HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.111 W Hyman Ave.1981-1
........
D
o
.1981 RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEtlENT PLAN SUBMISSION - PiOJECT PROFILE
1. Applicant: Edwin W. Baker
2; Project Name: Snare/Baker Duplex
3. Location: 111 West Hyman (Between First and Garmisdm Streets)
4. Parcel Size: 3,750 Square Feet
5. Current Zoning: R-MF
6. Existing Structures: Vacant lot; adjacent building at 113 West Hyman
will be the other ~ of the Duplex.
7. Development Program: A single family house has been built at 113 West
Hyman a~d an employee unit has been approved there as well. Applicant
proposes building a second free market unit and employee unit at 111 West
Hyman to match the-adjacent development.
.
8. Special Review ReQuirements~ Special Review for e.ployee unit and
employee parking, subdivision exception, rezoning for residential
bonus overlay.
9. Miscellaneous: While 50% of the units will be restricted as moderate
.
income employee housing, only 28.5t of the requested total floor area
of the proj~ct will be devoted to the employee unit, and only 25% of the
proposed bedrooms will be devoted to employee use.
o
()
. ,.
Aspen/Pit!dn ?ianning Office
130 south galen~
aspen, colorado
s t re c t
81611
February 18, 1981
t1r. Ed Baker
Oxford Associates
650 South Cherry Stl'eet, Penthouse
Denver, Colorado 80222
Dear Ed,
Your letter of February 9 to Sunny was passed along to me for a response.
I was particularly pleased that you decided to follow our suggestion to
redesign the 111 \'!est Hyman building to meet the 70:30 provisions of the Code.
For your infortllUtioil, I am attaching a copy of the most recent ordinance
passed by Council to amend the 70:30 procedure. As you I'lill note, it speaks
to 70 percent of the units being )'estl'icted to employee guidelines, rather
than 70 percent of the fl oor area. An amendment whi ch comes before Counci 1
for first read'ing on February 23 rroposes to allow rounding upwards for
70:30 projects, so that your proposal requesting two employee units and one
free market unit would be allowable vlhen this ordinance is adopted in the
near future.
You llill note that the only requirement you should follow is that at
least 50 percent of the residential floor area be devoted to deed restricted
units, a pl'ovision which you clearly exceed at the present time. The other
provision, suggesting deed )'estl'icted projects containing 1.5 to 2 bedrooms
per uni t generally applies to larger projects and should not concern you.
Fina'lly, in tel1TlS of al'ea and bulk requirements, you need at least 1200 square
feet of lot area per bedroom in the RMF zone district at an FAR of 1:1, vlhich
means that you are correct in showinCj no more than 3 one-bedroom units on
your 3750 square foot site. There is a parking requirement in all residential
zones of one space per bedroom, but you lIIay apply for a variance from the
requirclllent for your employee units. You should be m,are, hOl,ever, that such
variances al'e rarely granted in residential zones.
If we can provide you I~ith any additional assistance in the development
of your project, please do not hesitate to call on us. However, it appears
that your proposal as it presently stands would be acceptable at such time
. .
p
o
Mr. Ed Baker
February 18, 1981
Page TvlO
as Council amends the 70:30 ordinance to allOl'1 rounding up fOl' projects
such as yours.
Si ncere ly,
j~~~ LSL
A 1 an R'i chman
Assistant Planner
cc: Sunny Vann
Enc 1 osure
o 0
OXFORD ASSOCIATES
Penthouse
650 South Cherry Street
Denver, Colorado 80222
303/320-0600
February 9, 1981
Mr. Sonny Vann
City of Aspen/Pitken County
Planning Director
Ci ty Hall
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Sonny,
Needless to say, both Bill Snare and I were greatly disappointed
at the turn of events in the last few days, culminating with the
disapproval of the additional half duplex on Bill's property at
III W. Hyman. At least we were prepared for the shock by the
phone call from Alan Richman on Friday and our meetings with
both of you on Tuesday. Not to be deterred however, I have a
possible solution and want to know if I am correct in my
assumption before proceeding with our architect.
We propose to redesign the interior of the unit (not the exterior)
and make it into three one-bedroom units. The lower-level unit
would contain 1000 sq. ft. The mid-level unit would contain approxi-
mately 1400 sq. ft. and the upper unit would contain 1000 sq. ft.
