HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.516 E Hyman Ave.48A-88
"
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
city of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 9/7/88
DATE COMPLETE: ~\...,\';f-,(
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
2737-182-13-004 48A-88
STAFF MEMBER: c.,~
PROJECT NAME: 516 E. Hvman Avenue Commercial GMP & GMOS Exemption
project Address: 516 E. Hvman Avenue
Legal Address: Block 94. Lot 0
APPLICANT: SJA Associates c/o Steve Marcus
Applicant Address: P. O. Box 1709 Aspen. CO 81611
REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Weil. Bill Poss & Associates
Representative Address/Phone: 605 E. Main Street '25-4755
----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
PAID:
YES
NO
AMOUNT:
$2.090.00 . /
2 STEP: ~
HEARING~ NO
TYPE OF APPLICATION,,\ \ >1 /~ ST~:
P&Z Meeting Date i\~<f-q f' PUBLIC
~
VESTED RIGHTS:
YES
NO
CC Meeting Date
PUBLIC HEARING: YES
NO
VESTED RIGHTS:
YES
NO
Paid:
Date:
Planning Director Approval:
Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption:
REFERRALS :
UCity Attorney
\~ity Engineer
\----:/Housing Dir.
-- 1 ~pen Water
~ity Electric
Envir. Hlth.
~spen Consolo
S.D.
Mtn. Bell
Parks Dept.
HolY Cross
~re Marshall
Roaring Fork
v' Roaring Fork
Energy Center
School District
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
Building Inspector
Other
DATE REFERRED:
9/(Jb / /?g
INITIALS: El-
DATE ROUTED: )lT~=- ~;~;~~~7~=
FINAL ROUTING:
city Atty
Housing
city Engineer
Other:
Zoning
Env. Health
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
---
------
.......,.
'"
- ~
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 516 EAST HYMAN AVENUE COMMERCIAL GMP CONCEPTUAL
SUBMISSION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, November 22, 1988, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 P.M.,
before the Aspen Planning and zoning Commission, in the Second
Floor Meeting Room, city Hall, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, CO, to
consider and score an application submitted by Bill Poss &
Associates on behalf of SJA Associates requesting a 1571 square
foot GMQS Allotment, in order to construct a second floor on the
building at 516 East Hyman Avenue, Block 94, Lot o. The
applicant also requests special Review Approval to reduce Off-
street Parking Requirements and a GMQS Exemption for an on-site
400 square foot moderate income, deed restricted employee unit.
The property is in the Commercial Core Zone District.
For further information,
Office, 130 S. Galena Street,
5090.
contact the Aspen/pitkin Planning
Aspen, Colorado 81611, (303) 920-
sIC. Welton Anderson
Chairperson, Aspen Planning
and Zoning commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Published in The Aspen Times on October 27, 1988.
city of Aspen Account
,-
'~..,,,..",-
'-..,.-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
city Attorney ~
City Engineer ~
Housing Director ~J
Water Department
Electric Department
Aspen Consolidat~d Sanitation
Fire Marshall -../
Roaring Fork Energy Center
District
FROM:
cindy Houben, Planning Office
RE:
CC and C-1 Zone Districts GMQS Applications:
516 E. Hyman Avenue
309 E. Hopkins Avenue
DATE:
september 23, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review and comments are the
competing in the Commercial Competition
allotments in the CC and C-1 Zone Districts.
two applications
for development
516 E. Hyman Ave. has been submitted by Bill Poss & Associates on
behalf of SJA Associates and is requesting GMQS Allotment,
Special Review Approval to reduce Off-street Parking Requirements
and GMQS Exemption for a 400 square foot moderate income, deed
restricted employee unit.
309 E. Hopkins Ave. has been submitted by Charles Cunniffe &
Associates on behalf of John L. King and is requesting GMQS
Allotment, Special Review Approval to increase Dimensional
Requirements and reduce Off-street Parking Requirements,
Conditional Use Approval for one free-market residential unit and
GMQS Exemption for Accessory Uses in Mixed Use Development.
Please review this material and return your comments no later
than October 26, 1988 so that I have time to prepare a memo for
the P&Z.
Thank you.
...-""
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and Council
THRU:
Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager
Cindy Houben, Planning Office ~
FROM:
RE:
516 East Hyman GMQS Allotment and GMQS Exemption (for
an employee unit)
DATE:
February 13, 1989
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 22, 1988 the Planning Commission reviewed
the Commercial Growth Management allotment request by 516 East
Hyman. The Planning Commission scored the project above the
minimum threshold of 26. The project's score was 32.5. In
addition, the Planning commission approved two Special Review
requests to waive the Employee Dwelling Unit parking space and to
pay ca~h-in-lieu for the required commercial parking spaces
created by the project.
REQUEST:
allotment
Exemption
The applicant is requesting a Growth
for 1,571 square feet of commercial space
for one 400 square foot employee unit.
Management
and a GMQS
APPLICANT: SJA Associates
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Weil, Bill Poss & Associates
LOCATION: 516 East Hyman Avenue; Lot 1 Pitkin Center Subdivision
(See Attachment 1, Location Map.)
ZONING: Commercial Core (CC)
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
The applicants are requesting an additional 1,571 square feet
(1,125 sq. ft. of net leasable space) of commercial space to be
constructed as a second level to an existing structure. The
previous structure was demolished in July of this year and was
reconstructed with replacement square footage. The replacement
square footage as well as the current proposal were both reviewed
and approved by the Historic Preservation commission. (We have
requested that the applicants bring a model of the proposal to
the meeting.) The following is a breakdown of the square footage
of the proposed structure:
Replacement sq. ft.
Proposed additional commercial sq. ft.
Proposed employee unit sq. ft.
Total Building Square Footage:
2,533.4 square feet
1,571.0 square feet
400.0 square feet
4,504.4 square feet
."',
The Commercial Core allows a 1.5:1 FAR. The site is 3,101 square
feet which means the total building size of 4,504.4 is almost
exactly what is allowed on the site. The proposed height of the
building is 35'8" which is 4'2" under the 40' height limit in the
Commercial Core zone district. The proposed open space on site
is 15%. This is less than the required 25% in the Commercial
Core zone district. However, since a portion of the structure is
a replacement structure which only had (3%) open space, the
applicants are actually increasing the open space on site by
12%. The Code does not require this application to provide the
required 25% open space since the new proposal does not increase
the degree of non-conformity (less open space) of the previous
structure.
The proposal is to utilize the basement for storage (to be used
solely by tenants on the site) the first floor is proposed to be
u~ilized as retail space "nn the second floor will be orri ce
space with the exception of 400 square feet to be used as an
em'Pi-oyee unit.
In addition to the request for commercial square footage, the
applicants are requesting an exemption from the Residential
Growth Management Quota System in order to construct an on site
400 square foot employee unit (studio).
In summary, the application is for the following actions:
GMQS Allotment (1571 square feet of commercial space)
GMQS Exemption (400 square foot employee unit)
REFERRAL COMMENTS: All referral comments have been incorporated
into the conditions of approval for the project. The applicant's
have agreed to all conditions therefore, we have deleted the
lengthy, specific referral comments from this memorandum.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The following staff comments are divided into 2 sections. These
are the GMQS allotment and the GMQS exemption for the employee
unit.
COMMERCIAL GMQS ALLOTMENT
The proposal is in the CC zone district. There is one other
application which is competing for the commercial square footage
allotment for the CC and the C-l zone district. This is 309 East
Hopkins, the Berko Building. The combined square footage
requests do not exceed the total 1988 available allotment for
square footage. At this time, it is the understanding of the
Planning Office that the Berko application will be scored at a
2
~
later date.
The 516 East Hyman application was scored by the Planning
Commission pursuant to section 8-106.F. of the Land Use Code. In
summary, the Planning Office and Planning Commission recommend
approval of the Growth Management allotment. After scoring by
the Planning Commission the application was found to exceed the
threshold in each scoring category with an overall score of 32.5
(threshold 26).
GMQS EXEMPTION REQUEST FOR THE
400 SQUARE FOOT STUDIO EMPLOYEE UNIT
The applicants are requesting an exemption from the City council
for a 400 square foot employee unit. This request was reviewed
by the Planning Commission who recommended approval to the City
Council. This request is made pursuant to section 8-104 C. 1. c
which directs the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to
the City Council regarding the exemption.
The applicants propose to construct an on site employee unit in
order to supply a portion of the required employee housing
commitment associated with their Growth Management application.
The applicants are requesting an exemption from the residential
Growth Management Quota System since the unit is to be deed
restricted as a moderate income rental unit. The Housing
Authority is in favor of the unit if the following restrictions
are met.
1. The payment-in-lieu for 2.09 employees shall be made at
the time of issuance of a Building Permit for any portion of the
proposed development and indexed to the then current Employee
Housing Guidelines Moderate Income Category.
2. That a deed restriction approved by the Housing Authority
be recorded for the on site Studio Employee dwelling unit before
an issuance of a Building Permit for any portion of the
development. Said unit shall be restricted to the then current
Employee Housing Guidelines and indexed to the Moderate Income
Category.
The criteria for exemption states that there must be a need in
the community and that the unit is compliance with the Housing
Authority guidelines. The Planning Office feels strongly that
there is a need in the community for a moderate income unit such
as the one which is being proposed. If the above conditions are
met, the Planning Office feels that it is appropriate for the
City Council to grant a GMQS exemption for the unit.
Additionally, the Planning Office would like to commend the
applicants for placing an employee unit on this site without
requesting the additional square footage allowed by the code.
The site is one of the more limited sites in town and the
3
applicants have proven that the addition of an employee unit on
site can work without maximizing the site with regard to square
footage. Consequently, the project is in scale with the
surrounding neighborhood and does not jeopardize the integrity of
the historic district.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to grant approval of the Growth
Management allotment for 1571 sq. ft. for the 516 East Hyman 1988
Growth Management application. In addition the City Council
grants approval of the Growth Management exception for a 400 sq.
ft. employee unit on site pursuant to the attached resolution."
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION:
J- ~ A-./J&A; ~
~
- C'~---., e
r::e~---
CMH
ch.516.2
4
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Planning and zoning commission
FROM:
Cindy Houben, planning Office
RE:
516 East Hyman GMQS Allotment, Special Review and GMQS
Exemption (for an employee unit)
DATE:
November 22, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Growth Management approval
for 1,571 square feet of commercial space; GMQS Exemption for one
400 square foot employee unit; a special review for a waiver of
the parking requirement for the employee unit; and a special
review for cash in lieu payment for the other 2 parking spaces
required for the additional commercial square footage.
APPLICANT: SJA Associates
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Weil, Bill Poss & Associates
LOCATION: 516 East Hyman Avenue; Lot 1 Pitkin Center Subdivision
(See Attachment 1, Location Map.)
ZONING: commercial Core (CC)
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
The applicants are requesting an additional 1,571 square feet
(1,125 sq. ft. of net leasable space) of commercial space to be
constructed as a second level to an existing structure. The
previous structure was demolished in July of this year and was
reconstructed with replacement square footage. The replacement
square footage as well as the current proposal were both reviewed
and approved by the Historic preservation commission. (We have
requested that the applicants bring a model of the proposal to
the meeting.) The following is a breakdown of the square footage
of the proposed structure:
Replacement sq. ft.
Proposed additional commercial sq. ft.
proposed employee unit sq. ft.
