopment. Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City of Aspen 160 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 Community Development Engineer Office 429-2768 Jennifer Phelan file://C:\DOCUME-l\jennifep\LOCALS-l\Temp\eudB.htm 8/31/2005 Alex Evonitz. 08:34 AM 8/26/'r,05, Re: drainage language Page 1 of 1 X-Sender: alexe@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 08:34:54 -0600 To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifer@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Alex Evonitz <alexe@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: drainage language X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Good Morning, I did tweak things a little that I hope will ease some of the Owners anxiety. Let me know if they would like to discuss the wording and or the intent...good luck! ave At 01:56 PM 8/25/2005, you wrote: What about this wording? The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for all areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt, including the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatability or improvement to existing drainage patterns. If any modifications are found to impact the historic run- off. a detailed drainage report may be required by the City. If this becomes necessary that report will need to fulfil the standard requirements for the City of Aspen in the areas of improvement/redevelopment. Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City of Aspen 160 S. Galena Street Aspen. CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 Community Development Engineer Office 429-2768 Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifer@ci.aspen.co.us> 8/31/2005 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: .jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner RE: Gant Condominiums Insubstantial PUD Amendment DATE: August 22,2005 APPLICANT: Gant Condominium Association LOCATION: 610 West End Street ZONING: R-15 with a PUD Overlay REVIEW PROCEDURE: Insubstantial amendments to an approved PUD may be approved. approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.445.100(Al PUD Insubstantial Amendments. REQUEST: The Gant Condominium Association ("Applicant") has applied for an insubstantial PUD amendment to 1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main ottice with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) make landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around Buildings A. B. C. J, and K ofthe Condominium Complex. AUTHORITY TO APPLY: The Condominium Association has represented to Staff in the application that they have the ability to represent the individual owners within the condominium complex pursuant to the Gant' s condominium documentation. The Applicant has also represented in the application that a majority of the unit owners within the Gant Complex voted in favor of making the improvements proposed in this application. Therefore. pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.304.040. Initiation of application for development order, the Applicant has the authority to apply for a PUD amendment given that persons owning more than fifty (50) percent of the property subject to the application have consented to making the improvements requested herein. BACKGROUND: The Gant received an amendment to their original approvals in 1989 that provided them an allowance to expand "non-unit" space by 2,500 square feet over what existed pursuant to City Council Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989. According to the application and supporting documentation, there have been three (3) expansions of "non-unit" space in the Gant since Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989. was enacted. These above three (3) expansions totaled 2,118 1 square feet, leaving 382 square feet of floor area still available for "non-unit" expansion. In 2004, the Applicant submitted and was approved an application for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment for initial landscaping and building improvements around Buildings D, E. F. G and H. STAFF COMMENTS: In reviewing the request to remove ancj replace the canopy, the proposed canopy is not to be enclosed and would not count against the 382 square feet of available floor area referenced above. The proposed landscape improvements incorporated in this application include I) enhanced landscaping around several of the buildings; and 2) new concrete pavers to replace the existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings; and 3) new stone-faced concrete walls to replace the existing railroad-tie walls; and 4) enhancement to the entry area will include a snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature. These improvements will be developed in phases in the next few years. Staff consulted with the City of Aspen Parks Department, City Engineer, City Building Department, and City Land Use Engineer (please see referral agency comments attached as Exhibit "C"). The Parks Department has indicated that for each individual phase the project manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree removals and excavation under the drip line. Additionally the improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler Ditch should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running. Staff has included conditions of approval to this effect. The Community Development Engineer and the City Engineer have been consulted on the request and are requiring that the Applicant provide a drainage plan prepared by a licensed engineer at the time of building permit submittal showing no increase in the historic runoff. a r- 0-w permit if work is undertaken in the r-0-w, and a detailed landscape plan showing any grading changes be submitted. Additionally the City Engineer is requesting that the Applicant upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city's drainage inlet from the last drywell behind their driveway on the north side. Staff feels that the proposed landscaping and canopy improvements will enhance the aesthetics of the property. The area that is proposed for snowmelt has been a problematic area for the Gant and will provide additional driving safety. In total. Staff believes that the proposal meets the review standards for approving an insubstantial amendment to a PUD as long as the conditions of approval proposed herein are complied with. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed application meets the review standards for approving an insubstantial PUD amendment pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.100(Ah PLJD Insubstantial Amendments. Therefore. Staff recommends that the Community Development Director approve the proposed amendment to allow for 1) the replacement of the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy: and 2) landscaping improvements (both hardscape and softscape) around Buildings A. B, C. J. and K of the Condominium Complex. 2 APPROVAL: 1 hereby approve this insubstantial PUD amendment to allow for 1 ) the replacement of the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) the proposed landscaping and site improvements to the Gant Condominiums at 610 S. West End Street, with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall provide a separate tree permit, for both tree removal and excavation under the drip line for each individual phase the project. 2. The Applicants improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler Ditch should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running. 3. The Applicant shall provide a site drainage plan prepared by a licensed engineer as part of the building permit submittal. 4. A r-0-w permit is required if work is undertaken in the r-0-w. 5. The Applicant shall upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city's drainage inlet from the last drywell behind their driveway on the north side. 6. The Applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan to the Parks Department for review and approval if any changes are proposed that are not shown on the submitted plan or were not represented during the site visit. 7. The Applicant shall apply for and obtain building permits prior to making any improvements to buildings or retaining walls. 8. All outdoor lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. The Applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan including cut sheets of the proposed fixtures for review and approval by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer in conjunction with building permit submittal. cl kÂ« Date 47 26/ irm- Arks Betidon, Community Development Director ACCEPTANCE: [, as a person being or representing the Applicant, do hereby agree to the conditions of this approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of my knowledge. Date Molly Campbell, General Manager Gant Condominium Association, Inc. 3 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A --Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B --Application Exhibit C --Referral Comments 4 Exhibit A Review Criteria and Staff Findings Insubstantial PUD Amendment. 1. A change in the use or character of the development. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe that the proposal will significantly change the character ofthe development. Iii fact, Staff feels that the proposal will beautify the aesthetics of the site by updating many of the hardscape landscaping features. Moreover, the Parks Department has reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and believes that it is appropriate so long as the Applicant amends it per the concerns that were outlined in the decision notice. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage ofstructures on the land. Staff Finding: The proposed improvements will not change the overall coverage of structures on land. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Any aniendment that substantially increases trip generation rates ofthe proposed development, or the demand.for public facilities. Staff Finding: Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not affected by this amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this request. 4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent ofthe approved open space. Staff Finding: The amount of open space will not be reduced by the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. A reduction by greater than one (i) percent ofthe off-street parking and loading space. 5 Staff Finding: The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number of parking spaces. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-opway.for streets and easements. Staff Finding The Applicant is not proposing changes to right-of-way widths. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area 01 commercial buildings. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing to increase the gross leasable tloor area of a commercial building. Stafffinds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 8. An increase by greater thanone (1) percent in Ihe approved residential density ofthe development. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing a change in the residential density. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation (11 the project's original approval or which requires granting a.hirther variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe that tlie proposed amendments are inconsistent with a condition of approval or representation made in the property's original approval. Moreover the Applicant has not proposed to vary the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6 Aftl/41 F\E m \M Amw Zed,na,0 3-6/4/649 2,ewâ‚¬4â‚¬4 8% 3613 Aa,Â»i, 84~ww4 Sl 612 PU.te/741 (970)920-1125 4%6(4**t<14<*40Â»6.1. *tâ‚¬t July 12, 2005 Mr. James Lindt, Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS (PHASES 2 AND 3) Dear James, This is an application for an insubstantial amendment to the PUD approvals previously granted to the Gant Condominiums. The Gant Condominiums is located at 610 West End Street in Aspen. The property consists of approximately 5.5 acres of land, and is improved with 143 multi-family residential dwelling units (305 bedrooms). The purpose of this application is to (1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and (2) improve the landscaping features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant. The locations of these proposed improvements are shown on the floor plans and landscape plan that accompany this application. This application is being submitted by the Gant Condominium Association, Inc., the owner of the property (hereinafter, "the applicant"). Proof of the ownership of the property is provided by Exhibit #1, a letter from Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C., counsel to the Association. Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the Gant Condominium Association for this application is provided by Exhibit #2. This letter also provides certification from the Association that the proposed improvements have been voted on and approved by a majority of the owners. I held a pre-application conference with you on July 12, 2005 (see Exhibit #3, Pre- Application Conference Summary). At that time, you confirmed that these activities would be processed administratively as an Insubstantial PUD Amendment, pursuant to Section 26.445.100 A. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. The following sections of this application identify the standards of the Aspen Land Use Code that apply to an Insubstantial PUD Amendment and provide a response to each standard. First, however, a brief overview of past approvals given to the Gant Condominiums is provided, which help to provide a context for this proposal. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Two History of Prior Approvals The Gant Condominiums was originally approved as a PUD by the Aspen City Council in the early 1970's. The project was developed in three phases and the original plats for the property document these phases. The plat for phase I (Buildings A, B, C, and D) is recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 431 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The plat for phase II (Buildings E, F, J, and K) is recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 499 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The plat for phase III (Buildings G, and H) is recorded at Plat Book 5, Page 22 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. When the property was originally developed, it was zoned for accommodations and recreation (AR-1) pursuant to the then existing Aspen Zoning Code. Shortly thereafter the City implemented a major revision to its Zoning Code and Zoning Map and the property was down zoned to R-15 PUD, making the condominiums a nonconforming use. In 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the City of Aspen to remove the stigma of nonconformity from the property and to make minor improvements to the office/reception area and the entry to the complex. This application was approved pursuant to Ordinance 41, Series of 1989 (see Exhibit #4), which rezoned the property to R-15 (L) PUD. This rezoning meant that the condominiums were no longer a nonconforming use, but were still subject to the nonconforming structure regulations. Therefore, Ordinance 41 also made an amendment to the nonconforming provisions of the Code. This amendment permitted expansions to the facility's "non-unit space" by the lesser of 10% of the existing floor area or 2,500 sq. ft. In the case of the Gant, 2,500 sq. ft. was the applicable limit, since the existing improvements to the property were in excess of 150,000 sq. ft. in size. Following receipt of these approvals, a 480 sq. ft. expansion of the office/reception area was accomplished. Subsequently, in 1996, the City approved an expansion of the conference center by 1,578 sq. ft. A letter from Nick McGrath to the Planning Office and a response from Bob Nevins, City Planner, authorizing this expansion are attached as Exhibit #5. In 2002, the applicant proposed another minor expansion of the non-unit space on the property. The purpose of this 60 sq. ft. addition was to build an elevator to serve the D Building. The City approved an insubstantial PUD amendment authorizing this project and it was subsequently constructed. Considering the above, to date the applicant has utilized 2,118 sq. ft. of the 2,500 sq. ft. of non-unit space available to this property, leaving 382 sq. ft. of floor area still to be developed. Mr. James Lindt July 12,2005 Page Three In July of 2004, the applicant submitted an application to the City for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment for Phase 1 of the landscaping and building improvements at the Gant. The activities covered by this application included a new walkway around the elevator of the E Building and landscaping improvements around the D, E, F, G, and H Buildings. This application was approved by the City on August 3,2004. The approved improvements have since been installed by the applicant. As part of the Phase 1 application, the applicant met with Ms. Sarah Oates, the City's Zoning Officer, to review the building changes proposed at that time and future plans (including the canopy proposed in the current application). Ms. Oates determined that since all of these proposals were for unenclosed areas, they would be exempt from the City's floor area regulations and would not count against the 382 sq. ft. non-unit space "reserve". A letter confirming this determination is attached as Exhibit #6. Insubstantial PUD Amendment An insubstantial amendment to the Gant Condominiums PUD is requested to replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy and to improve the landscaping features around the As B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant. The proposed new canopy is depicted on the attached architectural drawings. The existing canopy covers an area of slightly in excess of 180 sq. ft. The new canopy would cover an area of almost 450 sq. ft. The canopy will not be enclosed. The proposed improvements to the landscape features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings are shown on the proposed landscape plan. The landscape plan shows that there are several types of improvements proposed as part of this application. First, enhanced landscaping is proposed around several of the buildings. Second, new concrete pavers will replace the existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings. New stone-faced concrete walls will also replace the existing railroad-tie walls around these buildings. The new pavers and walls will match the pavers and walls that have recently been installed in Phase 1 of this project. Finally, the entry area that leads visitors and guests to the office will be enhanced, to include a snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature. It should be pointed out that this Insubstantial PUD Amendment does not address the issue of tree removal and replacement. Tree removal and replacement is not anticipated to be as sensitive an issue for these phases of the project as it was for Phase 1, since the applicant has designed the improvements in these phases to avoid all of the significant trees on the property. The applicant hereby commits to continuing to work directly with the Parks Department to ensure that any of the smaller trees on the property that may be diseased or are otherwise determined to be in need of removal are properly replaced on the site. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Four This application also does not include any information regarding the planned replacement of railings along the decks and patios in the complex. Staff has previously determined that this is not a relevant issue for PUD review and can be handled with a building permit. The staff can examine the decks that have already been modified within the complex to determine whether any further review of the remaining decks is required. Following are the applicant's responses to the standards by which the Community Development Director may authorize these insubstantial amendments to the Gant Condominiums PUD, as found in Section 26.445.090 A of the Land Use Code. The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. Response: The Gant is a multi-family accommodations development. No change to the existing character of this development will occur as a result of the proposed improvements. Instead, these improvements will simply enhance the existing character of the development and help to modernize this important part of Aspen's visitor accommodations inventory. 2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. Response: John Baker of Baker Fallin Architects calculated the existing footprint of all of the buildings at the Gant and found the site coverage to be approximately 58,499 sq. ft. Since the total land area of the Gant is 240,588 sq. ft., approximately 24.3% of the site is presently covered with buildings. Following the recent changes to the walkways approximately 74 sq. ft. was added to this footprint (new total of 58,573 sq. ft.) which still comprises approximately 24.3% of the site. No changes to the footprint are planned in the current phases. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates Of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. Response: The minor expansion of the arrival canopy and the proposed landscaping improvements will have no effect on traffic generation, or create any demands for public facilities. 4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space. Response: Baker Fallin has also calculated the existing amount of open space at the Gant and has found that approximately 48.4% of the site (116,427 sq. ft.) is open space. There are no activities in these phases that would change the approved open space. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Five 5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space. Response: There will be no decrease in parking on the property. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-of-way for streets and easements. Response: No such reduction will occur as part of this project. 7. An increase of greater titan two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. Response: No such increase will be caused by this project. 8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the development. Response: No change in density will occur as part of this project. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation Of the project's original approval or which requires granting a variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Response: The applicant is not aware of any condition or representation associated with the original approval which would be affected by this proposal. Conclusion I believe the above responses provide the information you require to process this application. If there is anything else you need, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES 8 0- j Alan Richman, AICP EXHIBITS EXHIBIT #1 LAWOFFICESOF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 LEONARD M. OATES TELEPHONE(970) 920-1700 RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE(970)920-1121 TED D GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B KELLY Imoasst@okglaw com OFCOUNSEL: JOHN T. KELLY MARIATICSAY July 2,2004 VIA HAND DELIVERY (WITH APPLICATION FOR MINOR AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT/THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS) Julie Ann Woods, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Application for Minor Amendment to Planned Unit Development/The Gant Condominiums Dear Ms. Woods: Please be advised that this firm of Attorneys acts as counsel for The Gant Condominium Association ("Association"). The Gant Condominiums ("Project") is a condominium project created under the Colorado Condominium Act. The common elements of the Project are owned by all of the owners within the Project as tenants in common. Pursuant to the governing documentation for the Project, the Association is charged with the administration of the affairs of the Project, acting by and through its duly elected Board of Directors and Officers. Pursuant to the provisions of the condominium documentation for the Project, the Association is constituted as the attorney in fact for all of the owners of condominium units within the Project to make and process land use applications. The Board ofDirectors by its actions has authorized Molly Campbell to act for and on its behalf in connection with the processing ofthe present land use application for minor amendment to the planned unit development approval for the Project. If you should be in need of any further clari fication or supplementation o f this letter please give me a call. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. it < 2 97 41/,LL<4 It ) h \1 By C Leonard M. Oates 1 / ~ LMO/bab End. C LMO Data & ForrnsOataCIienls\GanNIr to Woods 7.1.04.wpd EXHIBIT #2 Mr. James Lindt, Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS Dear Mr. Lindt, The Gant Condominium Association, Inc. hereby authorizes Alan Richman Planning Services to act as its designated representative with respect to the application for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment being submitted to your office for our property, located at 610 West End Street in Aspen. Alan Richman is authorized to submit this application on our behalf. He is also authorized to represent us in meetings with the City of Aspen staff. I can also certify to you that the Condominium Association held a meeting to discuss the improvements addressed in this application. A majority of the condominium unit owners voted in favor of making these improvements. Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this application, please do so through Mr. Richman, whose address and telephone number are included in the ~land use apI~,isation. Si*erelâ‚¬) < Gant Condomiyium~Association, Inc. Molly CampbeÂ©General Manager 610 West End Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 920-6070 EXHIBIT #3 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: James Lindt, 429-2763 DATE: 7/12/05 PROJECT: Gant Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman OWNER: Gant Condominium Association TYPE OF APPLICATION: Insubstantial PUD Amendment DESCRIPTION: The Applicant would like to make some amendments to the landscaping, entryways, and walkways within the Gant PUD. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.445.100 Amendment of PUD development order. Review by: Staff for complete application, referral agencies for technical considerations, Community Development Director for final approval unless the Community Development Director does not feel comfortable approving the proposal administratively, Public Hearing: No, unless the Community Development Director does not feel comfortable approving the proposal administratively. Referral Agencies: Parks, Building Department Planning Fees: Planning Deposit $660 for 3 hrs of staff time (additional hours will be billed at a rate of $220 per hour) Referral Agency Fees: Total Deposit: $660 To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant' s name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behal f of the applicant. 3. Completed Application form. 4. Signed fee agreement. 5. Pre-application Conference Summary. 6. A letter from the homeowner's association saying that they have approved the amendment. 7. Letter of authorization for representative to act on owner's behalf. 8. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 9. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 10. Existing and proposed landscaping plans. 11. Existing and proposed site plan. 12. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)-preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. 13. 2 Copies of the complete application packet (items 3-11) Process: Apply. Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to Parks for referral comments. Case Planner reviews application with remainder of Staff and drafts a decision notice. Community Development Director reviews decision notice and signs if appropriate for approval. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City, The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. C.-D 1 : 1 -... ExHIBIT #4 CE BOOK 611 muttl- L :, Lf) ORDINANCE NO. ~ ~ ..I Â· -r,19 (Series of 1989) J N C AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZONING 2 THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS TO R-15 (L) PUD AND AMENDING SECTION 9-105 OF THE ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS TO PERMIT MINOR EXPANSIONS TO NONCONFORMING HOTELS AND LODGES WHEREAS, The Gant Condominiums (hereinafter, "The Applicant") is an existing multi-family/hotel development located in the R-15 PUD zone district; and WHEREAS , The Applicant submitted to the City of Aspen a land use application requesting rezoning of its property and amendment of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in order to make the project conforming; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter, "The Commission) held a duly noticed public hearing on June 20, 1989, to consider the applicant's request; and WHEREAS, The Commission recommends to the Aspen City Council (hereinafter, "The Council") that The Applicant's property be rezoned to R-15 (L) PUD and that Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations be amended to permit minor expansions of nonconforming hotels and lodges; and WHEREAS, The Council, having received the recommendations of The Commission, wishes to rezone the Applicant's property to R-15 (L) PUD and to amend the Aspen Land Use Regulations to permit minor expansions of nonconforming hotels and lodges. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. BOOK 611- PAGE619 Section 1 That it does hereby rezone the property known as The Gant Condominiums, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, to R-15 (L) PUD. Section 2 That the Zone District Map be and hereby is amended to reflect the zoning described in Section 1 and that the Planning Director is hereby authorized and directed to amend said map to reflect the new zoning. Section 3 That the City Clerk be and hereby is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4 That Article 9, Section 9-105 B, Lodge and Hotel Preservation, of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 9-105 B, Lodge and Hotel Preservation. B. Increase in units or size. There shall be no increase in the number of units in the lodge or hotel, er-the bobab-square-â‚¬ootagc in thc lodgc or hotcl, unless the enlargement is for the purpose of constructing deed restricted employee housing units accessory to the principal use, consistent with the requirements of Section 9-105 C. BOOK 611 YAGE620 Enlargement of the square footage of a lodge or hotel shall also be permitted if the expansion shall be for the purpose of improving the facility's non-unit space. The enlargement for the purpose of improving the facility's non-unit space shall be reviewed and considered as a Development Application for Special Review, pursuant to Art. 7, Div 4. In determining whether to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application, the Commission shall ensure all the following standards and requirements are met. 1. The lodge or hotel shall not be expanded by more than ten percent (10%) of its existing floor area or two thousand-five hundred (2,500) square feet, whichever is less. Enlargement which occurs in phases shall not exceed these limits, measured on a maximum cumulative basis. 2. The external floor area of the lodge or hotel shall be equal to or less than 1:1 following the enlargement. 3. The expansion may be in rental rooms, provided an equal amount of existing square footage is converted from rental rooms to non-unit space." BOOK 611 PmE621 Section 5 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6 Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect any right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to the effective date of this ordinance, and the same shall be continued and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7 A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the A~Ltj day of (_L -aÂ«j , 1989 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council 0 Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /25~J day of Â»F , 1989. -14.t 00Â» Miphael -'Gas-Ama~1, Â·Mayor Pr.e Tem *Pt'.044, ~*4J~L4+2'-i P' U W L-_â€ž i.Kathryn iÂ¢. *och, City Clerk : 0, 3 & A: u BOOK 611 PAGE DC C FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this I 4- day of 4Â£Â£.acut , 1989. William L. Stirling, Mayor 0 a F A 3,Â£ ,Â· ,~' ATTESÂ¢: 2 I . .- Z ) 4tk_.... ',~ ' 1, KathrÂ¥n *07 Koch, City Clerk VAMord nom. uon,-1 4. oaKer I o. Mole Uampoet, Uare~ 3130&99 hme: 9:15:18 AIM rage :1 0/ i BACT. 3.1996 11: 26AM . MCGRATH ASPEN Co NO.231 P.2 .-' EXHIBIT #5 J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH, P.C. ' 600 Ecd Hopkjns Avenue A Protalsiord Co,porcrlon SuItes 203 Attomay, At law Mpan. Cabrodo 81 al l Talepnonâ€¢ (970] (225-261 2 J NIctÂ·'010: MCGÂ·fcÂ·th- T-copia [9701 926-4402 St.man W. Lact:Cfl ntbow@cwl.nor ocrla L. Godwin October 3, 1996 CorrnoServe 7,10Â©0.1 SO MEMORANDUM To: Plarming Office, City of Aspen From: Nick McGrat Esq. 'Ihz Gant - Prapoeed Renovation of Conference Center 01'he Gant is considering renovation and perhaps expansion of its 1 Car~rence Center. We are submitâ‚¬ng this memorandum to you not as.a formal application, but simply to familiarize you with certain history of The Gant and the ' possible alternatives it is currently reviewing, ; The Gant operates as a condominium hotel. -It has 143 units, 118 of which are rented short-term Historically, about 80 percent of its units have been rented as short-term tourist accomodations. The Gant sits on approximately 5.2 acres. ' In 1989, The Gant easted as anon<onforming use. To solve that problem, The Gant petitioned the Aspen City Council to rezone The Gant property so that it would be a penrdtted use. As a result Coundl adopted Ordinance 41 on August 14, 1989, rezoning The Gant from K-15 PUD to R-15(L) FUD. The enactment of Ordinance 41 made The Gant a conditional (permitted) use instead of a non- Â· conforming use. while remaining a nonconforming structure las to FAR and d~sity. In addition, at 218 same Mme in 1989, The Gant desired to expand its 0Â£fice and reception area. At that Eme, Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the =Code") did not allow any increase In total square footage in a lodge or hotel As a part of Ordinance 41, Section 9-1059 of the Code was amended to permit 1 A nonconforrni~structrire 'Ineans my structure which was established purnunt : to 6 zaning and building laws in etfect at the ume of its developolent, but whkh does not conform to the dimensional requiremâ€¢mts imposed by this Code for the zone distict in which it is located." Code Â§3-101. * i â€¢-r.bâ€¢< C- /791 f: COL / 1 AS'I. a.d O.C. fiald, ber, ~ ~ e Prom: John R. Baker To: Molly Campbel Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM Page 6 of 7 NO.231 P.3 20. 3.1996 11 : 26AM MCGRATH ASPEN CO l Memorindirm Planning Office, City of Aspen Re: The Gant Odnber 3, 1996 Page 2 expansion for the purpose of improving the facilitÂ» non-unit space. In accordance with amended Section 9-1058, approval was granted to The Gant to ) expand its offce and lobby area by 480 square feet. While Code Section 9-la58 does abw expansion of non-unit space, it also limits that expansion to a 10 percent cumulative increase in existing floor area, or a cumulative increase of 2,500 square feet whicheve is less. After the 1989 expansion, The Gant has 158,243 square feet 10 percent of that is 15,824 square feet, 50 the 2,500 sq!131, fbot limitation is the applicable standard. After its 480 square foot expansion in 1989, The Gant still has 2,020 square feet available for expansion before reaching the 1500 square foot cap. Because The Gant wishes to continue to be one of Aapen's Enest condaminium properties, its Board wanted to consider a number of alternatives , for refurbishing the Conference Center which would add long term value to i homeowners. Currently linder consideratian are the following: 1. Plan #1 - Camplete Refurbishment . 41 Under this option, 1:he Gant would use the edsâ‚¬ng floor plans with no In?jor constructianimprovements, and would complete veryhigh quality decor and furnishing renovation. including carpet furniture, remodeling of the bar and flreplace in the lounge room, replacement of woodwork and doors, and refurbishment of the rest rooms and dressing rooms. In addition, necessary repairs would be made to the upper t*rrace of the building. This work conbemplates no increue of.interior area, and, we believe, does not need approval bor completion. 2. Plan #2 - Meeting Roam AdditiOIL In addition to the work contemplated in Plan #1, this proposal would add a meeting room on the edsting open roof area of the facility at the level of 62 parldng lot near J-bdlding. Further, there would be substantial relovation to an existing room to provide for lobby space, the entire facility would be brought up to the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act, rest rooms would be imprÂ°red including replacing the saunas with steam rooms, and an elevator 0 rrom. JOI'In R. Baker To. Molly Campbell late: 3/30/99 TimeÂ·. 9Â·,1-5:18 AM Page i 01 5 ACT . 3.1996 11:27A, MCGRATH ASPEN CO NO.231 P.4 l Memorandum Flarming Office, City of Aspen I Re: The Cat October 3, 1996 Page 3 I would be added. Ihe square footage increase under this proposal is approodmately 1,100 square feet. 3. Plan #3 - Meeting Room and Exercise Room Additlon. In addition to all items contemplated in Plan #2, a 450 square foot i exercise room would be added on the lower terrace. This addition would also allow for the expansion of the upper terrace by approximately the same square I -Ii- footage as the exercise room. Ike kitchen would also be enlarged and remodeled ! 0; The square footage increase contemplated by this plan is approximately 1,550 ~ 1, 2 73 4.7,1 square Eeet. 4 -+ULÂ«,< 1 The Gant is in a compedtive market Currently it ha the largest meeting facility cf any Aspen condominium property but those facilities fall short of the local hotel competitors. While the addition of a meeting room and conversion of an existing room to lobby space will not significantly increase the total square footage available far IneeUngs, the redesign of the rooms will 4.Uow the facility to better meet the expectations of meedng plannee and will,impcoved overall functionality. The enlargement of the deck area if Plan #3 is approved wiIl significantly increase 'Ihe Ganfs summef capabilities for food and beverage, meeting and specialty functions such as weddings and family reurtions. The fact that the Inteâ‚¬ng fadlities at aIl competitive properties are either new or remodeled places The Gant at an additional competitive disadvantage. Further, among all of The Gant's competitors, ordy one lacks even a rudimentary exercise facility. As to employees. The Gant believes that any proposed expansion will not necesgitate hiring rEw employees. The boardfeels that any increased services can be handled by its curzent staff and the expansion will allow The Gant to employ its existing staff more regularly on a year-round basis. The board of directors of'Ihe Gant would like to maloe a decision a.5 to which alternative to pursue by early November. This would aRow for a tkvo phase construction project, the first of which would be completed in die spring of 1997 and the second in the fall of 1997. Molly Campbell. John Baker (The Gant's architect) and I look forward to working with you on developing this new project e Jann *1. 8aker To: Molly Campoell Date 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM Page 3 of 7 -'ll DEC. 6.1996 11:52PM MCGRATH ASPEN CO NO. 110 P.3 i 1 NovAber 1996 UL_ Mr. Nicholas McGrach, P.C. Attorneys Ac Law 600 Ease Hopkins Avenue, Suice 203 Aspen' Colorado 81611 ASPEN Â· FrK]N (970)925-26 2 CL)64UUNrll D,vaorMANr [>Er.1,17.iNT Re: The Gant - Proposed Confereace Center Recovaton , Dear Mr. McGrath: Â· Having reviewed your memorandum of 2 October 1996. City files arld applicabie sections of che Land Use Reguladens, I w.acid Iik. co confirm the following based uÂ·pon the approval of Ordinance 41, Series of 1996: A. Current zoning: R-15 (Lodge) PUD B. Density: No increase in the number of Units in ttfe lodge or hotel-unless the enlargement is far the purpoie of constructing deed restricted employee housing unics acceascry to Chc principallae. , C. Enlargemenc ofsquare foocage: Lodge or hotel shill Â®t be expanded by more chan rea percent (10%) of ic; existing floor area or cwo [housand -five hundredÂ· (2.500) squars feet whichever is less. Ealargement which occurs ih phases shall noc exce=d cheje limits, measured on a maximum cumulative basis. D.* External floor area: Lodge or here[ shall havE an external floor area equal co oricss than 1:1 following the enlargement. E. Expansion: Rcrical rooms may be expanded, provided aa equal arnounc of existing gquare foocage is converced from rental rodms to non-imic space. F. Review procedure: Enlargement for ehe purpose of improving che facilicy's non-unic space shall be reviewed and considcred as a Dcvclopmonc Applicatior. for Special Review, Arc 7, Div. 4 (recodified u Chapter 26.64). In regards co the non-unic expansion of the Gant, the following conditions apply: 1. Pursuant to Ordinance 41-89, maximum floor area dxpansion of non-unit space /'~~ i. at Chc Gant shall not cxcced 2,500 square feet After che 480 square foot expansion in 1989, che Ganc concinues to havc 2,020 square fccc of non-unit 9, expansion pocencial. . IJO SCUTM G.LO,04 50Â·Mur Â· As,04, Cog,wc 81611-1975 Â· PwoN: 970.910.3090 Â· FE 970.9203,09 0 ... From: John R. Baker To: Molly Campbell Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9:1 "3 AM Page 4 of , DEC. 6.1996 11:52AM MCGRATH ASPEN CO NO. 110 P.4 2. Pursuant to Ordinance 41-39 09*Chapcer 26. 64, Special Review, an amendment to che development o?der shall be submirred co che Community Developrnect Director for review and recommendatioc for approval, approval with candicions or disapproval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. It is a one-step review before [he Commission ac a pubfic mcccing. 3. Thc developmcn[ applicacion shall include existing and proposed floor plans and elevuions of che Conference Ccater in addicion to che general applicacion informacion and responses to Secrion 26.64.090, Insubstancial amendmant criteria. 4. The developmen[ appilcation requires a bale fcc deposit of S 1,050.00, Minor Review. Aoy addirional hours required by Haff to process the development applicacion shall be bfUed at 12 hourly ratz of S t73.00. 0 5. Once a complete developmen[ application is received by Communiry Developmenc, the marter should be brought before Planning and Zoning Commission within four to six weeks. Based upon our review and current understanding.of the Gant's rcfurbishmendexpaasion plans, Community Development shall process che davelopment application u an Insubstantial Amendment subject to Special Review. The proposed non-unit space expansicn shall not require new employee mingarion. If I can provide furcher information or clarifiction regarding thetiry' 3 =quircmcats and review procedure for che proposed expansion and refurbishmenc of the Gases non-unic space, please contact me. Sincerely, Robert Nevins City Flarlner 0 EXHIBIT #6 A 44*L'Rldw,K~ 7/Â¢44*tot* Setuate Ect 3613 A4*,4, â‚¬~tmb f1612 16*6/74# (9701920-1125 at24*â€¢Ut.410Â»0. *a July 2, 2004 Ms. Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: GANT CONDOMINIUMS Dear Sarah, Thank you for taking the time to meet with Molly Campbell and me yesterday to discuss the Gant's plans for improvements to its buildings and grounds in the upcoming years. During the meeting we explained to you that only minor changes are being proposed for the buildings. This year the Gant plans to add a covered, unenclosed walkway next to the elevator that serves the E Building. This addition would be approximately 74 sq. ft. in area, and would occur on each of the four levels of the building. In the future, the Gant proposes to modify the canopy that covers the entry to the Office/Reception Building at the entry to the complex. The existing square canopy would be replaced with a new half-circle canopy that would cover approximately 300 sq. ft. more in area. The canopy would also be an unenclosed space. During the meeting you indicated that both of these areas would qualify as porches as defined by the Land Use Code. Therefore, both areas would be exempt from the City's floor area calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reserve of 382 sq. ft. of "non-unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989. If I have accurately summarized our meeting, I would appreciate it if you would sign in the space below and return a copy of this letter to me for my files. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES /44- e Alan Richman, AICP Ms. Sarah Oates July 2, 2004 Page Two I concur that the two improvements proposed by the Gant (unenclosed walkway addition to Building E and unenclosed canopy at the entry to the Office/Reception Building) qualify as porches as defined by the Land Use Code and would therefore be exempt from floor area calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reserve of 382 sq. ft. of "non- unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989. /,6/ Sarah Oates, Zoning Enforcement Officer MAPS/DRAWINGS room #: Original Street h phone ext: ~ Glory Hole Park b :j /7/ I A Bike Patt}/ - hilr -1<-2 1 West End s 40/ Tubs V~--= , i / . im 13.-MU , 1 J i - e /2/ ...61 . 13023-Y: 1 1 ID C _ <=1 4 1 â€ž112322 -&L= i K L//Ib, Codrt 2 13~ 9. 9/ / 4 < Cowt 1 - ilillill i ji5,:atlillli 4 -2 ,--40 / / R.-PIR 1 u To Tennis Courts<) 3,4 and 5 l- W ~l~~1~ll~~~Ill~lIND1ll~~~ *~j~~~ ~% - 1 Reception Administrative Offices l~. -Â·1 - -Mr/.1 - 2 Fitness Dressing Rooms 9 3 Bike/Ski Racks 4 Guest Laundry (basement level) L, 97 1-~-, 5 :r /N f= 2 -- .1 - 5 Guest Laundry .............. {2nd & 4th floors) (ground level) ~Elevator / &001/Hot Tub ~_~~~ <) Recycling Areas 1HE The GANT parking lots and neighboring streets are permit parking only. Please ask the front desk staM for assistance. GINF Valet parking is available. aspen Durant Avenue 6 -1 - ~.A . 3040 El AA2.1 SCALE 1/8"=1'-0" Ldi -2 4 , . V,N 1 f .. =IW-* . %1-3 1-- E- - fr -6- ~1 T.-2- â€žL_ i'' 22:1 1. !1~ IIi. -- 11- -- .1 1.1.- 0 & 6 6 ~TYPICAL AT STAIRS _, i j_â€¢ 1#11' VAE ' 1 . 92.lj "*11.,-:- Itt .1 Wil 9-3 W 6 v 14, -,1 -- - , 4..., IR ~NO 1 1 1 - --1 --4- , 1 U) 4 F .2.01 h - 1 -- 1 Z E- -1 LU JE J 1 1 4 1 L__ ---- -2 - 1- U.1 - >E - O JZ 135' ~ F - 05 00 --- aol= U.Q.2 UN =85 A-'204 EXISTING 41_ 1 wow 1 7 -1 - J , A 104 << 62'~.L 1 ,/t /Â« (9 Ul 3--T . --4- --4 1 1 , 40 1 7--3 > Z \\1 1/ . , EXISTING CLOVERED WALK - . EXISTING LOBBY ~ 0- -- ~ 1 Nx rl Ill ~A--222 g 1 1 1. 1 - EXISTING CLOSET TO REMAIN 1 1 1 + 0 1 1 / 41 3-- k *4 1 ISSUED FOR: DATEÂ· 4 1 65% 00 SET 25 MAR 04 \ A 204 /, 1 ''1 m-_ _- 4, - REPLACE EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL WrTH x 1X STAI R NO 1 4 STOREFRONT SYSTEM (ALUMINUM Wi | ANODIZED BRONZE FINISH), 11 9 1\4\ ! 4 V ~fVC EDGEOFNEWENTRYCANOPYABOVE. 1 I J#DÂ» STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING. SEAMS IN 1 HI It RADIAL PATERN PROVIDE BUILT-IN EDGE GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT TO 111 21 9 UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE GENERAL NOTES: 1. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS 27 0 CANOPY OVERHANG SQUARE 2. FIELD VERIFY ALL DECK AND WALKWAY 9 / FOOTAGE: 447sf DIMENSIONS. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TAKEN , - FROM ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS Â¢/ -// (A COPYRIGHT .000 AND ARE FOR PRICING ONLY. INri LL FRAMING AT NEW CANOPY ROOF. <fj MORTERARCHITECTSP.C. REMOVE EXISTING RAILING. I I - SCALE 1/8'=1'-0Â» ~ REPLACEMENT DOOR TYPES. SEE SHEET A2.1 DRAWN: JKB Eâ€¢ UNIT ENTRY SCONCE /6'-8' A.F.F. TYPICAL PROJECT #: 0309 STAIR I NO 1 Sm WALKWAY SCONCE /6'Â·8: A.F.P. TYPICAL SHEET TITLE: Â»A" BUILDING PLANS 0 4 S= STAR SCONCES / 7-0' ABOVE TREADS TYPICAL- C. CEILING FIXTURE / TOP AT 8'-8' A.F F. TYPICAL /Th "A" BUILDING / ENTRY CANOPY l AA,4 ~ ~3 1 ill' OO 'N3dSV 133M1S aNB 1S3M'SO L9 I 332IH-L 3SVHd *,l 1 m l 4 91-49 2 1, , 1/ 1 /1 6-221 1 1/1 -2 DOWNSPOUT - 4 - \ \ *Ir.U NEW ENTRY CANOPY. STANDING 1 2 11 1 SEAM METAL ROOFING. SEAMS IN ~ ~ RADIAL PATERN. PROVIDE BUILT-IN ' 4 :- - EDGE GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT TO ,#.0 1/ UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE \9 1 , 2'-39' HIGHEST POINT OF ROOF # f f ~> INTERSECTION wl wALL. 4 \ \ A 202 F 43 \ * LOWEST POINT OF ROOF , INTERSECTION W/ WALL. .. 0 A.304b F .r- PURLIN/RAFTERTAIL I.- -- DOWNSPOUT -4- I 21.321, C 9 7 ... r A 3040 2 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" ~ CANOPY ROOF PLAN @LOBBY < 1 - 1 - 1 ' 'JE 1- - ill" - r-~ ~TYPICAL AT STAIRS 40 11 P==i & Â£.2'FEXâ‚¬2_AG_ acma,4rfz> -Memo to the Jennifer P. Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer ~,g- I. 66-ofÂ»E -3*15 REL,ps . 7-29-05 CD'evu= A 6,-l TÂ«30 , RE: Gant Condominium/ PUD Amendment In doing my review additional details will be needed on a few things so engineering can sign off when the time comes. It would appear that a full permit application for the improvements would be our best avenue to follow. Including but not limited to the following. â€¢ A detailed landscape plan will need to be reviewed by parks, but also I would like to see what grading changes that might accompany those improvements. â€¢ Next, for the new snowmelt system, energy calc' s must be preformed and I believe a fee paid for that kind of improvement. The building folks have a much better handle on that then I do. â€¢ Also related to the snowmelt is the requirement that no runoff from the system be released into the City ROW. Generally, an engineer is involved with the design of such systems if it becomes necessary to install a drywell for the snowmelt. â€¢ Drainage in the areas of enhanced / new patios could need to have the storm runoff plan (drainage report) if any additional hard surface is part of the plan. â€¢ If any walls are being modified so they are above 4 feet in height, from the bottom of the footer to the top of the wall, an engineer will need to provide a design. It's a code requirement. â€¢ A building guru will need to comment on any stir changes that seem to be proposed based on the drawings submitted. â€¢ Lastly, Nick A. might require a ROW permit be issued for any work that might take place in the ROW. Generally, I don't see any specific reason why these improvements wouldn't be allowed. The caveat is that a design effort will be required for some of the elements of this proposal. AVE Page 1 of 1 X-Sender: nicka@sam X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:00:45 -0600 To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Nick Adeh <nicka@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Gant PUD Amendment Cc: alexe@ci.aspen.co.us X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hello Jennifer, 1 have reviewed the proposed enhancements to their site and in fact have met with The Gant manager and their landscape architect and civil engineer. These enliancements seem to be adequately addressed and my only suggestion would be to have them submit their drainage calculations for drywells based on 5-year storm return events. Please also ask them to upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to our drainage inlet from the last drywell behind the their driveway on the north side. Their plan also lacks scale and north arrow! ! ! Thanks, Nick Adeh. P.E. At 08:50 AM 8/1/2005, you wrote: Hi Nick and Brian - Just trying to wrap up this request for a minor PUD amendment up by the end of this week....1'11 be out of the office next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns by tomorrow. Otherwise, ['11 assume that you are okay with what was proposed. Thanks. .jennifer Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City of Aspen 160 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 file://C:\DOCUME-l\jenni fep\LOCALS- 1 \Temp\eud12.htm 8/23/2005 Page 1 ofl X-Sender: brianf@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu. 18 Aug 2005 17:24:03 -0600 To: jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us From: Brian Flynn <brianf@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Gant X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Jennifer, thanks for setting up the meeting today. 1) for each individual phase the project manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree removals and excavation under the drip line. 2) the 2007 improvements to the entry way specific to the wheeler ditch should coincide at a time the ditch is not actively running. Brian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager 130 South Galena St Aspen. CO 81611 970-429-2035(P) 970-920-5128(F) file://C:\DOCUME-l\jennifep\LOCALS-1 \Temp\eudC.htm 8/22/2005 . I V 1 .L-- 0 6---- <* 9/IA I Z 4 -1-./ 1 00.4.gi&aÂ¥be -I >poo*ooo 1 1% il - \ 1 -- ' - n -- 0413-r 2--00- - 1 */.11 11< - 14 1- 1, ---\\ *\ 111 \ 1 / 6 > 37 / 1 1 I 11 11 tl A- -- 22<X -=:32-3.42 Â»Â« 1/ 1 03 1 .LiAN,i,/9 141 4, 1 .7/ 6 4,\ l.It./,9/ , A.... 'ANA f p\. 1 U ...ttll W 417 99 1 / t Â·3- .L 7 \ll '* i l 1 1 / 1 1 P JA 1/ / PROPOSED SNOWMELT CONCRETE DRIVEWAY i PROPOSED STONE FACED CONCRETEWALL PROPOSED WATER FEATURE f 4.1 1 INCREASED LANDSCAPING f / /4/lif -- THE GANT- PHASE 11-111 IMPROVEMENTS - PUD AMENDMENT PROPOSED CONDITION -- THE GANT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture â€¢ [_and Planning â€¢ Urban Design â€¢ Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 â€¢ 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 0 10 20 40 1:20 DATE 0 . . . 0 . 0 . t- 00,1 6 . D 1 . . ,irri:- r ;,4.. 1,~Sâ‚¬21,2 , <a. U 48â„¢99* . A L 'i 1% I . I . 0 8,4,% lomit,j. C.:Tat .bt'.4 1 K th :ti. Mica i Wn'" :2:Â£ :DNG-HY .: e %; ... i.A ~,6.-il . 1 r. 4,01,1 1 1 ~;l:;# f m-/1.4191 : N'.- 1,4 ': ': -' .k t.:02.'- , e A. a . 11Â¢:-:)4..1 * likk*"W,ke, . V." tift ': 441.-0-i~ =US*,4 t. 914'~ A ..- *. - 4<. , 944' Â·-ga., â€¢ 400#*L:/Wa.imi= 86# + R",41. 1 , .. C:'11 - 46, difi -~ 0--A -4,4 04 'u@n'/1 - - 45,4 k nal m e ast:,9 . - . D â€¢,;Â·Â· di~ 2- i,909 4- 0 . 11]ir Â· Â·- < 42â€¢ 0 9yt,Â·~ . - . 4, ..,0 -,ur aa 4 (7 . : 40 .PLy . . 18:i :.2..4 . , 9 4 1 ./11 . 1: 1.2,~ i - ..... U 1 . \ 1 :er, .eatig'*i ~1 0,691):f le'â€¢ V - 17 9 Ler* a .. - 4:7: 9 ' lit,VI;JIMIIIIIIIIIIIII'll ~} P 15 , f ..i-2 .4 90 Â£///T 1 3*4 'I~fWME 7 -2 t te lu . ' 19 , - Il h.t:, #1 1. 1# 1 1-7 2 / - i ' 2, â€¢rw Â· - 11.8,; r . *a. --14#1/11149 9 CU - 4, 1/ill/,4 , j, t~ 9 4-~'-71*I~-'~",~m13. . r ~iU'~M~-'~*.:U.Md~'i~41.-. C /. . 1 411 Nallailillillillillilli:i/ IE -- .8"+44 -r /, t.. 1% . I r~,5 4. ..24" e pr-.-*i- â€¢.aâ€¢4-4~~"4 - -,7.As><4 .<b . ~livm'*~ . 1. 1.19%1 .. ..=. .1 2 - 134 *27 M. 0 - ... Aa,Â¥*+MB", am . Â®4,0 *A K' LE 1.1 1 4.--4 -11 *ityl D E 19Â»Â¢~ ~7~~9 . 111:~ m .7," 0, 09 9 "18, 4 'a Ikit~ ;~*6 ..4 16:. 3 *triC Iri91 4 - *141, 1 4,/9 / 4 ...... (32 - - A~ . , i. ..9 10 - t- .i e.*00* 1// 11* -4Â«Â«Ga L ' 1- -4 th ..4. -4, 4 8, -444* -elâ€¢.Adi/ .Gai/-9/*/b/~01Â£Q~ m*â€ž*gra .., .614 *4...... - k 44- 7~/~~~~~~~~~~~~~4~~~~/~F toÂ¥Â».1,1. A-<**gfusla, 4 0 ' ~ ..:~~1*27,~ 49 *%.k. -,-83.-0- .. =-2':8282*Maydal/0.9 /0WUWWY Merall/ .-'-Â» / I jillialilmil~ilmij~iggilimilli~:~7~ ... . 7 -i . . 1 imlm. 4~imp.vAI'lill. ./lililillililly2ir* A . : I i 1 -~-4..Â»Vit I. j>J. f 1 , 11$:litill â€¢-m . . A .... - V- Â»i 41,4 4, 4 r. * . 44 O.Dll - e ~44 - 34.8. :.. - ..Ah 1% RE ,?A tyy~--4.9 d.dilf 1% 0 Â¥9% 9 4 le- V els 4544*. I 1% 0- 59-L- - . 0%42. C. 9. : Ce/41~ .A . . CO al'Vi Et ' I.lf + 4 06 eco 38% 0, 26244 '49*IMI'll""/ 6/R e . 4,42 0 4 ..91 9 4 -'~9'4-es Page 1 of 1 X-Sender: briant@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:24:03 -0600 To: jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us From: Brian Flynn <brianf@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Gant X-Mailteanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Jennifer. thanks for setting up the meeting today. 1) for each individual phase the project manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree removals and excavation under the drip line. 2) the 2007 improvements to the entry way specific to the wheeler ditch should coincide at a time the ditch is not actively running. Brian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager 1.30 South Galena St Aspen. CO 81611 970-429-2035(P) 970-920-5128(F) file://C: \DOCUME-l\jenniYep\LOCALS-l\Temp\eudC.htm 8/22/2005 , Alan Richman, 04:20 PM 8/16/9005, Re: Gant Minor PUD Amendment Page lof 2 X-Sender: arichman@mail.sopris.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Date: Tue. 16 Aug 2005 16:20:26 -0600 To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifer@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Alan Richman <arichman@sopris.net> Subject: Re: Gant Minor PUD Amendment X-Spam: [F=0.0002486082; B=0.500(0); BMI==0.500(none): S=0.010(2005081001); Mil-0.500 (2005081606); R-0.024(sl 00/n4074); SC=none; spf=0.500] X-MAIL-FROM: <arichman@sopris.net> X-SOURCE-IP: [216.237.72.68-1 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA=== X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Jennifer - My first reaction is that these comments are way beyond the typical detail of a PUD amendment and are much closer to building permit level details. I will be passing this information along to the landscape architect and will commit to the issues being resolved. But clearly comments about tree protection fences and energy calculations have nothing to do with the standards for a PUD amendment. We can certainly take parks out for a site visit. We did that last year for the first amendment and everything proceeded smoothly from that point forward. We are not removing trees, so the types of concerns that arose last year are not pertinent to this second amendment. I would hope that we could get the PUD amendment approved with appropriate conditions to address these issues so we can move forward with building plans that resolve each of these matters. If we need to sit down with you to discuss this we would be happy to do so. At 12:00 PM 8/16/2005 -0600. you wrote: Alan - I routed the request to engineering (comm dev and city engineer), parks for comment. and building. Nick Adeh had no comments but parks and the comm. dev. engineer did (building is still reviewing the proposal). I've included the comments below and would suggest that we meet this week (with parks and engineering) for a site visit or meet at city hall to discuss in more detail the improvements being proposed. Parks: 1) A site visit is required to discuss and review all proposed enhanced landscaping 2) More detail on the enhanced landscaping plans will be needed for each area proposed for improvements. include in this planting plan the existing trees and irrigation and how the new landscape will not have an adverse affect on the existing trees. 