The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.sr.Aspen Grove.A4384 - .. ~l LJ '1 , . ~CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspeh ~ PROJECT NAME: Ii,:; P!"'" J:.1M1J..l.:-:g r d.'f () eM l'+urrc - APPLICANT: ~/Yo. ~ QMilrJ/J1..L<J REPRESENTATIVE: firJrC/ IkJP,tlCUYlI-L c/o rko/Y()A0 TYPE OF APPLICATION: I, GMP/SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) 1, Conpeptual Submission Preliminary Plat Final Plat 2, 3. II. SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) 1, ...' Conceptual Submission 2. Preliminary Plat 3. . Final Plat III. EXCEPTION/EXEMPTION/REZONING (2 step) IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) 1. Special Review 2. Use Determination 3. Conditional Use 4.. Other: i~ l ., STAFF: Phone: Phone: cr RS' 2%(" '1 (F'EE) ($2,730.00) ($'1,640.00) ($ 820.00) ($1,900.00) ($1,220.00) ($ 820.00) ($1,490.00) ($ 680.00) I P&Z MEETING DATE: '3"<a - 'd-':l.. CCMEETING DATE: DATE REFERRED: !zJrz/N r REFERRALS: vl'City Attorney ~City Engineer ____Housing Director ~sPen Water Dept, ____City Electric Environmental Hlth. ____Fire Chief ..:..-Aspen Consolo ____Mountain Bell S.D. ____Parks Dept, ____Holy Cross Electric Fire Marshall FINA~OUTING: /City Attorney %hei: -e vKs ~ Engineer ____Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:-I!Jhu..1; ~ ----?chool District _____Rocky Mtn, Natural Gas ____State Hwy Dept. (Glenwood) State Hwy Dept. (Grd. Jctn) VBuilding Dept. ~e"':,\ I Other: DATE ROUTED: ~ding Dept. .. ,-.. r-. . DISPOSITION: \}I 0.-0 C\ CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: Ordinance No, CITY P&Z REVIEW, CITY COUNCIL REVIEW, Ordinance No. CITYP&Z REVIEW, CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: Ordinance No. I ~ , MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: DATE: Aspen Gr-ove 13ui lding Adel.i t.ion -. Sp",c ial R",v i",w Febr-uar-y 19, 1985 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- LOCATION: 517 E. Coopel" ZONING: CC APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Th", applicant is r-equesting a an addition of 286 Sq_ ft. of Bui.ld.i.ng. GMP exemption Pf~l" Sect1.on 24....1..1.2(h) for- commer-cial spaCt~ at. th,? Asp",n Gr-OV(i' PLANNING OFFICE REVIEW: The space to be added will cover- what is now pinocchio's outdoor- dining ar-ea. Th", plan is to conver-t the space to r-et.ail fr-om r-estau- I"ant: use_ Section 24--1.1..2(h) <:d.lows fOI" expansions up t.o 500 sq. fL by Special R",vi",w of t.h", Planning and Zoning Commission. The sect.ion stat.es that "th", I-eview of any I"equest. for- t.he expans.i.on of an exist.ing commer-cial or- office use shall include a deter-minat.ion of minimal or manageable impact on the community, consider-ing, but not. limit.ed to, findings that a minimal number- of additional em- ployees will be generated by the expansion or- t.he applicant will pr-ovide addit1.onal ",mployee housing; that a minimal amount. of addit.ion~d. pal-king demand will b~~ cl"eat.ed or- t.hat pal"king can be accommodated on sit.e; t.hat. ther-e will b", a minimal visual impact on the neighbor-hood due t.o t.he pr-oject.; and t.hat. minimal nE'W demand is placed on ser-v.i.cl?S available at. thl? si t.l~ such as wat."'I", sewer, r-oads, dl"ainag~) and f1. t'e pl"ot.ection" " This pr-oper-ty is subj(,!ct t.o r-eview by t.he Historic Pn?serv<,t.ion Commit.t.ee (which was star-ted on Febr-uary 12) and is in a viewplane. The Engineet" ing Depar- tment madl~ compn?hensi ve commen ts concer-n inq i t5 compliance wit.h zoning r-egulations. These ar-e specifically: "cc zoning dict.ates t.hat then~ be :2.5% open space per' building si t.e. Should t.h,~ pr-oposed 2B6 squal"e fl~et be add.~d to t.he exist.ing 10,068 squar-e feet, the building will have a total footprint ar-ea of 1.0,354 square feet.. This is exact.ly 7.5% of the t.otal land par-cel of 1.3,806 squar-e feet_ Ther-e can be a 1..5:1 floor- area r-atio in th1.s zone (since no ~ .- employee housing is provided) which, in this case, allows a building of 20,708 square feet. With the proposed addition, the total floor area will be 20,132 square feet, 576 square feet less than the allowable." Bill Drueding of the Building Department points out that entrance canopies have been added OV~1r" the t.wo fr"ont entrances_ These canopies should be count.ed in floot" ar"e calculations but were not shown on thE' plans" The canopies are 6 feet by.'5 feet. for" a total of 60 square feet (2 canopies). The building is still wit.hin the allowable FAR. Since these two additions were allowed by t.he Building Department wit.hout. P&Z review, due to their being under 250 square feet, we should add them t.o t.he 286 square feet request~1d herein in any calculation of t.he cumulat.i ve add.i t.ion to thf~ building (not t.o exceed 500 square feet, as per sect.ion 24-11.2(h)). The int.ent.ion of t.he use of the addit.ional space is for ret.ail area and conver"sion of the SPi.