Total Building Square Footage:
2,533.4 square feet
1,571.0 square feet
400.0 square feet
4,504.4 square feet
The commercial Core allows a 1:1.5 FAR. The site is 3,101 square
feet which means the total building size of 4,504.4 is almost
exactly what is allowed on the site. The proposed height of the
building is 35'8" which is 4'2" under the 40' height limit in the
Commercial Core zone district. The proposed open space on site
is 15%. This is less than the required 25% in the Commercial
Core zone district. However, since a portion of the structure is
a replacement structure which only had (3%) open space, the
applicants are actually increasing the open space on site by
12%. We are not requiring this application to provide the
required 25% open space since the new proposal does not increase
the degree of non-conformity (less open space) of the previous
structure.
The proposal is to utilize the basement for storage (retail and
residential); the first floor is proposed to be utilized as
retail space and the second floor will be office space with the
exception of 400 square feet to be used as an employee unit.
In addition to the request for commercial square footage, the
applicants are requesting an exemption from the Residential
Growth Management Quota System in order to construct an on site
400 square foot employee unit (studio). The applicants are also
requesting Special Review in order to waive the requirement for
the employee unit parking space and in order to be allowed to
make a cash in lieu payment for the required parking spaces
associated with the additional commercial space.
In summary, the application is for the following actions:
GMQS Allotment (1571 square feet of commercial space)
GMQS Exemption (400 square foot employee unit)
Special Review (waiver of employee unit parking space and
cash in lieu for commercial parking spaces)
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
1. ENGINEERING: Jay Hammond of the Engineering Department made
the following comments in his memorandum dated November 8, 1988.
(See Attachment 2.)
1. site Design - The design is generally excellent. However,
the proposed bench should be moved onto private property, the
bike rack should not interfere with the 8 foot sidewalk and the
trees and plantings should conform to the CCLC Streets cape
Guidelines.
2. Storm
possibility of
site.
Drainage
aggravating
The dry well design
groundwater conditions
raises
on and
the
off
3. Parking/Special Review - The cash in lieu payment is
acceptable. Mr. Hammond notes a fractional payment whereas the
Planning Office has traditionally rounded off the spaces to the
nearest actual number of spaces. Therefore, an addition of 1,125
square feet of net leasable area equals to 2 spaces. (See
section 5-301(E).)
2
4. Bonus Points - The Engineering Department feels that the
exceptional design of the service area deserves a bonus point.
The Engineering Department also offers suggested scoring for the
engineering related issues. These recommendations appear in
Attachment 2.
2. HOUSING AUTHORITY: In a memorandum dated October 20,1988,
the Housing Authority made the following recommendation (See
Attachment 3):
1. The payment-in-lieu for 2.09 employees shall be made at
the time of issuance of a Building Permit for any portion of the
proposed development and indexed to the then current Employee
Housing Guidelines Moderate Income Category.
2. A deed restriction approved by the Housing Authority
shall be recorded for the on site Studio Employee dwelling unit
before an issuance of a Building Permit for any portion of the
development. Said unit shall be restricted to the then current
Employee Housing Guidelines and indexed to the Moderate Income
Category.
3. WATER DEPARTMENT: In a note from Jim Markalunas of the Water
Department he mentions that the existing service lines should be
abandoned at the main. Service is available to the site. The
applicants propose a 4" connection line and the abandonment of
the existing service line. (See Attachment 4.)
4. ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT: In a memorandum dated November 2, 1988
from Don Gilbert of the Electric Department, it is noted that
there is no mention of electric service to the site. At the time
service is required the applicants must submit plans to the
Electric Department. Any upgrading of services required to
service the project will be at the applicants expense. (See
Attachment 5.)
5. ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT: In a letter dated
August 23, 1988, Bruce Matherly of the sanitation district notes
that service is available to the project. However, the system is
in need of upgrading in the area. The applicant commits to
paying their fair share of this upgrade. (See Attachment 6.)
6. FIRE MARSHALL: In a memorandum dated September 26, 1988, Wayne
Vandemark of the Fire District notes that the project is within a
3 minute response time. In addition, the applicants have
contributed additional protection for the adjacent buildings by
providing a sprinklering system for the entire structure. (See
Attachment 7.)
7. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION: In a memorandum dated
November 15, 1988, Roxanne Eflin made the following remarks:
3
"On February 9, 1988, HPC reviewed the project at 516 E. Hyman,
granting Demolition and Conceptual Development approval to both
Phase 1 and Phase 2, with conditions. On June 14, 1988, the
applicant returned to HPC for Final Development approval. The
Committee granted approval for demolition and final development
for Phase 1, and recommended approval of final development for
Phase 2, subject to GMP allocation.
staff and the HPC found the general development application
consistent with the Historic District and Historic Landmark
Development Guidelines. The infill design, setback,
fenestration, materials and details were felt to be very
compatible with the adjacent structures, and well suited to the
site. HPC's only concerns during Final Development review
focused on the "plaza" entry in its coordination with the next
door Mason and Morse plaza reconstruction. This situation has
apparently been addressed satisfactorily.
staff is very pleased with the project. By incorporating
historic scale and massing with modern materials, the project
presents a good design solution to a challenging, narrow site."
(see Attachment 8.)
8. ROARING FORK ENERGY CENTER: In a memorandum from steve
Standiford of the Roaring Fork Energy Center dated November 15,
1988, Mr. Standiford makes the following summary:
"Overall, this building will use energy efficiently. We would
like to see more insulation for the roof. It is also assumed
that the basement walls will be insulated to R-19. With these
minor changes and attention to construction details to prevent
air infiltration problems, this project could match the stated
claim of an "extremely" energy efficient building." (See
Attachment 9.)
STAFF COMMENTS:
The following staff comments are divided into 3 sections. These
are the GMQS allotment, the GMQS exemption and the special review
for parking.
COMMERCIAL GMQS ALLOTMENT
The proposal is in the CC zone district. There is one other
application which is competing for the commercial square footage
allotment for the CC and the C-1 zone district. This is 309 East
Hopkins, the Berko Building. The combined square footage
requests do not exceed the total 1988 available allotment for
square footage. At this time, it is the understanding of the
Planning Office that the Berko application will be scored at a
later date.
4
,---~..-
This application shall be scored pursuant to section 8-106.F. of
the Land Use Code. This score shall be forwarded to the city
Council with a recommendation by the Planning commission for a
Growth Management Allocation. Please refer to the attached score
sheet for the Planning Office comments and recommended scoring.
(See Attachment 9.)
In summary, the Planning Office recommends approval of the Growth
Management allotment. After scoring by the Planning Office, the
application was found to exceed the threshold in each scoring
category.
GMQS EXEMPTION REQUEST FOR THE
400 SQUARE FOOT STUDIO EMPLOYEE UNIT
The applicants are requesting a recommendation for exemption from
the Planning commission for a 400 square foot employee unit.
This request is made pursuant to section 8-104 C.l.c which
directs the Planning Office to make a recommendation to the city
Council regarding the exemption.
The applicants propose to construct an on site employee unit in
order to supply a portion of the required employee housing
commitment associated with their Growth Management application.
The applicants are requesting an exemption from the residential
Growth Management Quota system since the unit is to be deed
restricted as a moderate income rental unit. The Housing
Authority is in favor of the unit if the following restrictions
are met.
1. The payment-in-lieu for 2.09 employees shall be made at
the time of issuance of a Building Permit for any portion of the
proposed development and indexed to the then current Employee
Housing Guidelines Moderate Income Category.
2. That a deed restriction approved by the Housing Authority
be recorded for the on site studio Employee dwelling unit before
an issuance of a Building Permit for any portion of the
development. Said unit shall be restricted to the then current
Employee Housing Guidelines and indexed to the Moderate Income
Category.
The criteria for exemption states that there must be a need in
the community and that the unit is compliance with the Housing
Authority guidelines. The Planning Office feels strongly that
there is a need in the community for a moderate income unit such
as the one which is being proposed. If the above conditions are
met, the Planning Office feels that it is appropriate for the
Planning commission to recommend a GMQS exemption for the unit.
Additionally, the Planning Office would like to commend the
applicants for placing an employee unit on this site without
requesting the additional square footage allowed by the code.
5
The site is one of the more limited sites in town and the
applicants have proven that the addition of an employee unit on
site can work without maximizing the site with regard to square
footage. Consequently, the project is in scale with the
surrounding neighborhood and does not jeopardize the integrity of
the historic district.
SPECIAL REVIEW
The applicants are requesting two items under special review.
First, they are requesting that the parking space for the
employee unit be waived. The code requires one parking space per
bedroom. The applicants argue that the addition of a parking
space will require that the building be moved forward which is
impossible since the first floor of the building has already been
constructed. In addition, the building presently offers a rear
service area which is superior to most of the designs seen in the
commercial core. Ample trash and delivery area for the building
are provided. The proposal offers other stores along the alley,
in need of additional dumpster space, the opportunity to utilize
the extra space provided at 516 East Hyman. The trade off, of
having an employee unit on site and having an adequate service
area for the commercial portion of the building for less parking
is supported by the Planning Office.
The second special review request is to allow the commercial
parking requirement to be paid through the cash in lieu
provision. section 7-404(B) (1) of the Code gives the city
Council the option of allowing cash in lieu in the Commercial
Core zone district if the determination is made that it is not
practical for the applicant to provide on site, off street
parking spaces.
The requested net leasable space is 1,125 square feet which
requires two parking spaces. The Planning Office supports the
proposed method of payment since the Rio Grande parking structure
is in the approval process at this time. In addition we feel
that given the type of infill design required by this site there
was little opportunity, if any, to supply on site parking.
In summary, the Planning Office recommends approval of the growth
management allotment of 1,571 square feet. In addition, the
Planning Office supports the cash in lieu payment for the
required number of parking spaces for the commercial portion of
the proposal. The Planning Office feels that it is important to
provide a parking space for any residential unit, however, it
appears that the requirement of a parking space is impossible
given the site and the design of the structure. We have made the
determination that the opportunity to have an intown employee
unit outweighs the need for the parking space. We feel that the
applicants responded to a community need by adding an on site
employee unit to the project. Therefore, the Planning Office
6
supports the waiver of the parking requirement for the employee
unit.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of the GMQS allocation of 1,571
square feet and that the applicants receive special review
approval to pay cash in lieu for the required commercial parking
spaces. In addition, we recommend the applicant receive approval
for exemption from Growth Management for the employee unit as
well as special review approval to waive the required parking
space for that unit. We recommend the following conditions as
conditions of approval:
1. The applicants shall move the bench onto the site. It
shall not be located within the public right-of-way.
The site design shall be revised to reflect this change
and shall be submitted to the Planning Office prior to
review by the city Council.
2. The applicants shall provide a storm drainage system
which is approved by the City Engineering Department.
This system shall be approved in writing by the
Engineering Department prior to issuance of a building
permit for the project.
3. The applicants shall commit to allowing the additional
dumpster space to be utilized by other occupants of the
alley with first priority given to pre-existing
structures which do not have the ability to provide
on-site dumpster space.
4. The following Housing Authority conditions shall apply:
a. The payment-in-lieu for 2.09 employees shall be
made at the time of issuance of a Building Permit
for any portion of the proposed development and
indexed to the then current Employee Housing
Guidelines Moderate Income category.
b. That a deed restriction approved by the Housing
Authority be recorded for the on site studio
Employee dwelling unit before an issuance of a
Building Permit for any portion of the
development. Said unit shall be restricted to the
then current Employee Housing Guidelines and
indexed to the Moderate Income category.