3) all new concrete work and curb work will need to be staged outside of any planting beds, and landscaping. All storage of materials. machines and such related materials will not be allowed under and tree drip line. 4) the new plans showing more detail for the enhanced planting shall also show tree protection fences. this should also be defined in the plans for the curb and entry way work 5) A tree permit will be required for any excavation under the drip line work and tree removals. these should be identified on a separate site plan and also in the field during the site visit Engineering: â€¢ A detailed landscape plan will need to be reviewed by parks, but also I would like to see what grading changes that might accompany those improvements. Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifer@ci.aspen.co.us> 8/17/2005 . Alan Richman, 04:20 PM 8/1612005, Re: Gant Minor PUD Amendmer+ Page 2 of 2 .. â€¢ Next, for the new snowmelt system, energy calcs must be preformed and I believe a fee paid for that kind of improvement. The building folks have a much better handle on that then I do. â€¢ Also related to the snowmelt is the requirement that no runoff from the system be released into the City ROW. Generally. an eiigineer is involved with the design of such systems if it becomes necessary to install a drywell for the snowmelt. â€¢ Drainage in the areas of enhanced / new patios could need to have the storm runoff plan (drainage report) i f any additional hard surface is part of the plan. â€¢ I f any walls are being modified so they are above 4 feet in height, from the bottom of the footer to the top of the wall, an engineer will need to provide a design. It's a code requirement. â€¢ A building guru will need to comment on any stair changes that seem to be proposed based on the drawings submitted. â€¢ Lastly, Nick A. might require a ROW permit be issued for any work that might take place in the ROW. Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City of Aspen 160 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> 8/17/2005 , ~Brian Flynn, 12:13 PM 8/8/2005, Re: Gant PUD Amendment Page 1 of 2 X-Sender: brianf@ commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 12:13:17 -0600 To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Brian Flynn <brianf@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Gant PUD Amendment Ce: chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us X-Mai]Scanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Jennifer, Gant PUD amendment. 1) A site visit is required to discuss and review all proposed enhanced landscaping 2) More detail on the enhanced landscaping plans will be needed for each area proposed for improvements, include in this planting plan the existing trees and irrigation and how the new landscape will not have an adverse affect on the existing trees. 3) all new concrete work and curb work will need to be staged outside of any planting beds. and landscaping. All storage of materials, machines and such related materials will not be allowed under and tree drip line. 4) the new plans showing more detail for the enhanced planting shall also show tree protection fences. this should also be defined in the plans for the curb and entry way work 5) A tree permit will be required for any excavation under the drip line work and tree removals, these should be identified on a separate site plan and also iii the field during the site visit 1 copied Chris in the event someone needed something from us prior to Jennifer returning. Thanks sorry for the delay At 11:55 AM 8/1/2005 -0600, you wrote: Brian - I put the referral in the parks in-box at city hall on July 22nd. The Gant is interested in receiving a minor PUD amendment to install a new, larger canopy. install snow-melt in part of their driveway. replace some of the walkways with new stone pavers. replace some of the railroad tie walls with stone walls, and install some new/additional landscaping. This is an administrative review so no DRC meeting, but since they talk about landscaping 1 thought some initial feedback or any conditions of approval that you would like to see should be included. At 11:35 AM 8/1/2005. you wrote: Jennifer I completely forgot what the PUD amendment was about, I think you said it was in your office? At 08:50 AM 8/1/2005 -0600, you wrote: Hi Nick and Brian - Just trying to wrap up this request for a minor PUD amendment up by the end of this week....Ill be out of the office next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns by tomorrow. Otherwise, Ill assume that you are okay with what was proposed. Thanks. Jennifer Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City of Aspen 160 S. Galena Street Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> 8/16/2005 .-Brian Flynn, 12:13 PM 8/8/2005, Re: Gant PUD Amendment Page 2 of 2 Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 Brian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager 130 Sout h Ch.i i ena St Aspen. CO 81611 970-429-2035(P) 970-920-5128(F) Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City o f Aspen 160 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 Jrian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager 30 South Gatena St Aspen, CO 81611 970-429-2035(P) 970-920-5128(Fl Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us> 8/16/2005 Page 1 of 1 X-Sender: nicka@sam X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15 :00:45 -0600 To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifer@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Nick Adeh <nicka@ci.aspen. co.us> Subject: Re: Gant PUD Amendment Cc: alexe@ci.aspen.co.us X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScallner: Found to be clean Hello Jennifer, I have reviewed the proposed enhancements to their site and in fact have met with The Gant manager and their landscape architect and civil engineer. These enhancements seem to be adequately addressed and my only suggestion would be to have them submit their drainage calculations for drywells based on 5-year storm return events. Please also ask them to upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to our drainage inlet from the last drywell behind the their driveway on the north side. Their plan also lacki scale and north arrow! ! ! Thanks, Nick Adeh: P.E. At 08:50 AM 8/1/2005, you wrote: Hi Nick and Brian - Just trying to wrap up this request for a minor PUD amendment up by the end of this week....I'11 be out of the office next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns by tomorrow. Otherwise, Ill assume that you are okay with what was proposed. Thanks. Jennifer Jennifer Phelan Senior Long Range Planner City of Aspen ~ 160 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Phone: (970) 429-2759 Fax: (970) 920-5439 file://C:\DOCUME-l\jennifep\LOCALS-l\Temp\eud 12.htm 8/23/2005 Memo to the Jennifer P. c Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer ~g- I Â»4,2- 1-tti5 14-aups 7-29-05 ace,-,u:- AUT Tz'fo'30 4 RE: Gant Condominium/ PUD Amendment In doing my review additional details will be needed on a few things so engineering can sign off when the time comes. It would appear that a full permit application for the iniprovements would be our best avenue to follow. Including but not limited to the following. â€¢ A detailed landscape plan will need to be reviewed by parks. but also I would like to see what grading changes that might accompany those improvements. â€¢ Next, for the new snowmelt system, energy calc's must be preformed and I believe a fee paid for that kind of improvement. The building folks have a much better handle on that then 1 do. â€¢ Also related to the snowmelt is the requirement that no runoff from the system be released into the City ROW. Generally, an engineer is involved with tile design of such systems i f it becomes necessary to install a drywell for the snowmelt. â€¢ Drainage in the areas of enhanced / new patios could need to have the storm runoff plan (drainage report) i f any additional hard surface is part of the plan. â€¢ If any walls are being modified so they are above 4 feet in height. from the bottom of the footer to the top o f the wall, an engineer will need to provide a design. It's a code requirement. â€¢ A building guru will need to comment on any stair changes that seem to be proposed based on the drawings submitted. â€¢ Lastly. Nick A. might require a ROW permit be issued for any work that might take place in the ROW. Generally. I don't see any specific reason why these improvements wouldn't be allowed. The caveat is that a design effort will be required for some of the elements of this proposal. AVE 02Â£ ~4'ea 7-2 7-29 -9-- MEMORANDUM TO: Plans were routed to those departments checked-off below: 16....... City Engineer X.<Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· Community Development Engineer ~4 O......... Police Department 0........... Zoning Officer O........... Housing Director ,~ X........... Parks Department O........... Aspen Fire Marshal City Water O........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District X........... Building Department 0........... Environmental Health O........... Electric Department O........... Holy Cross Electric O........... City Attorney O........... Streets Department O ........... Historic Preservation Officer O......... City Parking Manager - O........... Pitkin County Planning FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner~ Community Development Department LJ. 130 So. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone-429.2759 Fax-920.5439 RE: 610 S. Westend Street (Gant Condominiums) - Insubstantial PUD Amendment DATE: July 22,2005 COMMENTS: Please review the attached application for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment request. This is an administrative review and approval process, so please have your comments in to me by Friday, July 29,2005. Thank You, Jennifer Phelan . Â»toly Ata* Ee40*a,0 *ta,Utâ‚¬*t* Set*2â‚¬6 '8* 3613 Aa#.t, (3ol~olo X1612 PAOâ€¢te/741 (970)920-1125 a,124+00*@404*'td. â€¢iâ‚¬f July 12, 2005 Mr. James Lindt, Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS (PHASES 2 AND 3) Dear James, This is an application for an insubstantial amendment to the PUD approvals previously granted to the Gant Condominiums. The Gant Condominiums is located at 610 West End Street in Aspen. The property consists of approximately 5.5 acres of land, and is improved with 143 multi-family residential dwelling units (305 bedrooms). The purpose of this application is to (1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and (2) improve the landscaping features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant. The locations of these proposed improvements are shown on the floor plans and landscape plan that accompany this application. This application is being submitted by the Gant Condominium Association, Inc., the owner of the property (hereinafter, "the applicant"). Proof of the ownership of the property is provided by Exhibit #1, a letter from Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C., counsel to the Association. Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the Gant Condominium Association for this application is provided by Exhibit #2. This letter also provides certification from the Association that the proposed improvements have been voted on and approved by a majority of the owners. I held a pre-application conference with you on July 12, 2005 (see Exhibit #3, Pre- Application Conference Summary). At that time, you confirmed that these activities would be processed administratively as an Insubstantial PUD Amendment, pursuant to Section 26.445.100 A. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. The following sections of this application identify the standards of the Aspen Land Use Code that apply to an Insubstantial PUD Amendment and provide a response to each standard. First, however, a brief overview of past approvals given to the Gant Condominiums is provided, which help to provide a context for this proposal. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Two History of Prior Approvals The Gant Condominiums was originally approved as a PUD by the Aspen City Council in the early 1970's. The project was developed in three phases and the original plats for the property document these phases. The plat for phase I (Buildings A, B, C, and D) is recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 431 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The plat for phase II (Buildings E, F, J, and K) is recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 499 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The plat for phase III (Buildings G, and H) is recorded at Plat Book 5, Page 22 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. When the property was originally developed, it was zoned for accommodations and recreation (AR-1) pursuant to the then existing Aspen Zoning Code. Shortly thereafter the City implemented a major revision to its Zoning Code and Zoning Map and the property was down zoned to R-15 PUD, making the condominiums a nonconforming use. In 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the City of Aspen to remove the stigma of nonconformity from the property and to make minor improvements to the office/reception area and the entry to the complex. This application was approved pursuant to Ordinance 41, Series of 1989 (see Exhibit #4), which rezoned the property to R-15 (L) PUD. This rezoning meant that the condominiums were no longer a nonconforming use, but were still subject to the nonconforming structure regulations. Therefore, Ordinance 41 also made an amendment to the nonconforming provisions of the Code. This amendment permitted expansions to the facility's "non-unit space" by the lesser of 10% of the existing floor area or 2,500 sq. ft. In the case of the Gant, 2,500 sq. ft. was the applicable limit, since the existing improvements to the property were in excess of 150,000 sq. ft. in size. Following receipt of these approvals, a 480 sq. ft. expansion of the office/reception area was accomplished. Subsequently, in 1996, the City approved an expansion of the conference center by 1,578 sq. ft. A letter from Nick McGrath to the Planning Office and a response from Bob Nevins, City Planner, authorizing this expansion are attached as Exhibit #5. In 2002, the applicant proposed another minor expansion of the non-unit space on the property. The purpose of this 60 sq. ft. addition was to build an elevator to serve the D Building. The City approved an insubstantial PUD amendment authorizing this project and it was subsequently constructed. Considering the above, to date the applicant has utilized 2,118 sq. ft. of the 2,500 sq. ft. of non-unit space available to this property, leaving 382 sq. ft. of floor area still to be developed. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Three In July of 2004, the applicant submitted an application to the City for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment for Phase 1 of the landscaping and building improvements at the Gant. The activities covered by this application included a new walkway around the elevator of the E Building and landscaping improvements around the D, E, F, G, and H Buildings. This application was approved by the City on August 3,2004. The approved improvements have since been installed by the applicant. As part of the Phase 1 application, the applicant met with Ms. Sarah Oates, the City's Zoning Officer, to review the building changes proposed at that time and future plans (including the canopy proposed in the current application). Ms. Oates determined that since all of these proposals were for unenclosed areas, they would be exempt from the City's floor area regulations and would not count against the 382 sq. ft. non-unit space "reserve". A letter confirming this determination is attached as Exhibit #6. Insubstantial PUD Amendment An insubstantial amendment to the Gant Condominiums PUD is requested to replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy and to improve the landscaping features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant. The proposed new canopy is depicted on the attached architectural drawings. The existing canopy covers an area of slightly in excess of 180 sq. ft. The new canopy would cover an area of almost 450 sq. ft. The canopy will not be enclosed. The proposed improvements to the landscape features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings are shown on the proposed landscape plan. The landscape plan shows that there are several types of improvements proposed as part of this application. First, enhanced landscaping is proposed around several of the buildings. Second, new concrete pavers will replace the existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings. New stone-faced concrete walls will also replace the existing railroad-tie walls around these buildings. The new pavers and walls will match the pavers and walls that have recently been installed in Phase 1 of this project. Finally, the entry area that leads visitors and guests to the office will be enhanced, to include a snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature. It should be pointed out that this Insubstantial PUD Amendment does not address the issue of tree removal and replacement. Tree removal and replacement is not anticipated to be as sensitive an issue for these phases of the project as it was for Phase 1, since the applicant has designed the improvements in these phases to avoid all of the significant trees on the property. The applicant hereby commits to continuing to work directly with the Parks Department to ensure that any of the smaller trees on the property that may be diseased or are otherwise determined to be in need of removal are properly replaced on the site. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Four This application also does not include any information regarding the planned replacement of railings along the decks and patios in the complex. Staff has previously determined that this is not a relevant issue for PUD review and can be handled with a building permit. The staff can examine the decks that have already been modified within the complex to determine whether any further review of the remaining decks is required. Following are the applicant's responses to the standards by which the Community Development Director may authorize these insubstantial amendments to the Gant Condominiums PUD, as found in Section 26.445.090 A of the Land Use Code. The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment: 1. A change in the use or character Of the development. Response: The Gant is a multi-family accommodations development. No change to the existing character of this development will occur as a result of the proposed improvements. Instead, these improvements will simply enhance the existing character of the development and help to modernize this important part of Aspen's visitor accommodations inventory. 2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. Response: John Baker of Baker Fallin Architects calculated the existing footprint of all of the buildings at the Gant and found the site coverage to be approximately 58,499 sq. ft. Since the total land area of the Gant is 240,588 sq. ft., approximately 24.3% of the site is presently covered with buildings. Following the recent changes to the walkways approximately 74 sq. ft. was added to this footprint (new total of 58,573 sq. ft.) which still comprises approximately 24.3% of the site. No changes to the footprint are planned in the current phases. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. Response: The minor expansion of the arrival canopy and the proposed landscaping improvements will have no effect on traffic generation, or create any demands for public facilities. 4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent Of the approved open space. Response: Baker Fallin has also calculated the existing amount of open space at the Gant and has found that approximately 48.4% of the site (116,427 sq. ft.) is open space. There are no activities in these phases that would change the approved open space. Mr. James Lindt July 12, 2005 Page Five 5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space. Response: There will be no decrease in parking on the property. 6. A reduction iii required pavement widths or rights-of-way for streets and easements. Response: No such reduction will occur as part of this project. 7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. Response: No such increase will be caused by this project. 8. An increase by greater than one ( 1) percent in the approved residential density Of the development. Response: No change in density will occur as part of this project. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting a variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Response: The applicant is not aware of any condition or representation associated with the original approval which would be affected by this proposal. Conclusion I believe the above responses provide the information you require to process this application. If there is anything else you need, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES AA 0., Alan Richman, AICP EXHIBITS EXHIBIT #1 LAWOFFICESOF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONALCORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 LEONARDM. OATES TELEPHONE (970) 920-1700 RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE (970) 920-1121 TED D GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY Imoasst@okglaw com OF COUNSEL: JOHN T. KELLY MARIATICSAY July 2,2004 VIA HAND DELIVERY (WITH APPLICATION FOR MINOR AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT/THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS) Julie Ann Woods, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Application for Minor Amendment to Planned Unit Development/The Gant Condominiums Dear Ms. Woods: Please be advised that this firm of Attorneys acts as counsel for The Gant Condominium Association ("Association"). The Gant Condominiums ("Project") is a condominium project created under the Colorado Condominium Act. The common elements of the Project are owned by all of the owners within the Project as tenants in common. Pursuant to the governing documentation for the Project, the Association is charged with the administration of the affairs of the Project, acting by and through its duly elected Board of Directors and Officers. Pursuant to the provisions ofthe condominium documentation for the Project, the Association is constituted as the attorney in fact for all of the owners of condominium units within the Project to make and process land use applications. The Board ofDirectors by its actions has authorized Molly Campbell to act for and on its behalfin connection with the processing of the present land use application for minor amendment to the planned unit development approval for the Project. I f you should be in need of any further clarification or supplementation o f this letter please give me a call. Very Truly Yours, ~ATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. b Â«4-1 4) 3-/4 By (3~~2~A#<4/, P Leonard M. Oates I / 1 - LMO/bab End. C \LMO Data & Forms\DataChents\GanNg to Woods 7 1 04 wpo EXHIBIT #2 Mr. James Lindt, Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS Dear Mr. Lindt, The Gant Condominium Association, Inc. hereby authorizes Alan Richman Planning Services to act as its designated representative with respect to the application for an Insubstantial PUD Amendment being submitted to your office for our property, located at 610 West End Street in Aspen. Alan Richman is authorized to submit this application on our behalf. He is also authorized to represent us in meetings with the City of Aspen staff. I can also certify to you that the Condominium Association held a meeting to discuss the improvements addressed in this application. A majority of the condominium unit owners voted in favor of making these improvements. Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this application, please do so through Mr. Richman, whose address and telephone number are included in the ~land use apI~Ation. SiÂ¢ereÂ© r Gant CondomipunpAssociation, Inc. Molly Campbet,General Manager 610 West End Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 920-6070 EXHIBIT #3 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: James Lindt, 429-2763 DATE: 7/12/05 PROJECT: Gant Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman OWNER: Gant Condominium Association TYPE OF APPLICATION: Insubstantial PUD Amendment DESCRIPTION: The Applicant would like to make some amendments to the landscaping, entryways, and walkways within the Gant PUD. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.445.100 Amendment of PUD development order. Review by: Staff for complete application, referral agencies for technical considerations, Community Development Director for final approval unless the Community Development Director does not feel comfortable approving the proposal administratively. Public Hearing: No, unless the Community Development Director does not feel comfortable approving the proposal administratively. Referral Agencies: Parks, Building Department Planning Fees: Planning Deposit $660 for 3 hrs of staff time (additional hours will be billed at a rate of $220 per hour) Referral Agency Fees: Total Deposit: $660 To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Completed Application form. 4. Signed fee agreement. 5. Pre-application Conference Summary. 6. A letter from the homeowner' s association saying that they have approved the amendment. 7. Letter of authorization for representative to act on owner's behalf. 8. An 8 1/2" x 11"vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 9. A written description ofthe proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 10. Existing and proposed landscaping plans. 11. Existing and proposed site plan. 12. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)-preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. 13. 2 Copies of the complete application packet (items 3-11) Process: Apply. Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to Parks for referral comments. Case Planner reviews application with remainder of Staff and drafts a decision notice. Community Development Director reviews decision notice and signs i f appropriate for approval. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 11.WIBIT #4 -- BOOK 611 mu:81 . O.3 L :. J.) ORDINANCE NO. ft . (Series of 1989) CI AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZONING ~ THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS TO R-15 (L) PUD AND AMENDING SECTION 9-105 OF THE ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS TO PERMIT MINOR EXPANSIONS TO NONCONFORMING HOTELS AND LODGES WHEREAS, The Gant Condominiums (hereinafter, "The Applicant") is an existing multi-family/hotel development located in the R-15 PUD zone district; and WHEREAS, The Applicant submitted to the City of Aspen a land use application requesting rezoning of its property and amendment of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in order to make the project conforming; and WHEREAS , the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter, "The Commission) held a duly noticed public hearing on June 20, 1989, to consider the applicant's request; and WHEREAS , The Commission recommends to the Aspen City Council (hereinafter, "The Council") that The Applicant's property be rezoned to R-15 (L) PUD and that Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations be amended to permit minor expansions of nonconforming hotels and lodges; and WHEREAS, The Council, having received the recommendations of The Commission, wishes to rezone the Applicant's property to R-15 (L) PUD and to amend the Aspen Land Use Regulations to permit minor expansions of nonconforming hotels and lodges. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. BOOK 611- PAGE 619 Section 1 That it does hereby rezone the property known as The Gant Condominiums, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, to R-15 (L) PUD. Section 2 That the Zone District Map be and hereby is amended to reflect the zoning described in Section 1 and that the Planning Director is hereby authorized and directed to amend said map to reflect the new zoning. Section 3 That the City Clerk be and hereby is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4 That Article 9, Section 9-105 B, Lodge and Hotel Preservation, of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 9-105 B, Lodge and Hotel Preservation. B. Increase in units or size. There shall be no increase in the number of units in the lodge or hotel, or-the betab-square-â‚¬eotagc in the lodgc or hotcl, unless the enlargement is for the purpose of constructing deed restricted employee housing units accessory to the principal use, consistent with the requirements of Section 9-105 C. BOOK 611- pmE620 Enlargement of the square footage of a lodge or hotel shall also be permitted if the expansion shall be for the purpose of improving the facility's non-unit space. The enlargement for the purpose of improving the facility's non-unit space shall be reviewed and considered as a Development Application for Special Review, pursuant to Art. 7, Div 4. In determining whether to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application, the Commission shall ensure all the following standards and requirements are met. 1. The lodge or hotel shall not be expanded by more than ten percent (10%) of its existing floor area or two thousand-five hundred (2,500) square feet, whichever is less. Enlargement which occurs in phases shall not exceed these limits, measured on a maximum cumulative basis. 