~ce now occupied by Pinocchio's Rest.aurant. .into ret.ail spaces. Less employees should r"f~sul t from t.his conver"- sion, since rest.aurant.s requir"e considerably more employees than t"et.ail stores. The Engineering Depar"tment not.es that. this conven3ion will also lessen the demand on water and sewer" ser"vices and reduce t.he amount. of t.r"ash gener"ated. Parking demand should also be decreased. In terms of visual impact., t.he addit.ion is 12 feet high and set. back approximat.ely 10.5 feet fr"om t.he sidewalk. The maximum height. allowed by t.he viewplane is about 15 feet.. The court.yard is present.ly a very at.tr'act.ive open space element. on t.his block of Cooper Avenue. The area to be enclosed is paved and is utilized for out.door dining. The design fot" t.he addition wil.l. utilize identical ar"chi t.ect.ural mater-' ials. The building has very clean lines and t.his addition will ext.end .1.0 feet. along Cooper" Avenue wi t.h t.he same elements of design.. We have r"eviewed t.he original GMP submission for the Aspen Grove Bui..lding fr'om 1977 and find no conflict.s wit.h commit.ment.s made. In fact., t.he required open space amount.s are exactly adhered to in t.his appl..i.cat.ion. The expansion of t.he building will result. in t.he loss of one spruce t.ree in t.he court.yard_ The spruce t.ree to be eliminat.ed is quite lar"ge (about. a 12" ca.l.iper" t.ree) and ,11m Hol.l.and was asked t.o repor"t. on its transplant. potential_ The t.ree has been t.ransplat.ed once, which i.n Jim Holland's opinion wi.l.l probably enhance it.s crlances for survivaL He likes the tr'ee in its present location, but says that t.her"e is an empt.y tr-ee well .in fr"ont. of Pablo's t.o which .it. can bf~ reloci.'t.ed. Holland also comm.?nted that he fel t. encouragim~ pedest.r ian flow,and the addit.ion of seat.ing t.o t.he cow"t.yar"d WElr" good concept.s. The Planning Office agrees wit.h his comment.s. PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office feels that. the request. has minimal growt.h impact.s 2 ,~ ."-" and that Special Heview appr-oval be g.iven for' a 13MP exemption for the 286 sQUar,1 fe~?t commercial addi t.i.on <.1S proPos~1d, provided t.hat the landscape plan is commi tted to and t.he spruce t.reE' is t.ransplanted at. the cost of t.he applicant.. Viswplane approval can also be given si.nce no viewplane lines are being violated by t.he proposed const.ruction. 3 "~";;~ .:'t~F ,,- ,'-' ,-, ..HAGMANYAWARCHIIECTS, lID. 7 February 1985 Ms. Colette Penne Plann.ing Department City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Aspen Grove Building Application for HPC Review & Approval Dear Colette : Aspen Grove Associates wishes to undertake renovations to the Aspen Grove Building on Cooper Street. They are proposing to build a smaHaddition of 286 s. f. and to minimally alter the existing west street elevation (atPinocchiols) and the rear central elevation at the courtyard (presently the Wienerstube). In conjunction with the remodel, a new landscape plan .is proposed to enhance the visual qualities of this urban space and encourage pedestrian flow in and around the courtyard. There is ample FAR and open" space with, which to do this. The changes are minor and in context with the existing' architecture using identical materials and configuration. In addition to being incompliance with visual criteria set forth by the City, (i.e. height, bulk; open space, set back and view plane criteria) the building addition itself will have immeasureable visual impact. Attached please find the architectural drawings in support of this submittal which delineate both the existing building and the proposed building addition with the minor elevation c;hanges. Please call our offices if you have any questions. We would appreci- ate being scheduh;!dt for review by the Historical Preservation Commission at the earliest available time. Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, 'It,hrit s, A~ ' LY:sv cc': Aspen enclosures Ltd Grove Associates 210 SOUTH GALENA serrE 24 ~ ~. . MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Holland FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office Aspen Grove Building Addition - Special Review February 5, 1985 RE: DATE: ======================================================================= Attached for your review is supplemental information which the planning Office received from Heidi Hofmann on behalf of Hagman Yaw's client Aspen GrOve Associate.s wi th respect to the Aspen Grove Building Addi tion. Please review this material and return your referral comments to this Office no later than Friday, February 8th. If you have a problem meeting this deadline, please give me a call. Thanks Jim. ~ ~ :.~;'~=0~~"ip '<':.::'://.>:<" ". I [,:;ill~r;;::~ _ HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD 4 February 1985 Ms. Collette Penne Planning Department City of Aspen 310 South Galena Aspen, Colorado Re: Aspen Grove Building Application for GMP Exemption Dear Ms. Penne: On behalf of Birkwood Associates, owners of the Aspen Grove Building. we wish to submit an application for a proposed building addition of 286 sq. ft, of retail space for GMP exemption. Attached, please find architectural and landscape drawings in support of our application which delineate both the existing building and the proposed building addition. A recent survey completed by Survey Engineers, Inc" Aspen, .indicates that the existing building footprint occupies an area of 10, 068 sq, ft, on a total land parcel area .of 13,80.6 square feet, Relative to the 25% open space requirement of approximately 3,451. 5 sq. ft" the requested additional building coverage of 286 sq. ft. would be permitted, leaving an open space requirement as prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance. We have attached a copy of the Survey .Engineer docuemnts for your review. The approximate allowable FAR undercurrent zoning permits a building area of 20,709 square feet, The existing building square. footage, calculated in compliance with FAR measurement criteria, is 19,846 sq. ft, The approximate maximum allowable increase would be 863 sq. ft, Thus with the inclusion of this proposed expansion of 286 sq. ft. the total building area would be less than the allowable FAR. Building d.evelopment on the Aspen Grove parcel is further controlled by a view plane corridor, The. proposed one story building addition which is 12 feet high and located approximately 14.5 feet back from the sidewalk property line on Cooper Street falls under the vertical limits imposed by the view plane corridor and is thus in cornpliance.withthe visual standards set forth by the city, See attached Survey Engineer documents. The Space in the existing building fronting .on Cooper Street is currently occupied by restaurant use (Pinocchiols}. Along with. the proposed addition, the Pinocchio's space would be converted to retail use as permitted by the zoning ordinance. 210 SOUTH GALENA SUITE 24 ASPEN COLORADO 81611 303"925"'2867 ,- -, HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD Letter to Collette Penne 4 February 1985 Page Two Conversion of existing space to retail use, including the proposed addition will generate fewer employees than the existing restaurant use. Further, we do not anticipate that the 286 sq. ft. retail addition will generate an additional parking requirement. The impact on city services will not change and in the specific case of water and sewer, the gallon per minute requirement will be less than is required by the existing restaurant use. A new landscape plan is proposed to enhance the visual qualities of this urban space and encourage pedestrian flow in and around the courtyard. To support the existing architectural geometry, brick pavers will replace the hard surfaces and extend to the Cooper Street curb. The green ash that have been planted in front of the Les Chefs d'Aspen and Cattle Creek retail outlets will be continued, The landscaped green space at courtyard center will now emphasize the traditional and seasonal flower beds and the existing clumps of Aspen, Movable flower pots at the building edges add flexibility for retail entrances and impromptu courtyard activity. Another notable addition to this space is the removel of the existing fence barrier replaced with pedestrian seating. The building addition and new landscape plan will necessitateAhe removal and relocation of a clump of aspen at the southeast corner and the 30 feet :!: spruce next to the Pinocchio's space. The spruce tree, in addition to penetrating the view place, is a visual barrier to shopping activity and does not permit growth underneath. The owners propose to underwrite the tree relocation costs and donate the spruce (valued at $5,000) to the city, perhaps to be relocated one block away at the terminus of the Cooper Street Mall, This is the proposed location for the City Christmas tree that is designated in the "Lighting Improvement Plan for the Pedestrian Malls" and endorsed by City Council. I t is the opinion of local landscaper, Fred Braun, who originally moved the tree six years ago, that the tree stands a better chance of survival from relocation than another comparably sized tree that has never been transplanted. Maintenance of the tree would be the responsibility of the City. The pr!