5. The applicants shall be responsible for a cash in lieu
payment for 2 parking spaces, to be paid at the time of
issuance of a building permit.
ch.516
7
. .
.
.
...J
. U
,...
U
.
.
.
ill
- U
.-
-
C<l '- U
:I: 0
>- ill
- 0
u ~
*" a.
a
,
a leu!6PO
J .
J
J
~ !
It ,.,.:"tp.
U>
::> .
~ ! I
..
u".'''"1
u .
1
ill
~.
J::
ill
~
u:
u
u
.
'I!W I
.
I
fI
iJ
,
u
.
u , _
' 4:JJeuor.l c
.',J'- ~. '<0
. ~ I ::I;
.
J
h ent 1
Attac, ID_ LJ
---, -- l J .
elF
\6. ·
"a.
...J
.
.
o
u
z
L'
G
Z
-
Z
. 0
N
"
Z
0
I -
I-
<t
U
0
. ...J
.
z
I
.
01
~ .
.
I
,dlb" .
. 'I !I
.
.:L.
~
'"
~. a.
c
01
C<l
~
II
,
~
.'r !\"
.
I ,
:~r-- -
I ~I ,-
ttachment 2
NOV I 4 k_
MEMORANDUM
RE:
Cindy Houben, Planning Office
Jay Hammond, City Engineering~
November 8, 1988
516 E. Hyman Commercial GMP
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your use is a Commercial Growth Management scoring
sheet including recommended scores for areas pertinent to
Engineering review. The following comments are intended to
highlight specific concerns related to the GMP criteria.
Site Design - We would generally view the site design as
excellent. The proposed bench should be moved onto the private
property, any bike rack location should not interfere with the 8
foot sidewalk width and trees or plantings should conform to the
CCLC Streetscape Guidelines.
Storm Drainage - This criteria continues to create some
confusion. It is not necessarily an improvement to put 100% of
anticipated storm runoff into an on-site drywell. The design
raises the possibility of aggravating groundwater conditions,
effecting the building foundation or putting water into adjacent
basements. Acknowledge that the historic condition was less
than ideal, we would suggest discussing this matter with the
applicant and viewing a modified design as a technical
clarification.
- Park ing. We have no trouble with the cash in lieu proposal
though we would note that a net increase of 1,125 square feet
would request 2.25 parking spaces.
- Bonus Points. Engineering would recommend 1 bonus point for
the exceptional service area already in place.
Special Review
We are a little unclear as to the actual number of parking spaces
for which the applicant's propose a cash-in-lieu payment
(commercial requirement only or commercial and employee unit).
We have no particular problem with the cash-in-lieu proposal,
however, given the adjacent neighborhood conditions and the
pending creation of a parking structure.
GMQS Exemption
Engineer ing has no particular concern in exempting the employee
uni t.
JH/co/Memo137.88
Enclosure
Du.r.w..', S:JI\ ~~. (.&l,IlA>e. W""'eQ-0
Ai~~' 13; \I 70'"
1//','
L j)
I
'6 -10 (0 F',
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMERCIAL GROWTH MMANAGEMENT SCORE SHEET
PROJECT: SI<..e
E, ~iWlM\.
DATE: /1-3-'3"6
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (exclusive of historic features) (maximum l8
points). The Commission shall consider each application wi th
respect to the quality of its exterior and site design and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 Indicates a major design flaw.
~ Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
L.
3 Indicates an excellent design.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibi' of the
proposed building (in terms of size, hei , ocation and
building materials) with existing ne'" oring developments.
RATING:
COM~IENT :
SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed landscaping and open space areas, the extent of
undergrounding of utilities, and the arrangements of
improvements for efficiency of circulation (including access
for service vehicles) and increased safety and privacy.
RATING: --3
"'",lliNT, ~ ~"k\ t:~ ~~4l--
f,iAQA'~Il!b {ilQ k \ cJ'~ eo20. ..--::>>ND.t- 4-~
~~ ~{Ho\ ~_ ~(\- sb k~o l~ ~A,,-l)-~.
c. ENERGY - Considering the use of insulation, passive solar
1
or ientation, solar energy devices an lcient fireplaces
and heating and cooling devices aximize conservation of
energy and use of solar ene _ sources.
RATING:
COl~NENT:
d. AMENITIES - Considering the prOV1Sl0n of usable open space
and pedestrian and bicycles ways.
RA'l'ING: b
COMNENT: ~;b ~ I t>'^~~ b~)II\l, \c;b.~ NA,et,.
e. VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of
buildings to maximize public views of surrounding scenic
areas.
COM~IENT:
ING:
f. TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS - Considering the quality and
efficiency of proposed trash and utility access areas.
COM~IENT: lQJ,-r^ --t iAWv\.
'('\-M'~ ,
RATING:
O-<:P 11 QA\+
3,
SUBTO'l'AL:
2
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum lO
points). The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to its impact upon facilities and services and shall rate
each development by assigning points according to the following
formula:
o -- Indicates a project which requires the provision of new
services at increased public expense.
1 -- Indicates a project which may be handled by existing level
of service in the area, or any service improvement by the
applicant benefits the project only and not the area in the
general.
2 -- Indi ca tes a pr oj ect whi ch in and of i tse If improves the
quality of service in a given area.
(In those cases where points were given for the simultaneous
evaluation of two services [Le., water supply and fire protec-
tion] the determination of points shall be made by averaging the
scores for each feature.
3. WATER SUPPLY/FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the capacity of the
water supply system to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without system extensions and without treatment plant
or other facility upgrading. Also, considering the abili ty of
the appropriate fire protection district to provides services
according to established response times without the necessity of
upgrading available facilities.
RATING:
I
r.Jh"
/
t= I<.r:='{H--r
.,
(~~
ef(141.
~C{h ~~cc ,
COHHENT:
17,
b. SEWAGE DISPOSAL - Considering the capacity of sanitary
sewers to dispose of the wastes of the proposed development
without system extensions and without treatment plant or
other facili ty upgrading.
COM~1ENT :
C<MIMo-t J ~'t>
RATING:
{>.j..r"..,C.......r <iL ~(\ Q((~r
I
3
c. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS - Considering the ability of the
project to be served by existing city and County bus
routes. Also considering the capacity of major streets to
provide for the needs of the proposed development without
substantially altering existing traffic patterns or over-
loading the existing street system or causing a need to
extend the existing road network.
RATING: ~
t-'t-~\M\I ,~ dctak
COM~lENT: MMMM.\ 'i-I~.f-.
d. STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the capacity of the drainage
facilities to adequately dispose of surface runoff of the
proposed development without system extension.
COM~lENT: N Q.t~
.~~~l'M-.
~hk
\.~ ell M ~ 0--~~ ((-'.!,C\\~
~,\~\~JLD --=?'-'O.-rlS,q \ ~~ Mt
( 1'Nl}-u\ \0. \- '^ ~ r~k, \-c Q (3-v\ c\ ;t().N)) .
{D
RATING: I
*~~ &~~ <M\--~~-tL
t-lMflU t CR~jUu-t
~ ~ ~<.J>f'U'iJN(~-S,
e. PARKING - Considering the provision of parking spaces to
meet the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed
development which are required by Section 24-4.5 of the
Code, and considering the design of said spaces with respect
to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and
safety.
RATING:
COM~lENT :
0<u~~"-
lUJ
1\ L <:) ~'-,C I\D~ 10. H\.
t:... E_:S ::rOJO l:>
SUBTOTAL:
3 .
PROVISION OF EMPLOY!':!': POOlOU1C (RlaximUlll IS p6inU,)
Tlte COllllurs-
---
4
...
sion shall assign points to each applicant who agrees to
low, moderate and middle income housing which complie
housing size, type, income and occupancy guideline of
of Aspen and wi th the provisions of Se cti on 24 1 .10.
shall be assigned according to the following s edule:
vide
i th the
the City
Points
1
generated by the
o to 40% of the addi tional empl
project are provided with housin
4l to 100%
project are
a l.tional employees generated by the
wi th housing:
housed
RATING:
4. BONUS POINTS (maximum 8 points) (Note to exceed 20% of the points
awarded in Sections 1, 2 and 3) - Commissionmembers may, when any
one determines that a project has not only incorporated and met
the substantive criteria of those sections, but has also exceeded
the provisions of these sections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional points.
Any Commissionmember awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
recor d.
COMMENT: Z:>~,~til
Kl ~() '<r- c"""w-- ~
f~"~
Q \LCQ\h~\,
BONUS POINTS: I
\A:Jd\, ~eln-.\~ rcAo
5
..." ..
5. TOTAL POINTS
Points in Category l:
Points in Category 2:
Points in Category 3:
SUBTOTAL: Points in Cate-
gories 1, 2, & 3
Points in
TOTAL POINTS:
ng and Zoning Member:
(minimum of 5.4 poi
to remain eligib
( minimum
remain
needed
needed to
of 8.75 points needed
eligible)
(minimum of 25.8 points needed
to be eligible)
6
.~
Attachment 3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
CINDY HOUBEN, PLANNING OFFICE
FROM:
JAMES L. ADAMSKI, HOUSING DIRECTOR
DATE:
OCTOBER 20, 1988
RE:
516 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, COMMERCIAL GMQS APPLICATION
APPLICATION:
The application submitted by Bill Poss and Associates on behalf of
the SJA Associates and is requesting GMQS Allotment, Special Review
Approval to reduce off-street Parking Requirements and GMQS
Exemption for a 400 sq. ft. moderate income, deed restricted
employee dwelling unit.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project is located at 516 East Hyman Avenue. The property is
in the CC Zone and was the past location of Cheap Shots. The
applicant proposes to construct a building, two stories above grade
and a full basement. The uses within the building will be retail,
office and employee housing. The basement will be used for tenant
storage and mechanical space. The plaza level will be retail
space, and the upper level will be used for office space and an
employee housing unit (refer to attachment).
EMPLOYEE HOUSING:
The applicant is requesting a GMQS Allotment of 1571 sq. ft. All
of this allotment would be used as office space on the upper level.
According to the Employee Guidelines this would generate 3.9
employees for 1000 sq. ft. of net leasable square footage. The
applicant states that the net leasable square footage is 71.6% of
the total square footage. Therefore, the employee generation would
be 4.3875 employees (1571 x's 71.6%/1000 x's 3.9). The applicant
proposes to house 76% of the 4.3875 or 3.34 through a combination
of onsite housing and a payment-in-lieu contribution.
The onsite housing would be a studio indexed to the Employee
Housing Guidelines moderate income category. The application does
not state the income category for the payment-in-lieu. In a phone
conversation with Kim Weil of Bill Poss and Associates, he stated
that the payment-in-lieu contribution would be indexed to the
moderate income category of the Employee Housing Guidelines.
HOUSING AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION:
following conditions:
Approve application with the
1. The payment-in-lieu for 2.09 employees shall be made at
the time of issuance of a Building Permit for any portion
of the proposed development and indexed to the then
current Employee Housing Guidelines Moderate Income
Category.
2. That a deed restriction approved by the Housing Authority be
recorded for the on site Studio Employee dwelling unit
before an issuance of a Building Permit for any portion
of the development. Said unit shall be restricted to the
then current employee Housing Guidelines and indexed to
the moderate income category.