2. The external floor area of the lodge or hotel shall be equal to or less than 1:1 following the enlargement. 3. The expansion may be in rental rooms, provided an equal amount of existing square footage is converted from rental rooms to non-unit space." BOOK 611 PAGE 621 Section 5 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6 Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect any right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to the effective date of this ordinance, and the same shall be continued and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7 A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the /4-+U day of -~//--- , 1989 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the k>*'0~--j day of Â»F , 1989. 21) coÂ« . Mithael "Gas-Bm~tÂ·,Â· Â·Mayor Pne Tem " 44 CF .b .4 2 f :r.Â£,0 3//1~ -. 1 \Kathryn iFf. *och, City Clerk r. Â£ ~j i I it ,Â©Â·: BOOK 611 PAGEDLC FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this / 4440 day of 1-16(Â» , 1989. -r D 9\ I P 10-9 William L. Stirling, Mayor O a f A 3,2 9. Y' ATTES*: ''05 0 $ 8,0*ji.Lj J/da_-, Â·5 KathiÂ¥n . ~loch, City Clerk ord ruum. uoon rt. claKer 10. Motly Uampoell uare: 3/30/99 Ame. 9:1 0.18 AM ~~,CT. 3.1996 11: 26AM MCGRATH ASPEN CO NO.231 P.2 EXHIBIT #5 j 1 NICHOLAS MCGRATH, P.C. ' 600 Ecd Hopkjng Avenue \ A Protazional Cofporoflort Suite 903 Attefrre,3 Al Law Aspen. Colorado 81 61 1 Talepnonâ€¢ 1970] 925-2612 1 -1. Nicholas 41(Gcoth- Te,4ecopiew 19701 926-4402 Susan W. Loct:en '- nickhow@cs:-1.rer Dic,Ga L. Godwtn October 3, 1996 CoerÂ©oServe 7402,1 SCI MEMORANDUM To: Planning Office, City of Aspen From: Nick McGrath, Esq. The Gant - Propoeed Renovation of Conference Center The Gant is considering renovation and perhaps expansion of its 4 Conference Center. We ~e submittng this memorandum to you not as a formal applicabon, but simply bo familiarize you with certain. history of The Gant and &e possible alternatives it is currently reviewing, ' The Gant opeates as a condominium hotel. -It has 143 units, 118 of which are rented short-term. Historically, about 80 percent of its 1InitJ have been rented as short-term toluist accomodations. The Gant sits on approidmately 5.2 acres. In 1989, The Gant edsted as a non-confoming use. To solve that problem, The Gant petitioned the Aspen City Council to rezone The Gant property so that it would be a pe[mitted use. As a result Couiril adopted Ordinance 41 on August 14, 1989, rezoning The Gant from R-15 PUD to R-15(L) FUD. The enactment of Ordinance 41 made Ibe Gant a conditional *ermitted) use instead of a non- Â· conforming use, while remaining a nonconforming structure l as to PAR ~d density, In addition, at the same time in 1989, The Gant desired to expand its office and reception area. At that dme, Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the ~Code") did not allow any increase in total square footage in a lodge or hotel. As a part of Ordinance 41, Section 9-1053 of the Code was amended to permit ~ 1 A nonocnforming structure "mean5 any stnicture whichwas establiahed pursuant to 6 zoning and building laws in effie at the tne of its development, but which does not conform to thA dimensional requiremknt imposed by this Code for the zone district in which it is located." Code Â§3-101. -WornbÂ« C- UFUL Cat (70691. and O.C. floddl bgrl I 0 From: John R. Baker To: Molly CampbeU Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM Page 6 of 7 T. 3.1996 11:26AM EGRATH ASPEN CO MO. 231 P.3 4 Memorandum r Planning Ofice, City of Aspen. Re: The Gant .9. Odober 3, 1996 Page 2 expansion for the purpose of improving the facilitÂ» non-unit space. In accordance with amended Section 9-1[EB, approval was granted to The Gant to 4 expand its offzce and lobby area by 480 square feet While Code Section 9-105B does allow expansion of non-unit space, it also limits that expansion to a 10 percerrt cumulative increase in existing floor areÂ£u or a cumulative increase of 2,500 square feet whichever is less After the 1989 expan.sioru The Gant has 158,243 square feet 10 percent of that is 15,824 square feet, so the 2,500 square fbot limitagon ts the applicable standard. After its 480 square foot erpangion in 1989, The Gant still has 2,020 square feet available for expansion before reaching the 2,500 square foot cap. Because The Gant wishes to continut to be one of Aapen's Enest condaminium properties, its Board wanted to consider a number of alternatives for refurbishing the Conference Center which would add long berm value to homeowners. Currently undâ€¢Er consideration are the following: 1. Plan #1 - Complete Refurbighment . 9, Under this option, lhe Gant would use the odsting floor plans with no In*r construction improvements, and would complete veryhigh qualify decor and furnishing renova ticruincluding carpet furniture, remodeling of the bar and fireplace in the lounge room, replacement of woodwork and doors, and refurbishment of the rest rooms and dressing rooms. In addition, necessary repairs would be made to the upper terrace of the building. This work confemplates no increase of .interior area, and, we believe, does not need. approval for completion- 2- Plan #2 - Meeting Room Addition. In addition to the work contemplated in Plan #1, this proposal would add a meeting room on the eodsting open roof ima of the facUity at 62 level of the parking lot near J-building. Further, there would be substantial renovation to an existing room to prcvide for lobby space, the entire facility would be brought up to Me standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act, rest rooms would be improved including replacing the saunas with steam rooms, and an elevator 0 rrom. oonn R. Baker To: Molly Campbell Ua[Â© 0/.Dulbu 11[Ilt. ..1..,wi.â€¢â€¢ ir . 3.1996 11: 27AI MCGRATH ASPEN CO PO.231 P,4 -- 1 - 1///f. 4 Memorandum Planning Office, City of Aspen .Re: The Gant 1 October 3, 1996 1 Page 3 i would be added. The square footage increase under this proposal is approximately 1,100 square feet, 3. Plan #3 - Meeting Room and Exercise Room Addition. In addition to all items contemplated in Plan #2, a 450 square foot 6 exercise rocum would be added on the lower terrace. This addition would also allow for the expansion of the upper terrace by approximately the same square 1 -+ footage as the exercise room The kltchen would also be enlarged and remoripled 1 (0 The square footage mcrease contemplated by this plan is approximately 1450 1 135378 4Â·74 square ~eet. *04-vi 1 'Ihe Gant is in a competitive market Currently it has the laIgest meeting ' facility of any Aspen condominium property but diose faciMâ‚¬es fall short of the local hotel competitors. While the addition of a meeting room and convetsion of an existing room to lobby space will not signiScantly increase the total square footage available for meetings, the redesign of the rooms will allow the facility to better meet the expectations of nleeMng plannerB and will/improved overall functionality. The enlargement of the deck area if Plan #3 is approved will significantly increase The Ganfs summer capabilities for food and beverage, meebng and specialty functions such as weddings and family reunions. The fact that the meeting facilities at all competitive properties am either new or remodeled places The Gant at an addiEonal competitive disadvantage. Further, among all of 'Ihe Gangs competitors, caly one lacks even a rudimerttary exercise fadlity. As to employees, The Gant believes dlat any proposed expansion will not necesaitate hiring rew employees. Ihe board fedls that imy increased services can be handled by its current staff and the expansion will allow The Gant to employ its edsting staff more regularly on a year-round basis. The board of directors of The Gant would like to fnalce a decision u to which alternative to pursue by early November. This would allow for a two phase construction project, the first of which would be completed in the spring of 1997 and the second in the fall of 1997. Molly Campbell. John Baker (The Gant's architect) and I look forward to worldng with you on developing this new project. uofin M. daker To: Molly Campoeli Date. 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM Page 3 of 7 DEC. 6.1996 11:52PM MCGRATH ASPEN CO NO.110 P.3 i 1 NoÂ¥*tber 1996 Mr. Nicholas MaGrach, P.C. Attorneys Ac Law , 600 East Hopkins Avenue, Suite 203 Aspen. Colorado 81611 ASPEN Â· FITKIN (970)925-26 0 CowuuNNY D,yrlor,184'r OCragnâ€¢[.NT Re: The Gant - Proposed Conference Center Renovarion Dear Mr. McGra[h: Â· Having reviewed your memorandum of 2 October 1996. City files and applicabie sections of che Land Use Regulacidns, I wauld Iike co coafirm the following based upon the approval of Ordinance 41, Series of 1996: A. Curredzoning: R-15 (Lodge) PUD E. Density: No increase in the number of units in the lodge or horer unless the enlargement is far the purpose of construc[ing deed restricted employee housing unics accesscry to che principal use. C. Enlargemenc of squars fooage: Lodge or hotel shill nbt be expanded by more chan rea percent (10%) ofia existing floor area or rwo chousand -five hundredÂ· Â· (2,500) square fcet whichever is less. Enlargement which occurs ih phases shall aor exceed these limits, measured on a maximum cumulative basis. D.* External floor area= Lodge or hocel shall havE an external floor area equal co or less than 1:1 following the enlargemen[. E. Expansion: Rencal rooms may be expandect provided ao equal amounc of existing square foocage is converted from rental rodms to non-lmic space. F. Review procedure: Eniargement for che purpose of improving the facility's non-unir space shall be reviewed and considered as a Dcvclopmenc Application for Special Review, Arc. 7, Div. 4 (recodified as Chapter 26.64). In regard, co the non-unit expansion of the Gant, the following conditions apply: 1. Pursuant [o Ordinance 41-89, maximum floor area expansion of non-uni[ space ri at che Gant shall not exceed 2,500 square feet After che 480 square foot expansion in 1989, The Gant condnues to havc 2,020 square feec of non-unit expansion pocendal. 130 ScurrM G.Le,A Sot,Er Â· AS,1,4, Co~c:.00 81411-1975 Â· PHONE 970.910.3090 Â· FAx 970.910-5439 0 From: John R. 8aker To: Molly Campbell Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM Page 4 of 7 DEC. 6.1996 11:52AM MCGRATH ASPEN CO NO. 110 P.4 2. Pursuant to Ordinance 41-89 29*Chapier 26. 64, Special Review, an amendment to the develcpment o?der shall be submined to che Community mission. Ic is a i Development Director for review and recommendation for approval, approval with condicions or disapproval by the Planning and Zoning Com one-step review before [he Commission at a public mccring. 3, Thc developmon[ applicacion shall include eXisting and proposed floor plans : and elevations of che Conference Center in addicion to che general applicarion informacion and responsej to Secrion 26.64.090, Insubstancial amendment criteria. 4. The developmen[ appilcation requires a buc fcc deposit of S 1,050.00, Minor Review. Any addirional hours required by staff to process the development applicacion shall be biUed at 17 hourly rae of S t75.00. 5. Once a complete development application is reccivcd by Communiry Developmeng the mar[er should be brought before Planning and Zoning Commission within four to six weeks. Based upon our review and currear understanding. of the Gant' 5 Itfurbishmendexpaosion plans, Community Devclopmcnt shall process che development application u an Insubsuntial Amcndmcnt subjcct to Special Review. The proposed non-unit space expansicn shall not require new employee mirigacion. If I call provide further informacion or clarifiction regarding the,Ciry's requircments and review procedure for the proposed expansion and refurbishmenc of the Gant's non-unit space, please courant me. Sincerely, Robert Nevins City Planner 0 EXHIBIT #6 Wtk* 224.,a,0 ;,/61#QU#9 Se,cea 'Exc 3613 A4*eâ€¢t, (346tab E 1612 7404,6/743, l970)920-1125 446eA.0,44$@40*,ta. fle July 2,2004 Ms. Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: GANT CONDOMINIUMS Dear Sarah, Thank you for taking the time to meet with Molly Campbell and me yesterday to discuss the Gant's plans for improvements to its buildings and grounds in the upcoming years. During the meeting we explained to you that only minor changes are being proposed for the buildings. This year the Gant plans to add a covered, unenclosed walkway next to the elevator that serves the E Building. This addition would be approximately 74 sq. ft. in area, and would occur on each of the four levels of the building. In the future, the Gant proposes to modify the canopy that covers the entry to the Office/Reception Building at the entry to the complex. The existing square canopy would be replaced with a new half-circle canopy that would cover approximately 300 sq. ft. more in area. The canopy would also be an unenclosed space. During the meeting you indicated that both of these areas would qualify as porches as defined by the Land Use Code. Therefore, both areas would be exempt from the City's floor area calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reserve of 382 sq. ft. of "non-unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989. If I have accurately summarized our meeting, I would appreciate it if you would sign in the space below and return a copy of this letter to me for my files. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES 44. e Alan Richman, AICP Ms. Sarah Oates July 2, 2004 Page Two I concur that the two improvements proposed by the Gant (unenclosed walkway addition to Building E and unenclosed canopy at the entry to the Office/Reception Building) qualify as porches as defined by the Land Use Code and would therefore be exempt from floor area calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reserve of 382 sq. ft. of "non- unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989. 2 1/ Sarah Oates, Zoning Enforcement Officer MAPS/DRAWINGS It room #: / C j Original Street h phone ext: /40/ Glory Hole Park \\ /7 47Â» ~* ike Patty~ .1 West End j i - 0. 1~ O /07-9 Tubsl~~//"'~ \4~~-Â·_~--~ . /37 L v UÂ«F=""1~'- - 75.--Wiu.-Â» b /2 / 3-34/L-ill'll (51 19 ans ,-7#~- *r r--" 7 --1 i.....Â».tmd hb= = i 1 .