>posed building addition will only extend 10 feet along the Cooper Street frontage and will be designed using identical architectural materials and configuration as the existing building, as shown on the enclosed building addition plan and new landscaped courtyard and sidewal,k plan, r-. - HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, lTD Letter to Collette Penne q February 1985 Page Three In addition to being in compliance with visual criteria set forth by the City, (i.e, height, hulk, open space, set back and view plane criteria) the building addition itself will have immeasurable visual impact. The project construction would be initiated in April of 1985 and would be completed by June 1985. Please call our offices if you have any questions or wish amplification on any portion of this submission. We would appreciate being scheduled for special review by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the earliest available time, Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, Ha man Yaw Ar~ A, LY:lmt cc: Birkwood Associates enclosures ,~ . r""', REGISTERED IN COLO. Nio. <AEXICO AND UTAH .' . . . , - . GERARD H. PESMAN, P.E." L.S. . ASSOCIATED WITH SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. ELKS SLDG - 210 S. GALENA P.O. BOX 2506 ASPEN, COLO. 81611 PHONE 303-925-3816 JOHN TILLEY, ASSOC. May 2, 1984 ~(\v 'Mr. Walter Yurke Waro Huli Beach Hale 49 LipoaSt, #105 Kehi MauL Halvaii 96753' ~ Dear Mr. Burke, This letter is in regards to our recent tabulation of the net square footage of Lots D,E,F, the East 22.5 feet of Lot C and the West 25 feet of Lot G, Block 96, Original Aspen Townsite of Aspen. From an old survey (CIRCA 1978) the .total iquare footage of the combined lots is approximately 13,806 square feet, the building occupies approximately 10,06& square feet of said lots, leavin'g a net square footage of. approximately 3738 square feet, which with 25% open space leaves 286 square feet to develop. We cannot certify to exact square footage without an' up to date survey, Most of the'city monuments have been '~ug up or destroyed due to Mall construction and general development. Block 96 was long when we first surveyed it in 1975, but ~he field evidence of monumentation coul~,ghange some dimensions as of this date. . Sincerely, /7__ '/~' . JlQJA,/t1:Jl JC'I .~ Gerard Pesman ~opy to Frank vloods . to Hagman & Yaw I> . '. . / ';' , ' ~' .' -..-,1 ,-: . . Ai :~:i'~,;t;2<: . ' . "...l...,;~:l,"..~,:':' C' ..J....'.Y.lir.':tl",'tr.,...:i:,;:.,; :" ., 't~~"t~.~.'~::':;~~;:'::.: '''',' '.:.' " <."-- . "'I... .'. . . . ,:-'~. 'n~: ", . ,- . .' ,.,l, :.. " ;", . .....". ,....-. 1""',--, ':'i;~~p c:,',:::'-",. HAGMAN YAWARCHITKTS,rm, 10 December 1984 Ms. Collette Penne Planning Department City of Aspen 310 South Galena Aspen, Colorado Re: Aspen Grove Building Application for GMP Exemption Dear Ms. Penne:: On behalf of Birkwood Associates,. .owners of the Aspen Grove Building, \Ve wish to submit an application for a proposed building addition of 286sq, ft. of retail space for GMPexemption, Attached, please find architectural drawings in support of our appllc/ltion which delineate both the existing building and the proposed building adc:lition. A recent survey cOmpleted by Survey Engineers, Inc., Aspen, inc:licates that the existing building footprint occupies /In area of 10,068 sq. ft. on a total land parcel area of 13,806 square feet. Relative to the 25% open space requirement of approximately3,451..s sq. ft., the requested additional building coverage of 286 sq. ft. would be permittec:l, leaving an open space requirement as prescribec:lby the Zoning Ordinance. We have attached a copy of the Survey Engineer documents for your review. The approximate allowa.ble FAR under current zoning permits a building area of 20,709 square feet. The existing building square footage, calculated in compliance with FAR measurement cirteria, is 19,846 sq. ft. The approximate maximum allowable increase would be 863 sq. ft. Thus with the inclusion of this proposed expansion of 286 sq. ft. the total building area .would be less than the allowable FAR. Building development on the Aspen Grove parcel is further controlled by a view plane corridor. The proposed one story builc:lingaddition which is 12 feet high an.d located apprOXimately 10.5 feet back from the sidewalk property line on Cooper Street falls under the vertical limits imposed by the vIew plane corridor and is thus in compliance with the visual standards set fo"rth by the city. See attached Survye Engineer documents. The space in the existing building fronting on Cooper Street is currently occupied by restaurant use (Pinocchio'sl. Along with the proposed addition the Pinocchio's space would be converted to retail use as permitted by the zoning ordinance. 