"
I'
I'
I'
I'
I'
I'
I'
II
"
I
I.
I.
I,
i.
I.
1~
.~
o
I
4
CIT
PEN
August 8, 1988
Kim Weil
Bill Poss and Associates
605 E. Main
Sui te n
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 516 E. Hyman
As you requested, this letter is
able and can be provided to the
payment of the required fees. We
service be abandoned at the main.
to verify that water is avail-
above referenced sight upon
also require that the existing
Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
~t~\~
J~m Markalunas, D~rector
Aspen Water Department
JM:ab
Attachment 5
MEMORANDUM
TO: city Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Director
Water Department
Electric Department
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Fire Marshall
Roaring Fork Energy Center
FROM:
cindy Houben, Planning Office
RE: CC and C-1 Zone Districts GMQS Applications:
516 E. Hyman Avenue
309 E. Hopkins Avenue
DATE:
September 23, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review and comments are the
competing in the Commercial Competition
allotments in the CC and C-1 Zone Districts.
two applications
for development
516 E. Hyman Ave. has been submitted by Bill Poss & Associates on
behalf of SJA Associates and is requesting GMQS Allotment,
special Review Approval to reduce Off-street Parking Requirements
and GMQS Exemption for a 400 square foot moderate income, deed
restricted employee unit.
309 E. Hopkins Ave. has been submitted by Charles Cunniffe &
Associates on behalf of John L. King and is requesting GMQS
Allotment, Special Review Approval to increase Dimensional
Requirements and reduce Off-street Parking Requirements,
Conditional Use Approval for one free-market residential unit and
GMQS Exemption for Accessory Uses in Mixed Use Development.
Please review this material and return your comments no later
than October 26, 1988 so that I have time to prepare a memo for
the P&Z.
Thank you.
~ CI -V D c; /foo I6C /tJ J ,oJ-I! tf)1f) ItV r; () price
FRoM; 'Do ill G: I 1., ~ tZT fl!LCCTRJ<- beJ fT,
\)...G: 51&, ~ H'f'MIJt1) c:)- 3d'=? E HcrP/('/pJS, /WE,
PA-~, ~Ot.J Cf., / Cj ~g
;;::L~CI,e/( 'Z,e-~rJIU~<;'" 4r2€=- Afar .A16vT/oAfi:D fA.) T/fC I9PP).fCI"/t/dl/Y;.
;foR, (;IL1CYS. 71K 4PPLtc~).JT> ./fv!.r /b-? /l-uHI-I'<.€ rH1r I'fttJp VI'~.eI'}OIAJ6
tJr- ["ITCILI Tie S A2HjJUI~ (.) 70 SCt<UE -rJIG.S6 J..oc.nTIOIf)$ tflUSr fl>e-
/f,//f<::rP- ~'JC~AJS€.. T~~ WILt.. ft;6 D6rc;QMI/lJc~ wl/&Id IJ f'J.tljtfJ ,s.
1?,,,r?AA_1T/,, "-, JAr! "r+:/rG. "'"1'..>0.1 Cf.fL.L:""J--
..
Attachment 6
Aspen @onsolidated Sanitation ,District
565 North Mill Street
Aspen. Colorado 81611
J
J
Tele, (303) 925-3601
Tele, 13031 925-2537
J
J
J
August 23, 1988
]
Bill Poss & Associates
605 E. Main St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
J
Attn:Kim Weil
J
RE: 516 E. Hyman Building
]
Dear Mr. Weil:
I
.
The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has sufficient capacity at
the treatment plant for the additional demand. However, the collection
system will need some minor upgrading to accomodate the relatively minor
additional demand. It is the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's
understanding that the owners at this project are willing to contribute
their share of the anticipated upgrading.
I
'.
.1
I
.,
Sincerely
3......-.~ ~.x~
.
,.1
Bruce Matherly
District Manager
BM/ld
RECEIVED
~
AUG 211988
~
r.:lLL ross AND ASSOCIATES
.. - . .-....'1(''''':'..'10
,...."""
Attachment 7
~,. ."
~~ ~VA~L!Pff~
420 E. HOPKINS STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(303) 925-2690
TO: Cindy Houben, Planning
FROM: Wayne Vandemark~
RE: 516 E. Hyman Avenue
DATE: September 26, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
We have reviewed the application submitted by Bill Poss and
Associates. The project is well within a three minute response
time. There is an adequate water supply for firefighting in the
area. Sprinklering the structure will certainly enhance fire
protection for the building and give added fire protection for
the building and give added protection to the surrounding
structures.
SEP 2 6 1988
Attachment 8
MEMORANDUM
From:
cindy Houben, Planning Office
Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office
To:
Re:
516 East Hyman Ave. - GMQS scoring
Historic Preservation committee referral comments
Date:
November 15, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
On February 9, 1988, HPC reviewed the project at 516 E. Hyman,
granting Demolition and Conceptual Development approval to both
Phase 1 and Phase 2, with conditions. On June 14, 1988, the
applicant returned to HPC for Final Development approval. The
Committee granted approval for demolition and final development
for Phase 1, and recommended approval of final development for
Phase 2, subject to GMP allocation.
staff and the HPC found the general development application
consistent with the Historic District and Historic Landmark
Development Guidelines. The infill design, setback,
fenestration, materials and details were felt to be very
compatible with the adjacent structures, and well suited to the
site. HPC's only concerns during Final Development review
focused on the "plaza" entry in its coordination with the next
door Mason and Morse plaza reconstruction. This situation has
apparently been addressed satisfactorily.
staff is very
historic scale
presents a good
pleased with the project. By incorporating
and massing with modern materials, the project
design solution to a challenging, narrow site.
memo. cindy. 516eh
Attachment 9
,--'1'
ROARING FORK ENERGY CENTER . 242 MAIN STREET . CARBONDALE, CO 81623 · (303)963-0311
November 15, 1988
TO: Cindy Houben - Planning Office
FR: Steve Standiford - Director
RE: Comments on GMQS Application - 516 E. Hyman Ave.
Enerqy Conservation
The level of insulation specified for the walls is very
adequate. But, the R-30 recommended for the roof is below the
accepted standard of R-38, as stated by Public Service
Company and the State of Colorado weatherization programs.
By todays energy standards the project could benefit from
increasing the roof insulation levels.
The small amount of glass will certainly help with the
overall energy efficiency of the building.
The mechanical system is also a very efficient one but the
specified rating of 96% efficiency may be hard to achieve in
actual performance and may vary by 5 to 10%. The hydronic
heating system will be the most efficient heating system for
the building, as the proposal states.
Having a high percentage (i.e., 77%) of the glass facing
south will provide passive solar heat for the structure at no
cost. There is no mention of any thermal mass to store this
energy during the day for re-radiation to the space.
There is no mention of water conservation in the application
and we would recommend that attention is paid to this detail.
Overall, this building will use energy efficiently. We would
like to see more insulation for the roof. It is also assumed
that the basement walls will be insulated to R-19. with
these minor changes and attention to construction details to
prevent air infiltration problems, this project could match
the stated claim of an "extremely" energy efficient building.
."'.. ,,/
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT SCORE SHEET
PROJECT: 516 East Hyman Avenue
DATE: 11/22/88
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (maximum 18 points) Each Development
Application shall be rated based on the quality of the
exterior of its buildings and site design and assigned
points according to the following standards and
considerations.
o A totally deficient design.
1 A major design flaw
2 An acceptable (but standard) design
3 An excellent design
The following features shall be rated accordingly.
a. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - (maximum 3 points) Considering
the compatibility of the proposed development (in terms
of scale, siting, massing, height, and building
materials) with existing neighboring developments.
RATING: 3
COMMENTS:
The proposed infill desiqn was said bv the
Historic Preservation Committee to be well suited to the
site with reqard to set backs. fenestration. materials and
detail. All these elements are compatible with the ad;acent
neiqhborhood. The scale is appropriate and is less massive
with reqard to heiqht. than what is allowed in the zone
district.
The Planninq Office feels this is an excellent
desiqn.
b.
SITE DESIGN (maximum 3 points) Considering
quality and character of the proposed landscaping
open space areas, the amount of site coverage
buildings, the extent of underground utilities, and
arrangement of improvements for efficiency
the
and
by
the
of
'C",_~'k'",_~~,,~,"-____"~"~"~"_
"""
" ,
circulation,
safety and
areas.
including access for service, increased
privacy, and provision of snow storage
RATING: 2
COMMENTS: The proposed landscapinq is qenerallY in keepinq
with the streetscape quidelines.
The open space is less
than required bv code (25%) but more than existed with the
previous buildinq (3%).
The buildinq meets the zone
district standard of 1.5:1 FAR. all utilities will be
underqround. the service area in the alley provides ample
room for trash and service deliveries. The front walks are
proposed to be snowmelted. The Planninq Office fees this is
an acceptable desiqn.
c. ENERGY CONSERVATION - (maximum 3 points) Considering
the use of passive and/or active construction of the
proposed development, including but not limited to
insulation, glazing, passive solar orientation,
efficient heating and cooling systems and solar energy
devices; the extent to which the proposed development
avoids wasting energy by excluding excessive lighting
and inefficient woodburning devices; and the proposed
development's location, relative to whether solar gain
can be expected to reasonably result in energy
conservation.
RATING: 2
COMMENTS: The Roarinq Fork Enerqy Center referral comments
note that the proposed installation is adeauate but
additional insulation is recommended for the roof.
This
recommendation is based on todavs enerqy standards as
reflected bv the State of Colorado Weatherization Proqram
and the Public Service Company.
The small amount of qlass
on the structure helps with overall enerqy efficiencv. The
2
,r....".
application does not address water conservation measures.
The Plannina Office feels that this is an acceptable but
standard desian.
d. AMENITIES (maximum 3 points) Considering the
provision of usable open space, pedestrian and bicycle
ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters, and other
common areas for users of the proposed development.
RATING: 2.5
COMMENTS:
The extension of the snowmelted plaza area from
ad;acent structures provides wide sidewalk areas for the
pedestrian: a bench is provided on the public R.O.W. and a
bike rack is provided at the rear of the buildina. The bike
rack appears to encouraae the worker and resident of the
employee unit to bike but does not offer the aeneral public
a place to park their bike outside of the commercial
storefront.
The Plannina Office feels that this is an
acceptable desian.
e. VISUAL IMPACT (maximum 3 points) Considering the
scale and location of the buildings in the proposed
development to prevent infringement on designated
scenic viewplanes.
RATING: ~
COMMENTS:
The buildina is not within anv viewolane and is
lower in elevation than surroundina buildinas. The structure
is also below the heiaht that is allowed in the zone
district (35'8" vs. 40').
The Plannina Office feels that
this is an acceptable desian.
f. TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS - (maximum 3 points)
3
~.__..._..,_,~__"n_',,",,,,'_^_~'''~''''_~''~_~~''__'
-,
"''''''
Considering the extent to which required trash and
utility access areas are screened from public view; are
sized to meet the needs of the proposed development and
to provide for public utility placement; can be easily
accessed, allow trash bins to be moved by service
personnel, and provide enclosed trash bins, trash
compaction or other unique measures.
RATING: 3
COMMENT :
The service area in the allev is more than
adeauate with reqard to trash service. The applicants saw a
need in the surroundinq neiqhborhood and have provided space
for an additional dumpster to be used bv another allev
resident.