It would be our intention that the two lower units would be deed
restricted to moderate income (or middle income) employee housing
units, and the upper unit would be a free market one bedroom unit.
If my calculations are correct, we would have approximately
3400 sq. ft. in the total project and of that only 1000 sq.ft. would
be free market, with 2400 sq.ft. being deed restricted moderate
to middle income employee housing. This would make the employee
housing portion slightly over 70%, and the free market portion
slightly more than 29%. If I understand the ordinances correctly,
with those portions we should be able to apply for an exemption
from growth management and perhaps be permitted to build it this
year.
After you have reviewed my calculations, please write me at the
earliest possible moment with the procedures for applying for an
exemption from growth management to build such a unit as described
above. While the redesign of the house would be relatively simple,
we don't wish to incur any more expense until we have a reasonable
expectation of being permitted to do the building this year.
Real Estate InvestmefllS and Development
...
o
o
Mr. Sonny Vann
February 9, 1981
Page Two
I appreciate all your efforts and can understand some of the
frustrations that you must suffer in your position. It must not
be an easy position to hold, but I hope you know your efforts
are appreciated. I look forward to your very early reply
so that we might make our decisions without delay.
Best regards,
q--..~.:.,-.........::...::::::i'~...~.
'~,"
Edwin W. Baker, Jr.
President
EWB/td
U'>
C
0:>
-i
C>
-i
)>
r
0:>
-.....J 0) U1
n
o
'"
3
'"
.., ()
() '"
~. -0
'"
~
U'>
C
-0
-0
o
..,
IT
"
..,
o
x
~.
3
~.
IT
'<
:x: '"
'" '"
:> ()
0. '<
~. ()
~
o
CD
V>
~.
<0
:>
."
CD
'"
IT
C
..,
CD
V>
"'" w
:>
<0
."
'"
()
~.
~
n 0:>
:y
~. ()
~'<
0. ()
()
'" '"
..,
CD "
'"
." IT
'" :y
() V>
o
N '-'
"0 "
o c
CT
~. ~
()
CD ()
" -i
.., ..,
o '"
IT :>
CD V>
() -0
IT 0
~. ..,
o IT
:> '"
IT
~.
o
:>
N .......... ....... ...... I-' ...... .......
0:>
~
IT
~.
CD
V>
IT
~.
CD
V>
N ...... C) ....... ...... ...... N
<0
N .......... ...... ...... ...... ...... N
'-'
"'"
NNNNNNN
'-'
C>
N ...... ...... ...... ...... N N
<0
N ...... .......... ...... ...... ...... N
0:>
NO.......... .......... .......... ...... N
a:>
U'>
o
()
~.
'"
~
."
'"
()
~.
~
IT
~.
CD
V>
'"
:>
0.
U'>
CD
..,
<
~.
()
CD
V>
U'>
C
0:>
-i
C>
-i
)>
r
'-'
0\
.....
0\ Ul
"'" W
~.
." U'>
-J. rt-
.., 0
CD ..,
3
"
.., 0
o ..,
IT '"
CD ~.
() :>
IT '"
~. <0
o CD
:>
N
U'>
~
ro
..,
U'>
CD
..,
<
()
CD
N W N NNW N
'-'
.....
I'Tl
:>
CD
..,
<0
'<
'" "
o '"
'" ..,
0. 7<'
V> ~.
:>
<0
o
CD
V>
<0
:>
N WNW N W N
'-'
0:>
N W NNW W W
N
'-'
w w w w w w w
'-'
0\
N W N N N <..oJ N
'-'
0:>
N W NNW W W
'-'
.....
N W W NNW N
o
'-'
:;:
'"
IT
'"
..,
U'>
CD
..,
<
~.
()
CD
)>
"
C
CT
~
~.
()
."
'"
()
~.
~
~.
IT
~.
CD
V>
'"
:>
0.
V>
CD
..,
<
~.
()
CD
V>
-u
""
N
<:
o
r'
:>
<0
iD
3
CT
CD
..,
V>
"
CD
..,
~
r
'"
CD
o
...,
,
G
'"
V>
3
~.
:>
CD
G
o
'"
::l
'"
o
<.0
CD
..,
::c
CD
~
IT
o
::l
'-'
N
~ .)