2")OSOUTHGNb"1/\ SUiTE 24 t\~:pfN COLORADO 810"11 303"925"'2867 ,--. .~ HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD Letter to Collette Penne 10 December 1984 Page Two Conversion of existing space to retail use, including the proposed addition will generate fewer employees than the existing restaurant use. Further, we do not anticipate that the 286 sq. ft. retail addition will generate an additional parking requirement. The impact on city services will not change and in the specific case of water and sewer, the gallon per minute requirement will be less than is required by the existing restaurant use. The proposed building addition will only extend 10 feet along the Cooper Street frontage and will be designed using identical architectural materials and configuration as the existing building. As shown on the enclosed building addition plan, the landscaped (soft) surfaces will be increased in area over that which currently exists. In addition to being in compliance with visual criteria set forth by the City, (i.e. height, bulk, open space, set back and view plane criteria) the building addition will; in and of itself; have immeasurable visual impact. The building addition will necessitate the removal of one existing spruce tree, The owners propose to donate the tree to the City, perhaps to be relocated one block away at the terminus of the Cooper Street Mall where the city (lighting plan) plans the location of such a tree. The appraised value of the tree is approximately $5,000,00. Relocation and related expenses would be the responsibility of the city. The project construction would be initiated in April of 1985 and would be completed by June 1985, Please call our offices if you have any questions or wish amplification on any portion of this submission, We would appreciate being scheduled for special review by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the earliest available time. Thank you for your assistance, H Ltd LY:lt cc; enclosures f"""'. -. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Aspen Grove Building Addition - Special Review DATE: January 22, 1985 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- LOCATION: 517 E. Cooper ZONING: CC APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a an addition of 286 sq, ft. of Building. GMP exemption per Section 24-l1,2(h) for commercial space at the Aspen Grove PLANNING OFFICE REVIEW: The space to be added will cover what is now Pinocchio's outdoor dining area. The plan is to convert the space to retail from restau- rant use, Section 24-1l,2(h) allows for expansions up to 500 sq, ft, by Special Review of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Section states that "the review of any request for the expansion of an existing commercial or office use shall include a determination of minimal or manageable impact on the community, considering, but not limited to, findings that a minimal number of additional em- ployees will be generated by the expansion or the applicant will provide additional employee housing; that a minimal amount of additional parking demand will be created or that parking can be accommodated on site; that there will be a minimal visual impact on the neighborhood due to the project; and that minimal new demand is placed on services available at the site such as water, sewer, roads, drainage and fire protection." This property Committee and comprehensive tions. These is subject to review is in a viewplane. The comments concerning its are specifically: by the Historic Preservation Engineering Department made compliance with zoning regula- "CC zoning dictates that there be 25% open space per building site. Should the proposed 286 square feet be added to the existing 10,068 square feet, the building will have a total footprint area of 10,354 square feet. This is exactly 75% of the total land parcel of 13,806 square feet, "......, r-,.. There can be a 1.5:1 floor area ratio in this zone (since no employee housing is