The trash area will also be protected bv an
automatic sprinkler svstem.
This is an excellent desiqn
since the service area (allev) is out of the public view.
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum 10
points) Each Development Application shall be rated on the
basis of its impact upon public facilities and services by
the assigning of points according to the following standards
and considerations.
o -- Proposed development requires the
public facilities and services at
expense.
provision
increased
of new
public
1 -- Proposed development may be handled by existing public
facilities and services, or any public facility or
service improvements made by the applicant benefits the
proposed development only, and not the area in general
2 -- proposed development improves the availability of
public facilities and services in the area.
In those cases where points are given for the simultaneous
evaluation of two (2) services (i.e., water supply and fire
protection) the determination of points shall be made be
averaging the scores for each feature.
a. WATER SUPPLY/FIRE PROTECTION: (maximum 2 points)
Considering the ability of the water supply system to
serve the proposed development and the applicant's
4
_...".._~~--*".,.,~-",~...,.,..,^.,.,_.~~---_.~.,._-_.,. ..
,
commitment to install any water system extensions or
treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to
serve the proposed development. Fire protection
facilities and services shall also be reviewed,
considering the ability of the appropriate fire
protection district to provide services according to
established response times without the necessity of
upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of
available water pressure and capacity for providing
fire fighting flows; and the commitment of the
applicant to provide any fire protection facilities
which may be necessary to serve the proposed
development.
RATING: 2
COMMENT: The proposal can be serviced bv the existinq
water svstem. The old line will be abandoned and a new
4" service line will be installed at the applicant's
expense.
The proposal is in close proximitv (3 minute
response time) to the Fire Department. The applicants
have committed to installinq a sprinkler system
throuqhout the buildinq.
This will benefit the
surroundinq buildinqs in case of a fire.
This
improves the fire safetv in the area.
b. SANITARY SEWER - (maximum 2 points) Considering the
ability of the sanitary sewer system to serve the
proposed development and the applicant's commitment to
install any sanitary system extensions or treatment
plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the
proposed development.
RATING: 1
COMMENT:
The proposal requires unqradina the system of
which the applicants have committed to pavinq their fair
share.
This will onlv benefit the proposal since they are
onlv contributinq to a percentaae of the entire uoarade.
5
-
"'..
c. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS (maximum 2 points)
considering the ability of the proposed development to
be served by existing public transit routes. The
review shall also consider the capacity of major
streets to serve the proposed development without
sUbstantially altering existing traffic patterns,
creating safety hazards or maintenance problems,
overloading the existing street system or causing a
need to extend the existing road network and consider
the applicant I s commitment to install the necessary
road system improvements to serve the increased usage
attributable to the proposed development.
RATING: 1
COMMENT :
The proposal can be served bv the existinq
roadwavs and is within 2 blocks of the Rubv Park
Transportation Center. The proposal uses existinq roads and
services and does not provide benefits to the area.
d. STORM DRAINAGE - (maximum 2 points) Considering the
degree to which the applicant proposes to maintain
historic drainage patterns on the development site. If
the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, the review shall consider the commitment by the
applicant to install the necessary drainage control
facilities and to maintain the system over the long-
term.
RATING: 1
COMMENT:
The Enqineerinq Department is concerned that the
application proposes 100 , of storm runoff to be handled bv
an on-site drvwell.
This may create problems with the
qroundwater conditions in the area.
This issue must be
resolved to the Enqineerinq Departments satisfaction. The
Planninq Office feels that the resultinq desicm will onlY
serve to benefit the site.
6
"""'",
"",...-
e. PARKING - (maximum 2 points) Considering the prov1s1ons
of parking spaces to meet the commercial and/or
residential needs of the proposed development as
required by Art. 5, Div. 2, and considering the design
of the parking spaces with respect to their visual
impact, amount of paved surface, and convenience and
safety.
RATING: 1
COMMENTS: The applicants have committed to pavinq a cash in
lieu payment for the reCJllired commercial spaces but have
reCJllested a waiver of the residential parkinq space for the
employee unit.
Given the infill tvoe of desiQ'Il. the
applicants have qenerallv dealt with the parkinq situation
in an acceptable manner which only benefits the pro;ect.
3. PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING (maximum 15 points) Each
Development Application shall be assigned points for the
provision of housing which complies with the housing size,
type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City, and with
the provisions of Sec. 8-109.
Points shall be awarded as follows:
Zero (0%)
employees
(1) point
to sixty (60%) percent of the additional
generated by the proposed development: One
for each six (6%) percent housed;
Sixty-one (61%) to one hundred (100%) percent of the
additional employees generated by the proposed
development: One (1) point for each eight (8%) percent
housed.
The following standard shall be used in calculating the
number of full-time equivalent employees generated by the
proposed development:
Commercial Core
(CC) and
Commercial (C-1):
Neighborhood
Commercial (NC)
and Service Commer.
Industrial (S/C/I):
3.50 to 5.25 employees/l,OOO sq. ft.
(net leasable), based on review of the
city Council's housing designee:
2.30 employees/l,OOO sq. ft.
(net leasable);
7
,
Office (0):
3.00 employees/l,OOO sq. ft.
(net leasable);
Commercial Lodge
(CL) and other:
3.50 emp1oyees/1,OOO sq. ft.
(net leasable).
If it is determined that the proposed development generates
no new employees, it shall be awarded the full fifteen (15)
points available within this section.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the proposed development who are provided with housing,
the Commission shall use the following criteria:
studio:
One-bedroom:
Two-bedroom:
Three-bedroom or larger:
Dormitory:
1.25 residents;
1. 75 residents;
2.25 residents;
3.00 residents;
1.00 resident per 150 per
square feet of unit
space.
RATING: 12
COMMENT: The applicants have committed to supplyinq one on
site unit (400 square foot studio) and supplyinq cash in
lieu for the remaininq 2.09 emplovees at a moderate income
level. This Drovides (76%) of the employee housinq of the
pro;ect. The staff stronqlv suPPOrts the on-site emplovee
unit.
4. BONUS POINTS (maximum 4 points) Bonus points may be
assigned when it is determined that a proposed development
has not only met the substantive standards of Secs. 8-
106(F) (1) through (3), but has also exceeded the provisions
of these sections and achieved an outstanding overall design
meriting recognition. An award of additional bonus points
shall not exceed ten (10%) percent of the total points
awarded under Sec. 8-106(F) (1) through (3). Any Commission
member awarding bonus points shall provide a written
justification of that award for the public hearing record.
BONUS POINTS:
COMMENTS:
As a rule the Planninq Office never qives bonus
8
.-
'-"
points.
5. TOTAL POINTS -
SCORING CATEGORIES
1.
QUALITY OF DESIGN
2.
AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES &
SERVICES
PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
(LOW, MODERATE & MIDDLE)
4. BONUS POINTS
3.
TOTAL POINTS:
Name of P&Z Commission Member:
Planninq Office
516.score
9
--_.,~~..-~~- -,' .....,,",.......~-,"--"'_._~,~,'~-""-_.
/
POINTS:
14.5
6.
12.
32.5
PZMll.22.88
MOTION
Michael: I make a motion that we adopt the Planning Office's
recommendation.
Welton: We can adopt the Planning Office's scoring and we can
also approve the other review criteria such as special review,
approval to pay cash-in-lieu for the required parking spaces and
the applicant receive approval for exemption from Growth
Management for the employee unit as well as special review for
approval to waive the required parking space for that unit and
that the conditions be as listed in the Planning Office memo
dated November 22, 1988 I and 2 being the same, 3 being modified
as per Michael's suggested change and #6 to read: The applicant
shall install the additional insulation in the roof and basement
insulation shall be R-19 both as indicated in RFEC memo dated
November 15, 1988.
Michael so moved.
Roger seconded the motion.
Bill: The basement is already installed. It is already there.
We have insulation all the way down to the footings as the
Building Department requested that we do. It is 2" of rigid
insulation.
Roger: OK. And also I will be willing to modify that condition
because you are surrounded by buildings on both sides so you have
the insulation of other buildings. Then--applicant shall install
the additional insulation in the roof as indicated in RFEC memo
daed November 15, 1988.
Michael modified his second.
All voted in favor of the motion.
PZMll.22.88
516 EAST HYMAN COMMERCIAL GMP CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION
AND GMP SCORING
Cindy made presentation. (Attached in records)
Mari: Allowing them to get increased FAR for employee housing--
does it specify a certain percentage of employee housing that
they are generating?
Cindy: If they did take the additional square footage that is
allowed with employee housing, 60% of that additional square
footage would have to be dedicated to employee housing.
Mari: what I am saying is that they get the same FAR bonus
whether they are housing 100% of their generation or 30% of
their generation or whatever.
Cindy:
site.
Right.
It is just whether or not they have a unit on
Welton: It is a ratio of the number of square feet of the
employee unit. For every 6 square feet of additional of employee
units, you get 4 extra square feet of additional commercial
space if you take a bonus.
Mari: whenever we waive, we always seem to waive parking spaces
for employee housing. AS far as I know, the price the buyer has
to pay for the unit is the same with a parking space or without
parking. That is not quite right. The price is set by square
footage. I think we should discuss this with Housing Authority.
Bill poss: We have no problem with Planning Office
recommendations. We need to know how we are going to control the
additional trash area which Planning has requested with regard to
who uses our trash area.
Cindy: The owner of that space can lease it however they prefer.
Priority should be given to pre-existing buildings in the area
that don't have the ability to put their trash on-site.
Bill: We don't plan to lease it. We don't want a problem later
on if some change happens in the building as a condition of our
getting approval for growth management.
Michael: Just add after the word "allowing" put in "unreasonable
conditions imposed by the building owner".
2
<:I'lY OF ASPEN
~ GlUmI Ml\Nl\GFMNI' PIAN smHISSICN
roINl'S ALIDCATICN - '.IMDl SHEET
Project:
P&Z VOl'ING MEMBERS
1. QJality of Design
(18 pts)
a. Ardlitectural Design
b. site Design
c. Energy ConserV.
d. Amenities
e. visual Ilrpact
f. Trash & util.
SUBIUTI\L
2. Avail. of Public
Facil. & Services
(10 pts)
a. Water SurPlyjFire
Protection
b. Sanitary Se'.Ier
c. Public TransjRoads
d. stann Drainage
e. Pa:rkiIvJ
SUBIUTI\L
3. Provision of Afford.
Housin:J (15 pts)
a. lDlN :rncx:me
b. Moderate :rncx:me
c. Middle :rncx:me
SUBIUTI\L
SUBIUTI\L CATEXDRIES
1-3
4. IDlUS roINl'S
'lOrAL roINl'S:
1-4
welton Jasmine ~ RaIoona ravid Marl Jim Mickev &g.
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
,r,
/ )
! ,~ JIGlL0fj
MEMORANDUM
TO:
city Attorney
city Engineer
Housing Director
Water Department
Electric Department
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Fire Marshall
Roaring Fork Energy Center
ocr '1_
FROM:
cindy Houben, Planning Office
RE:
CC and C-1 Zone Districts GMQS Applications:
!P!;.''E.''!'~n .. Avenue.:
309 E.Hopkins AvenUEl
..,
DATE:
september 23, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review and comments are the
competing in the commercial Competition
allotments in the CC and C-1 Zone Districts.
two applications
for development
516 E. Hyman Ave. has been submitted by Bill Poss & Associates on
behalf of SJA Associates and is requesting GMQS Allotment,
special Review Approval to reduce Off-street Parking Requirements
and GMQS Exemption for a 400 square foot moderate income, deed
restricted employee unit.