///L- 3- Codrt 2 ~3~~ h\ Coltrt 1 IM, 4*Fl \V 4/. \\\. To Tennis Courts 3, 4 and 5 1 Reception 4-1 I i 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fl] i im././rE - Administrative Offices Cjellll'hillilillilli~rillijill~2lililailiggillifili~~lie~Rejitd-- 1 2 Fitness Dressing Rooms 3 Bike/Ski Racks 4 Guest Laundry (basement level) r--' f. --/1 -..- 5 Guest Laundry (2nd & 4th floors) 6 Guest Laundry (ground level) ~Elevator / \ ~ Pool/Hot Tub / 9 Recycling Areas 1/k- N... 1HE The GANT parking lots and neighboring streets are permit parking only. Please ask the front desk staff for assistance. GAN[ Valet parking is available. aspen Dur Int Avenue Waters Avenue (dead end) 4 *\.\Ne/?te glu /f-Â©\ \LAA22j 1 6 9'*' / 1 1/ 1 /1 LEJ DOWNSPOUT 94/01 r 9 NEW ENTRY CANOPY. STANDING ~ ~ SEAM METAL ROOFING. SEAMS IN I RADIAL PATERN, PROVIDE BUILT-IN P ' : 2 - EDGE GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT TO Â·40 9/. UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE 1 2'.214" HIGHEST POINT OF ROOF 1 9 INTERSECTION w/ WALL. 0 Me " \ 1 A 202 3 \ LOWEST POINT OF ROOF ~ Â¤ - - INTERSECTION Wl WALL, A.304b F â€¢r- PURLIN/RAFTER TAIL M...I- - DOWNSPOUT I r> 2'.~19 C /2\ CANOPY ROOF PLAN @ LOBBY 4 A. 3040 E ~~.~ SCALE: 1 /8"= 1'-0" 1 - - 1 1 1 . 1 ... L .1 ~TYPICAL AT STAIRS 1--1 - - LY E- 7 7 -7 --m 3 /- 11 Â· 291 -1 - - W - - - -- BA 3040 El SCALE: 1 /8.=1'-0. 1--ll i, C =;~Ci,-, f.: Tiwl 49 .fr,J ... 1 8 I ..iT 4- 1- i. ' jr-,41 7 19'L 1 I 6 3 - t-+I:t-- _ t*- *C 1 L Â·i 004 1Â·Â· 11 - .1 1.-- I.'.. ... -0 6-1 1 2 411 k. C 1- '71 7- 4- ~12. 1~ D /1- I 1+- 4-= r (77~TYPICAL AT STARS @LE. â€¢ 'j I Â¢ & â‚¬ I L = C A2.1 / 5 - ge- -/ r rAIR INO-1 1 -1 I . -21 V LU 1 1. Ill// Z 1 3 1 1 1% L__ --Ill- 1-Ill- lill--- -3 LU 4 Z 0 JZ '1 1.- - F- 05 00 + 1 -4% Ll.Q.2 A-12 Z< A 204 ' L 0 0 00 EXISIING .. 1- co QEE[CES 4 / -- A-103 io - ---4 1 1 ~~ ~ ~~/~ EXISTING CLOVERED WACK Â· , EXISTING LOBBY ~ -- - - \\\ n . 11 . 1 1 ~- A. 204b k . 1 1 1 4 1 - EXISTING CLOSETTO REMAIN 1 4 1 - 1 / ~ ISSUED FOR: DATE: - 65% ODSET 25 MAR N 0 1 Hek 0 1 -%- 3 -- 11 r- A 204 4 REPLACE EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL WITH \ \4~ STAR NO--1' 7 -- -- 4 STOREFRONT SYSTEM (ALUMINUM Wi ANODIZED BRONZE FINISH). 1~17 1.+ f ,/ 1 -2 ~55-/ / - EDGE OF NEW ENTRY CANOPY ABOVE. STAND ING SEAM METAL ROOFING. SEAMS 1N W 1 1 RADIAL PATERN PROVIDE BUILT-IN EDGE ft #/ pi t GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT TO Â· 2 UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE 1. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS 4[ A GENERAL NOTES: / CANOPY OVERHANG SQUARE 2. FIELD VERIFY ALLDECKAND WALKWAY . 4 PC>OTAGE: 447sf DIMENSIONS. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TAKEN - FROM ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS 0 r'A COPYRIGHT 2000 49' MCRTERARCHETECTS P.C. AND ARE FOR PRICING ONLY. - INEILL FRAMING AT NEW CANOPY ROOF. SCALE: 1/8'= REMOVE EXISTING RAILING. - ~ < 1- CD REPLACEMENT DOOR TYPES. SEE SHEET A2.1 DRAWN: JKB -32 K. El UNIT ENTRY SCONCE /6'-8" AF.F. TYPICAL PROJECT#.0 0309 GTAI~ ~ NO 1 Si WALKWAY SCONCE / 6'-8: A.F.F. TYPICAL. fi C SHEET T/TLE.Â· 'A' BUILDING PLANS C il ' 4 Sm STAR SCONCES / 79 ABOVE TREADS TYPICAL 4 C, CEILING FIXTURE/ TOPAT 8-8"AFF TYPICAL 1 "A"BUILDING / ENTRY CANOPY AA2.1 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" AAO 1 LL9Le OO 'NadSÂ¥ 133hllS aN3 1SEM'S Gl.9 dINI 33kIH1 3SVHd NV9 3 Hl . 0 . . . 0 . . 0 3 ,/1-E#*ake -* 314 ~ --9-\N\-1 d //Â£444 - 2 OMOOOOOOO ~ AA AR L.9 --1- 7.32.1 ~4141' Aooe 10Â¥pe - 8 \L - hi i *- --241< 4 4 5 / 9094-1 //A\\ {t , A 1 I L& 1*BE,scE.1-- i-- 1-* *T-- rr - z-i -- 1 'tof,i 1~ ~ BLD D ---///// ////// ill/1 Â«X ~ IA ,// 0 . 0/ A 1 \ -1 \\ f /-2*/ fÂ«\- -I--1- 6 41 1 - A briE -A j / 4~ 1 , L L ~Â·- NE\* STONE FACED CO~CRETEWALL /~~~ NEW STONE L L ///. FACED \ .1 //Ill,4 i ~~ NEW STAIRCASE CONCRETEWALL - ---- '411 /3- iÂ« *-- -1- nal -Â«t 6 1 CÂ· 0 0 0 01 1 1 â€ž- a e . Â«49Â»2\\2\ EZEZZ *i Oil 1 \.Â«42.-Â«22> t,1 0 1 \ \\\ ff fi{ 0 .- 1 // %2 1 - 1- x -- -k --*--)2-*---Tr--2-K *2 I if I f / / * A, 7Â»,2 IT ra 1542.- -'ll--0. ----A 1,47 --1 REPLAGE'EXISTING ,- -===22------------------\ -----=12=32*464 gw/ -i --I,-'..44 /51 ' ' , NEW CURB Ie--~ ,/ J j , 1.--LUZIN //3.1,11,11,1 //, CURBL E-- ENHANCED LANDSCAPING . .1 11. N + 1 4 . :wit-~Â©* 9 5 -' i -r I | -1., Â·1 \\\1.\9 4/ 4Â«62Â» 1 1 1 'J G'RS=AQ / 9Â¥Z#*211 > -.- 1 1/' - ~ ~ ----*~-~-- NEW CURB TO REPLACE .~ - ,. , LI, . 1 1 />fl-; fixit / * ...J EXISTING CURB-- .Â·-4 / i ' ~ ~ ,- Ut) ceÂ» 1 1 - 1 TENNIS COURTS 1 1 P-- BLDG Â·, u fl - 1 -2-- -- NEW CONCRETE UNIT .t Â· 92%* pAVER SIDEWALK (TYP) 4 , P.= 1-11.' M - A 1- 1 . 4 '1 .: ~ LIMIT~F WORK i 11/ 9 0 A\%01<.'.. 1/ _ : .~ BLD K 0 I. . ft : 0<1 . ly Z 8 8 U r li . r 1 1, 'k 1 1 0 116, - LIMITOFWORK ~ ~-9~0 -f 0 - Â· BLD C 661&'Al], NEW C,ONCRETE UNIT ~ Â· -1 1 1 1 0 . ----1~ 1/I'll' I 1 O 1 . ",1.42L EFI~~EWA P '3=1~11 PAV LK (TY )' '141 13'Er : IS ' . .'- ' #. , :.li- ti r:.1 - L)'881 Â·\\.A'- 4 , le'll f 'Ii'<Â·4 -9 .W,'r--- ' 0 VV'-Tr Iffi~,EGIK773*%&*93*4.Â·..l - z 1 -0 4-,1,2732.-Â·Â¥11 '-= 12.;..A.7Â£2.,m~ 11,\ -Z lm[ 29 / 11 r 1 1 1 PROPOSED SNOWMELT 11 11 i 1 2- 1..:26...1 r ..rI~ .9- i h. . 1 . 1, 1 JIA. 1 --Â¥,Bee---- ' , Limij #MAN K ' -Â·> ' a: -1 8 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY 1 \fI PROPOSED STONE 1 rywi"putpkn*-:Â·I..â€ž ..Pl LI' .l'~~'I.--.S-1.-- --Â· :Â· ,- i -â€¢Â·,- 1~4~1,--11-~-1L-1. ..,9 --~~, 12<~LbiLLA+~:Â·iI HAUUMPieR \\\4\\9 ~ f~g FACED CONSRETEWALL --~-~, i~.~,~~ ~- ;- ~-~-- ~:-4446,t~j ~~*:L~;(Â·iÂ»r<*m~ ~~~-~~I~~'~~~T~~~~~~-~~-~~~~~~~~~~ 00 IÂ· Ir..Tar. Â· ~77:*~ ":Â·'Â« -, ' i 2 -â€ž - b::{;(09]fmt~~1 --~.54@1 0 --4 9.. *.$ X. 4,;.\lj\\\\\\,f p 8 =- - 112' L. 91'DOCRJ-106 PROPOSED STONE FACED ' 1'71114 / CONCRETEWALL il y . ~2.-r-F ~,~~,i- i' '-l J.-â€ž!69Â¢â‚¬ 5:37,~1.'.-i i...5-rip DooR... ."-- --"Amf-191 " 644#:iv r:-,-trfin[-cr RÂ· t :. i j / h 4'k' 1 1 I .<t .RA:eer,94./ i ~Â·, â€¢ 11 ~9- ' -"=l-~ ..Â·r. 4,4,4.~ -.7 .r,2 - Â« . f â‚¬ 'j ./:- ; '-11*e,o,r,iL <<.eeÂ©eeeey.e,e:z:Â·:=eee~ee:e $Â»%*E?19Â£11: ~~ q, 1-:1 LY"(31219*1 0 . ...ga, . . ../-4 -Z Oil. ,-1 k:-Â· ,-~-47{;l *94 1 6- 2 1 1 : Â· ~COR BÂ·101 0 7- \41 ,- l: - i / 548+44-*4 T 'tb' --iktwi-- 4- I'l.Ng led~ DOC110-97 " - J .Â« 06 ... Â·1 | '25&.2. - ..4.1.'I-Â·Â· 1 . '1 ~ ~" ~~-' 1 1 Â§ O . 4,Â§.~.'~i-flfÂ°i}Fir>,- 251. 9,5.. '227,1(.......~ L :f ff.i~~-3'-7:,Â·t>~~1,-,--0.-*bÂ«,- Â·':'Â·- : 'L-~ . - -Â·Â· '#' 0 j & 1 Fp 1....1.1.- 1-4-11-/.11:11 -'.-- ~!,1 0 1-% 0 0 . / LIIVIIT OF WORK , LIMIT OF WORK ~' ~ BLD B ; \,1 1 . BLD J PROPOSED WATER - NEW CONCRETE â‚¬ FEATURE i....4-:i--?'-f,'44â‚¬(-i'=62"Ii'i'JÂ·'.:-2jÂ·Of.tk,fljilt-2'-22.3:05Â©611'9:--wi ~ - ,ni -- -~-' - SIDEWALK (TYP) l -7/00/ 8-96 i%' ioooit s.{M; Bh,12 ' - - i - - 'Ii, 2:LIff...r:-tt-'gl-I,3.6~-FI/â‚¬7 :,p, Â·Â· .41,3 'C==, - 0 4 G.,1.-:1 I , - 4/' '1 ' ' ' ' 'Iit 1 2 i . 6 . Â· /\%1\\U LANDSCAPINGI ENHANCED ./.1 4 -1-1 N \ / j 9 _ ' ~1 .~~ ' -:.,lir. I.t..14':'- 1,1..\ 1 -Ar -. -M ..frA- b j. 2669-~ - - 1 111 111 I - - 11.11113 :=2 - 9Â»---/ ~1 PROPOSED 1 ENHANCED 0 01 111 1 L .P ' ENHANCED INCREASED \ LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPING :,\ ! e %10 3,/1.-- ' / J , ir '.1.1 *H y h \ 31 / 1 r PROPOSED \- STONE ACCENT AUTOCOURT ' 4*~ ' it :- =.'-1 L \4 11 7 4 1 SNOWMELT 1 \1/----31 / 9kiN 1 1 / f /Jy h # DRIVEWAY ~~~ 1< 714,.. 471 Qitrri..$- ..--%-.- .11(/fiTZ ~5 BLD A ' 1- 4 J r-4 1 94Â«47 NIC-=%:4& 1,1,1,\,~97 ..41<04 - 14- 6-, r - IA:.:%.9 . A l\\\97 r.51 *7' C\:.A'.* (A 19.1:49â‚¬39 f. 1 40 - .m@*A , /1 C '.. 1 *Ce- f i %\1\- 6 %*1\%. f.1 , -' 0 e 0 / / . \''hi 0 0 ---.- .#--4 *l ?t- --f- Il il: 4~- a- e ' fA-00, 11\\11.\1.1 / 1, , 1 N_, V y <4 0 1 r 1 / t:<... 1 1 1 4 1 / / /k\1- t. .f IA \\- \\ r---- , /* 4â‚¬:*:.., 4.* c,-40+ ,~ f .. THE GANT- PHASE 11-111 IMPROVEMENTS - PUD AMENDMENT PROPOSED CONDITION THE GANT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION DESIGNWORKSHOP .....Im li.........il. Landscape Architecture â€¢ Land Planning â€¢ Urban Design â€¢ Tourism Planning 120 East Main Streetâ€¢Aspen, Colorado 81611 â€¢970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 0 10 20 40 1:20 DATE ........ Sct. 3000 90'Â·3 Uooo --- I-â€¢--,---~$9~13 WOOC LAND USE APPLICATION APPUCANT: Name: l)rL G AMA (.*> && 9 6-\ 4,0,- AssOC-.A.~.\ , 3. v. C Location: 6\0 u,)6-14 ts") 9-\- a.ee-t A.se. %/le 1 1 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: A,Â» O.L.6 -m Q 4 v4 vl 4 9<-f:-O . l, e-i Address: le C No,LA~ v-,4 9>rit.1 2* Lo"l ks~- 9/6 0, Phone #: Cl 3-0 -- c LIT PROJECT: Name: vvio \Li CA-4 062\, CL-e--\ 9---v. \. Address: G 4 0 .va--vt Q - 9 5 4...ia Arwo- 9/6 9 Phone #: 4 3 0,Â· 60 -? e TYPE OFAPPLICATION: (please check all that apply): D Conditional Use D Conceptual PUD- U Conceptual Historic Devt. Special Review Â® Final PUD (&#iJD Amendme@ U Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal E Conceptual SPA U Minor Historic Devt. GMQS Allotment ~1 Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) U Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption U Subdivision ~ Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream U Subdivision Exemption (includes j Small Lodge Conversioni Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane Lot Split 1 Temporary Use 1 Other: Lot Line Adjustment U Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDmONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Â«Â£ 44 rl Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ 6 6 0 E Pre-Application Conference Summary [2~Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement I3~Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form 8 Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD U El 00000 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Pavment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and ~ A#4-4c do J*.4, 4 . C..- ks,sce L.# 1FLD.. , Flo . (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 6 6 L which is for 3 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be inade within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure- to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued 1 0 4 until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN By: 7 %Â¢f Chris Bendon j V Community Development Director Date: 1 / \ 2~-6-5 Billing Address and Telephone Number: Reauired ilic &83 ) N1.Hy Lti' 62 IC O - Vk' 6 C D Uc J t S.. 0 6.\Â£.eA g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc ~i- C._-( <al 16 / / 11/30/04 1 70 - tel e RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD 11 4 'lilli 1 1 11 10.1-#11.11,11.-1 11 1, 1 1 2 111"1 Ble Edit Record Navigate Fgrm Reports Format Tab tielp - Module Help , vvy -'m-yky,w-Â»%4444â€ž~ UN 4% lt.J . .g /: 9 * 4 -3 , Clef Â®1 . Conditions 1 Sub permits :1 Yaluation 1 Pubac Comment 1 Attachments Main i Routing Status ] Arch/Eng i Parcels ! Custom Fields } Fees } Fee Summary i Actions ~ Routing Mistofy 1 Permit Type {astu J :pen Land U Le 2004 Permit # 10058.2005.ASLU :A | Address t610 WWESTEND ST g} Apt/Suite ~ Citg IASPEN state lEd-3 Zip (81611 .0 1 Pemit infoimation - -V=~~LL 'A - -% - i r-9222<kâ„¢::22.Â·x.k<kk.>Â«.u~,I i Master Permit :~ â‚¬~ Routing Queue las'u Applied ~07/14/2005 21 1 Proiect 1 i S tatus [pend,Ag Approved ~ i DeSCfiption ~PUD AME MOMENT Issued 1 Final i i Submitted ALAN RICHMAN 9201125 Clock J Running Days f-1 Expires 107/09/2006 ~ F Visible on the web? Permit ID: ~ 35014 Owner - Last Name |GANT CONDO ASSOCIAT Â£| Ficst Name 1 ]610 S WEST END ST ~ASPEN CO 81611 Phone ~{970} 925 500 V ~ Enter the permit type code V:ew Record 1 of 1 1 ~~I9709205439 07/14/2005 01:37PM Page 1 of 1 Â¥Â§ Dr. Sandra P. Williamson 'Â·"Â·' 23 a= r-3 1. 1 CL L 1 H 0-ve c ,-~> tjin- PAB<Locl 31- c#a 68- '-to 1 0..le_ c-Gl i. Cr& i-1-FL t LL'Â·C- LAJ~trtÂ· Obri_ C Y- 11 91) , C)#C ;lhQ'-Aftrâ‚¬. Clav-0- -tli.c - ha-Q. i 6.0-024. i i-3 6,1-00,-j=(. Â·,Â£ C dfu.<1.'.t~-11&-le- C,2--D Lt.'rebL,Â¥&9~ LL -42-Lill. t- 07, 65k.'0 -~trti.F~N-|6) LI-~-~-~-" 6.20-tb r~1(317&1 (3Â¥- E):i-Q-Â¢Jr<Z_ /--I 1 - LE> - L- . L.Ir-,4- U CL. A-,t 0- C -4 1>~ J-1.52_Â£-. "Rapid Weight Loss ... Increased Energy...Without Ephedra?" Natural supplement featured by ABC News and Woman's World Eliminate Unwanted Fat, without Diet or Exercise? Slimagain Inc . the foremost authority and cloned by many companies in advanced weight loss product 'Â·'412' using radio and TV ads to sell development has just introduced their '94 . similar products. Fat Absorber. latest technological breakthrough with 11;1 11 chitosan plus, works very simply. the release of the Slimagain Plus The foods you eat weight management system. r. 11.1.. have fat in them. By taking Fat Slimagain Plus combines their two Absorber. chitosan plus, right latest breakthrough products with Fat ...1 1111.1.:01~1111'-IM'.1 t: before meals, you can eat what you Burner calcium pyruvate and chitosan Â£ ...'' I' Â·Â·~:4 .2 want and let Fat Absorber do its plus the ingenious patented fiber Sam L. Goldstein job, which is to help bind up the fat complex product Fat Absorber, to Nutrition Editor in the foods. While working like a create the Slimagain Plus weight Loss pyruvate as "The Fastest Fat sponge to fat, Fat Absorber does System. In fact Dateline NBC Burner" on its cover. Muscle and the hard work while your body featured a special segment on Fitness Magazine also published a burns the stored fat for energy. The pyruvate itself. with doctors and body building science article from combination of the pyruvate Fat athletic trainers backing the studies the Weider Research Group. The Burner and Fat Absorber make up done on pyruvate over the past few article stated, -According to the the Slimagain Inc. Slimagain Plus years. Datelines positive statements weight loss system, which latest research. pyruvate U reported w ere much anticipated by both to increase lean body mass and represents the safest, most logical retailers and consumers all natural products on the market decrease fat in normal people" Pyruvate in the words of Healthy and Slimagain Inc didn't stop there in today. Natural Journal is "perhaps the most their pursuit of the absolute ideal EDITOR'S NOTE: According to the promising weight loss supplement to weight loss system. With the company's web site you can saveup come along in years" With the addition of the Fat Absorber to 60% when you ordering on line clinical studies and the medical chitosan plus originally released by at doctors endorsing pyru'pate as a Slimagain Inc. in 1999 has been a www. slimagainplus.com weight loss aid is unmatched in the mainstav and a solid stand-alone market today. The worlds leading weight foss product over the past 5 body building publication, Weider's , 3 ears. It has been Fat Absorber. so Muscle and Fitness magazine hailed successful that it has been copied If you are not the intended recipient, please call 1-800-231-5702 or email us at calldancer@hotmail.com