"'"
Ul
0\
.....
t
"
'"
C>
G
I'Tl
n
-i
V>
::l
'"
..,
CD
'-
0:>
'"
7<'
CD
..,
o
C
-0
CD
X
......
<.0
CO
......
'"
I'Tl
V>
......
o
I'Tl
Z
-i
......
" )>
r
""
G'l
N '"
C>
-l -0 :=:
:Po C) -l
r ...... :x:
r z
-< -i 3:
V> )>
V> z
:x: )> :P
I'Tl r G'l
I'Tl r I'Tl
-i C> 3:
n I'Tl
)> Z
-i -i
......
C> "
Z r
)>
Z
V>
C
0:>
:;::
......
V>
V>
......
C>
Z
0 0
,
fTl 0 n -0
-0 ~
"" ;0 <0
(D 'n fT1 0 Co
0 -; 3 N C. ~
-l ~ 0 -l W N ,~ U 1"11
C> c: < C> . ~ <: n ;0
-l V> ~, -l 0 0 -, ,,,
:to> V> :P 3: 3: r '< c> Ul
r -0 ~, r ~, 0 0 CO ~, ~
0 0 0.. 0.. :;: CO ~ 0
-0 ~, " -0 0.. CO <0 fT1
0 ~ 0 ~ -; ~ :r: Ul ~
~ rl' -h ~ CO '" ~ 0 ~ ~ -~
~ '"
==i V> 0 Z rl' () c: ~ ~
-; -l ~ CO 0 rn -; :r>
Ul Ul ~ 3 ~, 0- CO r
n c () ~ CO ::> CO
::> n 0 ::> <0 -; G>
)::.- ~, :P 3 () rn ;0
-l .0 -l CO 0 0
fT1 c: fT1 3 ::::
G> CO G> CO -l
0 0 :r:
;0 ." ;0
~ ~, ~ Ul 3:
fT1 ::> fT1 c :P
Ul '" Ul CO ~ Z
::> -l CO :P
:P () :P 0 X G')
I ~, 1 -l fT1
fT1 ::> n :P :~
<0 r [.'J
-l
-l
:P
r
r
-<
N ~ Ul
N :r:
<0 0 0 CO tn tn ~ fT1
fT1
-l
-0
'"
Itn ~ <0
W W CO
0 0 0 0 tn N N
I
w w f
N 0 0 N tn tn W
+> +> f
CO CO 0 0 tn tn +>
w w ~
~ 0 0 ~ tn tn tn
W '-', ~
CO '" 0 N tn tn '"
W W ~
W W 0 0 tn tn "
:P
w <:
w N fT1
+> $:
.' 0
+> G>
z fT1
0
-l
fT1
() 3 0
'" CO 0
rl' ~CO
CO ci'rn
<0
0 O~
-; -h0
~, ci'
CO +>
rn tn 3
CO
:P '0 CO
I Oci'
n~,
~ -;
ci'CO
rn.o
c:
............
~ -;
CO
I
.'
111 WEST HYMAN STREET,
ASPEN, COLORADO
GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION
FOR 1981 CONSTRUCTION
I
r
I
I
I
SUBMITTED BY: EDWIN W. BAKER, JR.
650 South Cherry Street~Suite 1400
Denver, Colorado 80222
(303) 320-0600
(Agent for William D. Snare)
I
I
.
.
,
'--'..J.-
December 4, 1980
,
.
TO: Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION
I. 'Location: Lot G and East 1/3 Lot F, Block 61
City of Aspen; Also to be
III West Hyman Street
II. Proposal:
This proposal 'is being submitted on behalf of William D.
Snare, who has just completed a single family house with
approval under a subdivision exemption at 113 West Hyman.
We are proposing to duplex that house by adding an identical
unit to the east side of the house. This application was
submitted in 19BO but had to be rejected because with the
two employee units the property would have exceeded
permitted density on the R/MF lot. Since that time, the
Employee Housing Bonus Overlay was passed for this zone
district permitting the density. If approval is obtained,
we would also ask for Employee Housing Bonus Overlay
Re-zoning to complete one controlled one bedroom employee
unit in the garden level of the new unit. Approval has been
obtained for re-zoning of 113 W. Hyman for construction of a
similar employee unit.