309 E. Hopkins Ave. has been submitted by Charles cunniffe &
Associates on behalf of John L. King and is requesting GMQS
Allotment, Special Review Approval to increase Dimensional
Requirements and reduce Off-street Parking Requirements,
Conditional Use Approval for one free-market residential unit and
GMQS Exemption for Accessory Uses in Mixed Use Development.
Please review this material and return your comments no later
than October 26, 1988 so that I have time to prepare a memo for
the P&Z.
,~
r;~Bo~5
Thank you.
rJo
'""...
-
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-2020
Date: 9/23/88
Kim Weil
Bill Poss & Associates
605 E. Main street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 516 E. Hyman Avenue Commercial GMP Application
Dear Kim,
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have
determined that your application IS complete with the exception
of the following:
~Letter of authorization . from owner for Bill Poss &
8~ Associates to submit application on his behalf.
~"'/ir (( .'1
We have scheduled your applica~t~'for review by the Planning and
zoning commission on November~ ~ 1988. The Friday before the
meeting date, we will call to 1nform you that a copy of the memo
pertaining to your application is available at the Planning
Office.
Your application requires public notice pursuant to Section 6-205
E. of the Land Use Regulations and I have attached a copy of
"Public Hearing Notice Requirements" for your information. A
copy of the Public Notice to be published in The Aspen Times will
be mailed to you in time for you to mail copies to the adjacent
property owners.
If you have any other questions, please call Cindv Houben
the planner assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
Debbie Skehan
Administrative Assistant
- -...- ---- ..
-- --
rf?/iP ih-;mo' ~
II
_11/f-7K- ~ ~ p~ I\))h~/~,0~/~
II $ IP~~
1.-577, 4- rq;lP-~ ~Y7~,
'2-- 7- );;2 . "2-
-z-g I ,l-- ~ ~ 9J dJA-,
fG
~
jJ!JV, ~6
I 1J- ~~ . f~' .
f"JjJ t ,'./Y- __7. - )/;cr-I MtJc ": .J f s tJ tf . 4 rf; ?J#L-I/
't 5~ - f a I...~ <; hm rk--:>)-- _ '2 S- :3 -r 1- m'/ rn-<'C.
I ~uJ.Yc..-Jfl-r r'~
I ~~ ~,(#(,-/I~I' ~ / 7' 7 I J.f;:j ~
/~:~01Idmfrl .. I . {Oo f~~~
'Z/Ib{}tY ~f'Ym.2fC cP-t )(11 ,,;I 4\, le'- -- ~ 1571 hW ~,&<- fl
fIVe ~bfY~ercuJ .fa 2-) ~ fi7-:~" d
.1Jtr~f'~ oo:-t.i?or"~ ~~
;J1,r-<r~~-. -#!!~ 1~~f', 1-
tW4~ - :lw"J f~tfU~ ~ ,I . ,
I~ - P6't - 1uL.t#~ ~ '_C;--Z-j 7) j I
I ~~b" - ft. 4 ; 1, I ,
.FVr-e rnI 7f)f~o/'l- .~~ L LA
I IE:: . / /_ ~-; /(::J
lvOI/V.J.-6 orG-- f(J I ()
a n.er h-r. ~ Jxll{t~/ ~!?, c;J /~QZJ/?rd:IL 3S-. 8-
. 1', ;;L-
ie cr vwh-fip-H~ ~
I'M/" ~ t ch 7 ~ Y.rn~ p-<<> ----
d<><r - I/;?c ~lTT td ;(J;/; j) )/coy J!
\ MN ~ 0/~" ~~ P-~~ I
~"qs,r l~ -/~{'.t.. ,o?dv<J { ~ r/j ~ i, , ~ ' .. ~ <-
(' I /lr J /1 /) .J'
"'\~ ,- () 7f"'~ SC"'(' _ - .,.........
1\'\
06' -1 ~'23;>i n-ovJ ! 510 )1 J:> (~ I 17) <~~ rn /- -<-
f) s",' ~ ~ tie vLC ~ r" '{ - ..) ') ,
p~ ,111 - fJd lei /,'",~ . ~tlF-~ R;: ( ? 0~~h
- - - -
- ------
- -- - - - - --....-
o
A
:..J
.y -,AJJ-u.C-4?~ ...,C)f A <J_
)C ! I h't. S t fA./-.et; _ ' {..;' 1- ,'" d kJ orf/L...1. r--",-",
. - \
!-h"U
1
-If
- .
([;~ ~ /~ ()/'GJ ~~L
I \ -:de? o-r r)
)
il~ ~J.e~~
-
......._ c '-
~f~./
~
?
'0 {fe' 23
Ii
~ ~ (;M Q~ 1/i~
hY ["-{',c-) ~
*-;9'n~ ;.
~ t~ It _ - . l~ ( -
1571 f
3 sov 'l' P-i au /'k.t
I j ~
Jf50d.4
-'lis 33 ~
1- ;11 Cj 7 /'
I <i :P 04- . 4-
II -4 C 0
(11 01- t ,
I
/
.} /q I /
~
237/
I
f3/500)
- ----
- -- ---
..
..
...
I.
...
I.
..
III
..
~
516
""
l.
east
hyman
a v en u e
..
..
...
100
...
ill
...
I.
...
ill
..
ill
..
100
..
III
...
III
...
..
..
III
...
III
...
commercial gmqs application
..
Ii
v
r:: (1,"'/ t__.
li/,/, ';))>"'1
-' ( 0
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
\
I',:
11:11
~
I
605 EAST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, COLORAD081611
TEL' (303) 925-4755
Septemb!2r" 6. i9~38
Al an Hi c::hm.3n
Planning Director
Ci ty 0+ F1":;p("n
130 Sou.t:.h G~'::\J. en,~'.~.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE:
5l.b E2.St Hyman
Dear Pll ;':.~n '!
We r~spectfLtlly submit this application for a commercial GMOS
allocation according to Article 8 of the Aspen Land Use Code.
As required, we have submitted twenty - one copies of the
proposal along with a check in the amount 0+ $2,090.00 to
Cover the 'review process~
At this time we wish to thank your sta++ +or their help in
answerillY our" questions duri~g the development of this
pl....oposal ~
If you have any qL!estions please do not hesitate to contact
US~
Very TrLlly Yours,
f~:
n.J:\]ak
-
.~
-
-
-
-
COMMERCIAL
-
GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM
-
ALLOCATION APPLICATION
-
-
.for
516 EAST HYMAN
-
-
f.:)ppl i cant
~:3JPI ("-'ISSOC i ates
c/o f:)t.eve 1'1ar-cu.s
F' ~ D. B'J}~ :l 7v)9
Aspen, Colorado 81612
':i25--).bl~:5
{.~rchi teet
...
Bill Pass and Associates
605 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
925-~t 755
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
copyright 1988 Bill Pass and Associates
-
-
O,-""-=~";;-"'...",7.-'----C-_"'''.=~~,_,
.-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It)
:3c-,\C"1.:. J, :~:;i'''i
1: I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
j--'~;(~JE'
I r',.iTPDDUCT:;: c:;r..J
1
GENERAL i~F)PL_IC!~TIO~! [!~FORMA1-ION
''')
PROJECT DESCRIPTIO]'!
(~ "
!.--\It:i.tCJ'''
t: c;.'i"n
t.; ~
: ,I ,:, ~:~. _I_ ,-:.\
. - .... n_ .~...
l.l
;;-:::<f'n
~... =
":3 t 0 J" in L\ !.... .::\:;' fl .::.'t q t:.:\
";1-
'cc::'rn
.'-'.
Fi J'"'(:;!! eV"CJ"C8C1.:i Dn
E.
Development Data arid Analysis
t~i
c:-
, .
Tra1:fic, ParkIng and Pedestrian
"
,
G~ ::::mp10'/I;;,;\e HI.JL!si nq i::'r-lJposal
H.
Fireplaces / WOOd stoves
G
I ~
Loca"tio!'l of PlJblit: F"acillties
t3
Locat:Lon ot Ret211 arld ServIce
UutJ. ':.:::.'t.~;
-:)
1<. .
Impact of Adjacent Land IJses
9
Const~uction Schedule
10
SITE UTILIZ(;TION
11
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDAF~DS
1 ~
.12
Quality ()+ Design
:t2
(~ .
B.
C.
(~rchi tectLu'-E\
i....}
L
~3i te Df?si gn
14
Energy Conservation
.15
-
_I"'
..,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
(,J I
'-,,.J I I
j~PF'END I X
D~
:n1E::J::I. t J. ,~;:;;
i6
'_ u
\)i su,::;\J. rnp2ct:~~.
16
f.::'"
~3;2r-V.1. cc~ 'Y'dr"d
17
Avallablllty of Public ServiC2s
18
Pl.
l/~i:":\t:el"'"
F'i r~e F'j'"otE'c:ti on
18
Bu
San i t:'dl'"'\--' ~:~E:.;v...et~.
19
c.
Public T~'ansPQr-~at:orl
F:oa.dS
i9
Du
:3toJ'-m DY-;;;'(lfli::iqe
.:~0
E.
F'..-:.'\r"ki rlg
'.cl2)
";'"
t~mpl Ll';".'f::-(.? Huusi nq
21
"\.
Bonus F'CJj.n't'5
r)1
"'...I.
SPEC I {OiL F:EV I E,,,S
f~ ~
Introduct.ion
.-..,....
";~...:'
.0 ~
r:'.;:'\I'-j.l nq
"24
i"';.
HPC
:;':~5
Gr1QS E:-:i"i1PTI ON
:26
1
. ..
Land Use Application ~orm
=~. i':)pplic.~.nt.~3 l.(~tt(-2r- 0+ ,~:'l.uthCJr-i;:':.3ti(Jfl
'':;'" Disclosul'""e of Owner":ship
4.
Water Department letter
;j..
Sanitation Department letter
6u
Aspen Volunteer Fire District letter
-
h.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SECTION...I
'1'1'
.111
"'I ~
LltHRODIdCT I ON
lIoH
...
i:ri ,;:i.CCC11....c:JE..rlCC: j,'..il:::': (,:.!:...,t:;.~~i;:0 ;.:::: '-"',+ the
e;l [_arid Use Code~ .this
.u
~\Ppl1 C.;"';1tl on
Ql~ ~ Gr"owth i1aflagement (;uota Svstein allocation
-
...
is submltt2d bv SJA ASSOC12t?Su
ihlS allocation will be used
-
far" a second ~loor r'ln the bLlildinq l.l!lder (:orlstrlJction at 516
-
East Hvman Avenu0u
-
:- :"'( f.'~' p !~. C, P F:! 1'- t.-
'.::he I
"'~ Ci n c: c; i"'; ,::) "'.: ,:;~. S
~he ~?:3t ~QCatlon
UT
-
Chc;c~p ::3hD-i:~'su
:::O!'-J. Di'-
'.. ~.J
;.j (.? in 0 1. :i t: 1 Dn
l~ :.-) f.~!'- f-?