provided) which, in this case, allows a building of 20,708 square feet. With the proposed addition, the total floor area will be 20,132 square feet, 576 square feet less than the allowable." Bill Drueding of the Building Department points out that entrance canopies have been added over the two front entrances. These canopies should be counted in floor are calculations but were not shown on the plans. The canopies are 6 feet by 5 feet for a total of 60 square feet (2 canopies). The building is still within the allowable FAR. Since these two additions were allowed by the Building Department without P&Z review, due to their being under 250 square feet, we should add them to the 286 square feet requested herein in any calculation of the cumulative addition to the building (not to exceed 500 square feet, as per Section 24-11.2(h)), The intention of the use of the additional space is for retail area and conversion of the space now occupied by Pinocchio's Restaurant into retail spaces. Less employees should result from this conver- sion, since restaurants require considerably more employees than retail stores. The Engineering Department notes that this conversion will also lessen the demand on water and sewer services and reduce the amount of trash generated. Parking demand should also be decreased. In terms of visual impact, the addition is 12 feet high and set back approximately 10.5 feet from the sidewalk. The maximum height allowed by the viewplane is about 15 feet. The courtyard is presently a very attractive open space element on this block of Cooper Avenue. The area to be enclosed is paved and is utilized for outdoor dining, The design for the addition will utilize identical architectural mater- ials, The building has very clean lines and this addition will extend 10 feet along Cooper Avenue with the same elements of design, The expansion of the building will result in the loss of one spruce tree in the courtyard, The spruce tree to be eliminated is quite large (about 12" caliber) tree and Jim Holland has been asked to report on its transplant potential. From a conversation with Jim, we understand that moving the tree will likely threaten its existence and will cost about $2000. This cost would have to be borne by the applicant. Guarantees should also be provided that if the tree dies after it is moved, it will be replaced by the applicant. We understand the desire on the part of the applicant to add pedes- trian access all around the courtyard, however, a specific landscaping plan should be presented and committed to, It is possible, in our opinion, that a plan which makes a quality green space that is more accessible to use by the public than the present courtyard is, may offset the loss of the tree in this location. However, at this time we have seen no such plan and have no basis to compare the proposal to the original commitments made in the GMP application for this build- 2 t!"'"\ .~. CIT ree t 611 MEMORANDUM TO: COLETTE PENNE, Planning BILL NESS, Parks superintendent~,~. JANUARY 22, 1985 REQUEST TO REMOVE WIENERSTUBESPRUCE FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: The tree in question is a 12" caliper, 30 ft. spruce. The cost of moving this tree will be very high (z $3,000). The chance of the tree surviving the move will be very low, so we at the Parks Dept. are not interested in the donation of the tree. We are interested in seeing that this tree continues to exist, it being a very prominent landscape feature in that block. We recommend not to move the tree, but to redesign the building around the tree with no excavation within 3 ft. of its drip-line. If this is not acceptable and the tree is removed, we think it's only fair that the City receive two 6" B&B nursery spruce for City Open Space for the loss. Thanks. ^ MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Officer w.f FROM: Bill Drueding, Zoning Enforcement DATE: January 7, 1985 RE: Aspen Grove Bldg - GMP Exemption ~ In caculating the building F.A.R., did the applicant count the two new permanent canopies located over two front entrances. These do not show on the plans submitted. These canopies received a building permit in April, 1983, as well as a subsequent encroachment license and I would count them in F.A.R. calculations. BD/ar ~ r-, ,'- MENORANDUl! To: Richard Grice ~ Prom: Elyse Elliott Date: December 19, 1984 Re: Aspen Grove Building Addition Special Review ~====~=~======================~=======~========================= Upon reviewing the application and making a site inspection, the Engineering Department has these comments: The Aspen Grove