III. Description of Development:
A. A 6" cast iron Aspen City water main is located in the
street, directly in front of the proposed duplex with
sufficient capacity to serve all of the proposed develop-
ment, including the employee units if approved. The
estimated daily demand for the one-half duplex and
employee unit would be 180 gallons.
B. A City of Aspen sanitary sewer main is located in' the
alley directly behind the proposed site with sufficient
capacity to serve the proposed unit. The estimated
sewer demand for the one-half duplex and potential
employee unit would be approximately 180 gallons per day.
C. Surface water will be drained to the street where suffi-
cient storm drainage exists to accommodate such run-off.
D. City fire protection exists at the site with the nearest
fire hydrant approximately 100 feet from the unit. The
Aspen fire station is approximately six blocks from the
site.
E. The total development area is 3,750 square feet (one-half
of the existing house site of 7,500 square feet.) The
one-half duplex would be two stories with garden level
basement, consisting of approximately 2,000 square feet
of living space on the upper two floors, including
three bedrooms, three full baths, living room, dining room,
kitchen, wet bar and utility room. There will be an
attached, enclosed, one car garage. The garden level
basement will include approximately 800 square feet of
living space with one-bedroom, bath, kitchen~ living
room/dining room and storage space. An owners lock'
storage closet'is also located in the basement. The
upper unit would be fr'ee market and the lower unit
controlled employee housing for one or two persons. The
sale or rental would be at or below the permitted level
under the City of Aspen moderate rent guidelines. The
nearest elementary school is approximately three blocks,
while the middle school and high school are approximately
three miles west. School buses run on Main Street, two
blocks north.
F. It is estimated that no more than two cars will be permitted
in conjunction with the one-half duplex and one car
for the employee unit, resulting in no more than three
carsuof additional traffic somewhat regularly. Casual
traffic'of tw~ to three cars caused by guest visits will
also result. Hyman Street and all intersecting streets
are paved and include curbs and gutters. All 'are in
excellent condition; having been recently seal'coated.
On-site parking for at least four cars will be provided
for the two units (one per bedroom.) Off-site parking is on
adjacent streets. Buses pass in front of the property ,
with stops on each corner. Additional routes are on Main
Street two blocks north. Proximity to town (3 blocks),
availability of buses and good roads for bicycles
provide an excellent disincentive to automobile use. As
mentioned, autos on premises will be restricted by lease
provision to the number of spaces required by ordinance.
G. Parks are located one block away at Main and Garmisch
(paepke) with' Wagner Park only two blocks east. The
hospital is three miles west, while the airport is five
miles wept. We do not foresee a significant impact
'on public transportation caused by this development.
H. The police department is located six blocks east, with
the response time less than five minutes. The proposed
development should not require any additional police
department personnel;
. "
I
I
I
I'
-3-
1.
Retail and commercial activities in the central business
district are three blocks east. The development impact
would assist, but,not significantly burden, existing
establishments. It is anticipated that no more than six
to eight persons would occupy both units at any time '
(one to two in the employee unit, four to six in the
one-half duplex.)
J.
There would be little impact on adjacent properties.
Where one house and one employee unit existed, one
additional free market unit and one additional employee
units would be built with off street parking provided
in compliance with City Ordinances. There is a duplex'
recently completed at 117-119 West Hyman, adjacent to
this proposed duplex, which represented Phase I of this
project. This proposal would be the final phase of the
development which would be comprised of four free market
units in .the two duplexes plus four controlled one-
bedroom employee units. On the west end of the block
is a pre-existing duplex across from the Cottonwoods
and Townhouse West. On the east end of the block
adjacent to the proposed unit a new duplex is under
construction on two lots. Across the alley is a lodge
(The Fireside Lodge) and another condominium/office
combination.
K.
If approved, construction would commence by May 1, with
completion anticipated by November 1, 1981. There would
be no phasing as this would represent the final phase
of the development.
As stated above, these units would complete,development
of the site. It will also assist in solving Aspen's
critical housing shortage for employees by developing
one housing unit for each free market unit. In order to
provide the rent/sale restricted employee unit in the
lower level, approval should be granted subject to
re-zoning the property to employee housing bonus overlay
which will be diligently pursued.
~. d)/7A'f"
~Bake~ '
EWB/bh