:"'.1 i::\ =:'
-
~~, ':::. ",.-~ I'
";~'_"";"-'.'+ ~;;:"qu,:::\t'-e
.Ec~et '~J.t: cj2\~l.g..E.~.~2_t.. ,2~2""'"~Crle ,-,e,r'-DpG.\"~~::.\/. Thc::: + :i. j.-.~::;t + J ::::lc<r- :'.'-li 11
,. .......,.'''',...,..."...._"^''''_..-~-
use 2252a2 square feet o.~ tt,is ar"ea ~eavlng
.~.._"----~ ~.-._-
281.
:-::;qUe:\r-e
f~Jot credit for the second flao~u
,-
11'1 addition t~ the applic2'cion fOI- 0 GI1QS 211ctm2nt~ this
;J!"'Dr.::05::).i. E..lS:C' Cf-;"r'.~::\l,;;:; j.n+cj~'n,~.:\tj.L1rl '::in 'ii---' ':::pC-?c:::.,~;'(.i. ('(':"\-':/.';:01"\15 E:l.nd
-. Gi~QS ~~l(2mpt!O!" ~::'11cn
-. ..J, '::1 (j :i. t~ :;. CJ n [:1 i. 1 -.. ," :.- <-.? q u. i (" c:~ cl .;. ;.::) r' t. h 1;.,;:
'"'I'-
,-'. .....
:: ~:;.'c 1.'': ~
=inally~ every effort has ~een made 1:0 insure .that this
application is complete.
Jf howevl;:;r"
during the evaluation
process, there arises a statement whictl needs +urther-
-
clari'ficatiGn5 please do not t18s1tate to contact the
applicant wno i~ill be happy .to p~ovide the teques.ted
infDI'-matiDfi .,.,; ,';;.5 t:imely ..:.~ fnan!lf2r~ pDssibl~2.
--
,
,
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
,.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SECTION II
II 9ENER~b APPLICATION INFORMATION
C'>jl"~L=~F ~
~3":"T Pi !~':!~3SD[: I (:'i rES
C:,/D ~;TEVE ("1{~HCUS
f:'. O. bOX 1709
ASPEN~ COLORADO 81612
(1:~5-7/:.' 15
D~~NEF~: . ;.:' i:"::iGEI")T ~
BILL POSS I KIM WElL
BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES
605 EAST MAIN STREET, SUITE 1
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 925--4755
<3TF{EET i-"iDDf~E::::::S.;
~316 E~(:IST HYtv1t4N
;:-:1f:3F'E!\j ~ j'::":JLOF\(~DO
LEG/=1L DEGen I F>T I Obi::
L,OT :l
PITKIN CENTER SUBDIVISION
{lSPEN. COLOF(ADO
~
-
DISCLOSURE nF OWNERSHIP, SEE APPENDIX
-
-
...
-
-2-
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
-
-
SECTION III
-
Lll pROJECT PESCRIPTION
fi'12 applic2~ts completeu Or"o.J8ct ~~ill c:onsist of t!~O stories
above gr'ade ~!ong ~ith a tU!l basement~
l-hsre will be ~.504.4
:3qUi3.I....e -feet C)-F ;:,;:'/t:C:I'"rl.31. f'i.DUr- ;':;.r"E.'-:::\ };i t:("iC-? IJuiidinq..
The net
il'lcre2se j.n floor" ai'-ea is therefoy-e 4504.4 square feet less
the 2533u~ square feet which WJ.ll be ~econstructed or 1971
'3QU.D.!'"E' of: E"0t: 4
(:-;dd it 1 on.:::':l .,.
'~hp applicants 2r"e requesting
GMQS 2x8/npticJfl for' ~ deed r-25tl~~c:~eo 2n!pl~yee studio of 400
":qu.:;;,,(-,:? -;.: '....,PT ...':J. ,n'i(.:] J. nq 1:', n (-:.? !. "lQ~:: ,':':.1..1 c::;t1Tlt;::'n'L
" (.;qUE-?::31.:
.c:I3- ..
. ,,-
,.. .... ", -'--' 1
,_w >:-'__'/ ",i
'3Q UE:\r" e -~: c:et "
".,...",.,,-~-----"--""'-
Ti'i~? use~; ~"'Ii th:~ 1""1 thE' bui 1 cJi nt.;.! will be CCof1s.;i stent. :,"-!i th t~hose
perrnj.tted :in -the CC zoneu
Ti-18 lJasE.'lnl:.:nt 1_I-J:ill bE? II';~;:-,d .for-
tenant storage ~nd mechanical space~
fhe plaza level wIll
contain one y"ctail spacey
.The Ltpper level will oe office
'5pace and on2 enlplavee 5~udlOu
A. WATER SYSTEt-1
~IJ.a-:\t:E'r ':.3ervi (:[-2 of O~- tl-.ie pJ--Dper.i::,;/ is pr.Dvi oed by a 1:.;;:11 (f1al n
-
welder ~.1yman AYenue~
ThE' ~:-?:: i .~;;t:i. rlld ;::.(::?rv.j. C1,2 Line \All. 11 be
-
atJandoned in a mar1ner ~cceptable to the water department and
-
-
.:.:., new 4lJ ~3,-=rY:l C':C2 1.1. ne 1"_.15.11 iJ€-? .1 nst~:-:j.ll ed to ~:,E~I'-VE\ t.hl:: preJjE.1ct y
-
T~'e water department has cietermined that .the existing system
-
is capable of providirlg enough water at 2 !sufficient pressure
-
without any imp~ovement5 i"ecessary~
-
-
-
8. WASTE SYSTEI'1
rle Asperl (:onsOlljjated S2nl~ation District t12S an
att
~'
'1 i nf=
~lowing west un the a:tley 2't the t~Qrth end of the property~
rhE' cDmp 1. eted P!'-(Jjl.2ct v..ii J..1. t-'f0qui j'-f.:::O El .it It :::.0?r-'vi ce 1 i ne"
This
Li'lcreased load can be har1dled by the ~~'isting treatment
;.::;'lci 1. i{:it?~:;"
Ttle cDllectlon system for .the entire district
does need LlpgT2ding, rlowever
~nd the ~pplicant is certainly
~rlg '_0 pay ~'lis shar-e~
C. STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM
Ttle project cDntains a dry well under the basement slab.
This dry well will collect water- from the btJilding s r-oof,
serVIce )fa!~d roofi foundation draifls, and the paved ~Jlaza
'~:'.r l~~'" "
Tt'le attempt is to lrltercept 100% of the rLlnoff before
_0dve5 the tJrope~~y
Ti'llS IS a tar superior situation than histo~lcally occurred
--_.~-~---~
DIl the !:.3i te.
Previous to this time, the site did not contain
-
-
a dry well and water which hit the ground was shed into Hyman
..
Averlue or the alley.
In addition, the previous bllilding had
-
a pitched t-oaf which directed water onto the adjacent Lots.
..
-
..
-
..
-4-
-
t
I
D. FIRE PROTECTION
!'"iE! P!'-Cj..'lC:.'c't 1
ilJCated appl~Qximatel'
':=,]. ':::;;C k ..;: ('D(fI (~!~:-pen
)OlLl~ltee~ !~,i.!'.2 L)epar'cmen~.
:ne rcsoonse tlme would be 3
mlrlutes any time 0+ day.
ri'je building l.t~elf wlll lJS protected ny arl automatic
:::;.pr-ink.1.E~r~
2m on all C0ree iE:vels~ and the service yard~
: is,
t:-iT!
...., n j \/ C2 q u:1. :.-. c- ci C; i'! ,. .-.' U:'::! :;~ E' Hi (:..2 roo! 1: iJ Ll t:. 1.,'"ll.i. J. r", f.'_7'
prcJ'/ided ';"1 1:'"-,-:-2 (2!-!'i:::i.:'-E~ Uu.ilding ~';~_ ,':',t '~~,;,:t+c.;:'t./ h~::.'nF~+it t.O rlCJt
only the appllc3nts
r",,..... "~l .j {,;~r- t.
r" - _, u_ -- -
t:.iut
';:.I-:C2 n(~.i f;)hboJ'" hood
,;';'1, -:.' i,.Jr:.:~ 1 ]. ~
E. DEVELOPMENT DATA AND ANALYSIS
-
fable 1 summarIzes the site and development data .for
-
::jl~ E~
Hvn"lan
"~
Ti~BL~::: .._
DevE~l cJpment:. :Ca.tE'.
Lot f':':;t-f~a
::")10
<.~. c-
.._' ~ I ~
-
Building
i::'uotPl.*' J. nt
2252,,2
,-"' """-
,:::.>..f-"
...
T~ash Area/Service Yard
306. :'; ~3. F"
-
-
Dpen Spa.ce
451" 5 ~3.. F:"
-
External Floor Area
"':t50 I.J.= ":':I. E..F..
-
F" "',. R.
.1.. 5:: 1
-
Development
CI'*ed it
:253:'5.. ~~t
'*' !=
..OJ .. I ~
-
GMQS E:<emption (Einployee f~ousing>
411)(1).0 5.1"..
-
-
1988 GMQS Allotment Rsquest
1571
G..F..
-
"-5-
3b!2 ~ demonstrates the proj2cts compliance with the
;~:,.L inE:n '::; 1 un,:\ 1
~quIY-emefl~S 32t tGr'~n (Jr C:C =ane~
TPi13LE :::~
D:imen~5ional i~equir-emeflts Compliance
F(equl r~;::::mf.:?nt.
P~opo5ed
Camp 1 i ,::~nr.:e
Mln Let Size 3000
"mo
yes
~in Lot Area/Dwell_ng 1000
::'010
yes
'lOll
i-'!in
. _".1_
1--'....)'-
~'.J i c! t ~'\
o
::0. :l
yes
lhil;
>1:i. ,'j i'-:'"' D n 't ",f '::;t !.... d
:)
.1. ;5
\./t'~!S
r'ii n ':.~:L dE' \"',:..r-d
CO'!
v.J
.fi.'.:l-=::;
!-'1i n F'ear- \.' 2ti'-' 0
0)
o
yes
~3(=I'-\/i ce Y.3.r-d
200
"00
';/€~S
!"lah ~ Hei I.;]ht.
40
35 '811
yes
Open ;=:pac2
::;~~ (1 >-
'~:ll(,i)
';+...J ....1, .,:.,..
11::-/
.. ...u. ..1
' /--
-1 f t,.'h~1
yes
r='l. OOt- 1":!1'-e:::"
4504.. ii.
-j'f:lS
-
"j ':
[Jpen space on s;itc iJrlQr i:o demoli'tion
-
(~:2) l.5 time~:; -::;:i.t..:e arez,~
-
'Table ~: ciemorlstrates the pro,iects cOfnpliaJ1Ce with the use
-
..
r2strictions set forttl for the CC zone:
-
Ti4BLE _
..
Table Llf Uses
-
..
USf::('~)
~~tatLls
-
..
:tj'3semE'nt
Tenant. :~3tor.age
FermItted
-
F'l c:'t2 a. Lf]Ve 1
Ret.ail
Per'mi t.ted
..
Uppet- L,€=vel
Office/employee housing
F'ermi tted
-
-
-6-
"~
F. TRAFF Ie, f"AFW: I NG AND F'EDESTR I AN
,'~IIIII
n 1:;:, p !.- oj r:z'c:: t
i, C'C.2.t:c:?(j
2 jJ 1 DC!:: ':: ("DID th.;:!! p(:!de~5t!'-ai n :nall
,::;.1"1cl ~: b.L CJC~<~; ~':r'um th(~ j':;:ubv :::"~;".r'k f "21.n::3J. i: C(-2nter".