Building is zoned CC ',lith a Viel'i Plane Overlay. CC zoning dictates that there be 25% open space per building site. Should the proposed 286 square feet be added to the existing 10 r 068 square feet., the building ~dll have a total footprint area of 10,354 square feet, This is exactly 75% of the total land parcel of 13,806 square feet, There can be a 1:1 floor area ratio in this zone which, in this case, allows a building of 20,708 square feet. With the proposed addition, the total floor area will be 20,.132 square feet, 576 , square feet less than the allowable. X o(~'::t (!1j (fi:;~~he building height is controlled by the Cooper Avenue View IJ/<<,:';!:Plane. The proposed addition is 12 feet high and is set back ~':,;~' ....c a.pproximately 10,5 feet from the sidewalk. This is about 3 feet less than the maximum height permitted in this View Plane. , .' The addition ~Iill be part of the space presently occupied by Pinnocchio's restaura.nt. The space will then be converted from restaurant use to retail use, This conversion will lessen the demand on water and sewer services and reduce the amount of trash generated. It 'Hill also decrease the number of employees and Hill not impact the parking, For these reasons, we see no problem with this Special ReviEW application. 1"""\ ~ MEMORANDUM TO: City Attorney Ci ty Engineer Building Dept. - Zoning Enforcement Officer FROI1: Richard Grice, Planning Office Aspen Grove Building Addition Special Review December 11, 1984 RE: DATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Attached for your review is an application submitted by Heidi Hoffmann of Hagman/Yaw Archi tects on behalf of their client Birkwood Associates, Associates, The applicant is requesting the addition of 286 sq, ft. to the Aspen Grove Building which is located at 517 E. Cooper. Apparently, Pinocchio's is vacating the building and the space is being remodeled for a new tenant. Please review this material and return your comments to the Planning Office no later than January 8, 1985, in order for this office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z on January 22nd. Thank you. HAGMAN YAW ARCHITEC;"""\ L TD 210 S. Galena Suite 24 ' ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 [L,[~uu[~@[f ll'OO~~~!rnOll'll'~(L (303) 925-2867 OATj;: fJOB NO, 7 December 1984 ATTENTION Collette Penne RE; As"..n Grnv" R..;J,.I'nN TO Aspen/Pitkin Plannin~ Office 310 South Gal..na A~r",n. rnln"'ldo 81611 WE ARE SENDING YOU Yc Attached 0 Under separate cover via the following items: o Shop drawings o Copy of letter o Prints o Change order o Plans o o Samples o Specifications COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION . 6 12-7-84 ASDen Grove Buildino GMP Annl' 6 12-7-114 c;it"/R, .. . PI;>n ;>nrl .... ..:_- 2 1-3-78 . Survev 2 Cooper Street View Plane 2 12-3-84 Transamerica Title Insurance Comnanv. Memorandum of Ownershio Check for S680.00 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: o For approval o For your use o As requested o For review and comment o FOR BIDS DUE o Approved as submitted o Approved as noted o Retu rned for corrections o o Resubmit_copies for approval o Submit_copies for distribution o Return_corrected prints 19 o PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS SIGNED: ,df2A.{;/J.." 121. ~ Heidi H. Hoffman~ . .. VO' c COPY TO PRODUCT24Q.3/NmDJtnc.,6rlitOII.Mass.OI471. If enclosures .re not as noted, kindly notify us at once. , MEMORANDUM OF OWNERSHIP ACCOM1\IODATION - NO LIABILITY Please d.irect correspondence to: r Aspen/pitkin Planning Office 130 S, Galena Aspen, Co 81611 cc: Hagman-Yaw Architects Ltd, L 210 S. Galena Aspen, Co 81611 Description: ., 601 E, Hopkins ADDRess '. . Aspen, CITY Colo STATE 81611 ZIP conE ORDER NUMBER 8482-0 .J 'Ihe east 22,5 feet of Lot C, All of Lots D, E andF, and the west 25 feet of Lot G, Bra:K 96, City and TCMlSite of Aspen County of Pitkin, State of Colorado Grantee in last instrument apparently transferring ownership: ASPEN GROVE ASSOCIATES, a Partnership by deed rea:>rded Septenber 5, 19 75 in Book 302 at Page 458. This information is for your sole use and benefit and is furnished as an accommodation. The information has been taken from our tract indices, without reference to, or examination of, instruments which purport to affect the real property. The information is neither guaranteed nor eertined, and is not an Abstract of Title, Opinion of Title, nor a Guaranty of Title, and our liability is limited to the amount of the fees. Date: Decerrber 3, ,1984 ,at 8:00 A.M. TponsomllPlCo Trtllllnsuponcll Company By VINCENT J, HlGENS ddv J No. C-567