(,3.i. 'v'E'n i,:h i s
,-
location IFl ~he CCJfnmerC12i cOI~e~ there s~lould ~e lIttle if
any incr"ease Ir'1 ve~llcular traffic Dll adjacent streets
resulting ,from an increase of 1~13~ 1571 gross ~~quare +eet of
commercial development.
: nt~~' ;::H-c. "i::~C1.: '_',I}:I. 1. c::~~)nt :~.l :-'1:-::, CH2r-H:::; :';-:";.nd ~i=--_~.~:_~~~~'~~~~~__'!':.Q___f~:,nS_~;:L~.r::_?:_g_~_
~,~~-...l~tQ~~L' ~_ ::;a.Llli---PE-d.e_5i:Lli~,O...?__~_'~~ _,_~~~~ ~,_~:~!~1.~.___e..~~~~.~l'::. c: t _~. ! fi E~ I::~ n t: i. r. e
plaza will be snownlelted to elilnirlate snow build IIp.
The applicaflt will provide a cas~--in-lieu payment -for the
~-c~quirC:.\c:! p,=,.rki!'lCJ ~:.;paci~s ':~;ubjec:t to specj,,:.iJ. r'E:.)viQf."I" The
i n'f cn-ma'!': Ion '."'\-
this ~eVlew 'G located in SectIon VI
,-~~
-"
l.:hi s
:Jlr'opo~:,;;;\l ,
G. EMPLOYEE HOUSING PROPOSAL
,-
-
~~s shown on Table 1, the applicants r"equest i~ fo~ GMQS
allotment of 1571 square feet.
All of this allotment would
-
be used as o'ffice space (Jrl t,e upper level generating 3"9
-
-
employees for each 1000 C)~ ne~ leasable 5qLla~e footage.
-
-
rhe uppsr- level is 71.6% 2'fficient leadir!Q to a increase in
-
net leasable square 'footage of "716 times 1571 or 1125 square
-
't:F21:~t "
This Incr"eaS8 gener-ates 1.125 times 3.9 or 4.3875
-
employees..
-
-7-
-
:ne applicants pr"opose to provieje t1DUSlflg for 3.34 (76%)
---~---" -..------.-----
c.\lnplu\/E~I;;.;:'5 t.hrC'l...lc.it"l .:::i. cc.moin(;'.\1::ion ~:!'f D.n (:rri -;:,j.tc.\ deed r"~?sti'-icted
employee unIt arlO payment of a hOlJsing dedication 1:ee~
3pecific211y~ t~e project l:ontalllS one deed restricted studio
apar'tment on t~le second ].'~vei.
Accorcjirlg to the Aspen/Pitkin
-
Courltv HOUS1Ilg Authority 1988 Elnployee HQusing Guidelille5~
r.:.jh'ji::; apaj"'"'r:mf.0n'i.:".
~::,at i ~:3+ i C:'5
the tlousing fleeds o.t
I '~I:"~~
.1....:..'-1
-..-
E~lllp 1. cyees ~
rhe applIcants propose ~o pay a housing dedicatlofl fee to
)i~ + ~:~t:2t
~~ t-'i"'~1- o'~ ~lQusinq t~le !'-emairling 2.09 ~mplove2s.
n,e
e11act 2mount Qr this fee is to be tJetermlrled in cooper'ation
with Housing A\!thor"ity and is s~ub.ject to all applicable
i;lui dc'l i !lC~;~
fhe applicant would 1i1<e to point ou~ that they are providing
an on site employee Llnit wittlout r'equesting an F. A. R.
+ 1 DaY"
----------------.--
!JCJnU:::i"
H. FIREPLACES/WOODSTOVES
J
There ar"e no fireplaces or woodstoves planned for the
-
jJ!'.oject.
-
-
-
I. LOCATION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES
-
-
The additIon o~ such a small afnou~t of commercial space
-
should have an insignificant impact on the use of public
-
-f,:=tci i i t:ie~~~
Table 4 shows the relationship between the
-
project and the pertinent public facilities.
-
-8-
...._..,-".~."._.r;O;;'-...'.'i
.-
": ,~:,T::;i F"
_"_____M
-
Dis~0r'C2 :0 !"i.!OllC .)C~ _~leS
-
-
f:'(;0d es t. !....:I. ,::;"q f'L;tl.L
1/..::: hlClck
-
(.\iaqr1f-?r- i~'iJ.J"" k
1/'2 block,;;;
-
-
I-=:i. j"<G,l 8t-31.':.J. C:'f')
.1. .,.-... t11CJck~3
-
i'::'~:Lt'/ HEI.l1
:I. hIoC:J<
-
;~:UU.I-"t: h (jUS::-C.~
i:)J.c)c/.: ...,
-
;'~'CJst U++ic:c~
h.LQc!<_.
-
Cab ~3taf'iC:l
:i.-/2 !:JlcJc!<
!=\:uby i~:'.::J.r.k
tJl Gel.;;:::;
Gond01 a.
::: bJ.ock~'5
-
J. LOCATION OF RETAIL AND SERVICE OUTLETS
-
li'n, i s '::~,E:?ct l c::'r-!
3 nc)t applicable to commer-Clal SMOS p~oposals~
K. IMPACT ON ADJACENT LAND USES
Since the applicarlts proposed project and all the neighboring
projects contain uses consistent with the CC zone, there
should be flD adver~;o effect on the adjacent uses"
In fi~-\ct ~
-
since the proposed pro.ject is an irl fill pi~o.]ect, there
should be an enhancement of the surrounding 11eighborhood.
-
-
-
-
-
-9-
-
'.
11~~
L. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
4tO
-
: :"iC.' D~';'i ~::it.e[nr:..:~nT. -';"'.i'j ci I::: J. Et::':: .;~;\ J t.::,\/~?.1. ":;,; EI.(" i2 FJ t"* 2sc:?n 't.l \" I....lll de!.-
...
:orlstrlJctiarl !!'1ey ShOlAld be completed by November- 1, 1988.
...
...
~he uppe~ level ~Jill ~itart constructi~n in April (Jf 1989 and
-
should be completed by \Juiy L4 1989.
...
1-: is irnportant to note that both schedules troy ~o avoid
...
Gnst~:lc~ion dl!ring Ihe t"lcaviest -tourIst seasons~
-
...
...
-
-
-
...
-10--
-
......
.-
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
..
.
-
-
SECTION IV.
~-"_.~~..._._._-"
lid'
.~'! tiJ TE ))TI1. I Z.tlT I ON
~.
...,
ftlis sec~iarl contaIns drawirlgs wtlich graphically explair1 the
.'.
a~Jplicarlt s proposal.
."
.."
...,
"'11
-
-
-
_.
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
- .-11-
-
.. . .
.
- '.,"'H~.
- -
.. 41
- -- G)' ..
'" I/)
::I . tV
0 I '..
.r:: ::r u
- .. >- 41
...
::I .. ,-
0 0 0
..
0 *" a.
.. .
.
- ".""1
I
..
41
- ~.
.
.. I .r::
41
..
.. ii:
.. .
.. II!" I , -
- I
.. .
- I
..
- .
- <II
......
. .-
- lj:lJeuoW - -- I ~J
--- ~'~l
.. ! ~
--
..
..
, .,.,,_.~~-
.~
leu!6PO
....
..
.
6updS ~.
.
...
..
I
...
-
t'
"
Z
-
Z
. 0
N
"
Z
0
I -
....
e::(
U
0
. ...I
-I,J
- IJ
'TF~
I ~. ·
'0.
...I
.
.
o
o
z
.
.
.
or-
U
...I
U
.
.
.
u
u
...:
. ..
III
I ~. a.
41'
c
Dl
III
. ==
, ::ill::.
.. .
. r !1'
. 'I ~I
z
I
.
.
I
: oct--- -
I~I : -
,~
, ..Q;&..
~v..
,....
.~
... z
.. <(
..J
- Q,
... to-
Z
- W
.. :E
w
- en
- <(
CD
-
-
-
CD Z
CI
III
..
0
..
III CD
Cl
III
..
0
.. ..
0 III
3!
III ..
CJ ..
0
X c 0 0
III
.c N
CJ
CD
:!:
0
...
I/)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
V .i',.
(/
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~&-
r._
...
...
i Z
C
.oJ
Q.
.oJ
W
>
W
.oJ
c(
N
c(
.oJ
Q.
GI
CJ
III
a.
III
,-
III Z
..
GI ' '
a:
...
...
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
-
-
-
-
...
-
...
o
(II
-
...
...
o
~
...
-
It)
...
-
...
GI
CJ
';: '0
.. ..
J::l!
----'--~
-
...
-
-
-~._..,,,,-,,,,............~......~---~-~,,~.,,.,
-
- z
c(
- ~
- l1.
~
- w
- >
w
- ....
- II:
W
- l1.
- l1.
::)
-
-
-
- z
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_.._...._~~-
~t
.~'
-
..
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
$
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
,
,
~
o
...
ll:I
~~
~&..
CIl
UI
IV
ll:I
CIl
C
o
..
UI
'0
C
IV
Ul
a:
w
I-
Z
W
U
Z
lo::
l-
ll.
W
:I
Z
W
>
<(
Z
<(
::E
>
]:
z
c(
~
>
J:
I-
Ul
c(
W
CD
...
I/)
w
Ul
a:
o
~
ofl
Z
o
Ul
c(
~
o
N
o
...
I/)
-
CIl
c
:2
:J
Cll
..lli
,!:!
...
III
~ I /
:E
l
r .
I
I
I
I
I ..lli
I u
.2
Cll
CIl
I -
~
U
c
I 0
u
,
j
I
I
I
- - \....:
-
- -=-
~t
-
-
-
-
-
-
I-
en
w
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"'C
C
:J
E?
CIl
CIl
...
~
C
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I
-
- I
- I
-
- I
-
-
-
-
&
o
.-
10
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
-
-
-
'0
C
::J
o
~
Cl
CU
~
o
IL
C
.-
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cl
c
.-
'0
':;j
aI
I
I
I
I
I
t--
.)t
U
o
aI
GI
..
GI
~
U
C
o
(J
I
~'i.
~
rn
~
w
~
q
EErn
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
COr
~
o
,g
III
GI
-
GI
..
o
c
o
()
!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"0
..
'"
>
GI
o
';
..
GI
CIl
w
CIl
a:
o
::E
'all
Z
o
CIl
cl:
::E
z
cl:
::E
>
X
I-
CIl
cl:
w
co
...
II)
a:
l!!
z
w
()
z
52
l-
ii:
>
W
..J
..J
<(
~
q
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- c
"
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.."--".,_.,,----_.~~.-...,...---,_.~'~".,.-,.,.._...
~~
anuaAY- uew,(lt
Cl
Qj
l!:!
I-
.,.
N
a.
Gl
U
III
a.
lJ)
III
...
Gl
a:
z
<(
..J
a..
<(
N
<(
..J
a..
~
u
C
Gl
1II
z
q
~
-
-
-
-
- Z
<t
- ..J
- a..
w
- a..
a: <t
- w 0
I-
Z en
- w
u t-
- z W
ll:: W
- I- a:
c. t-
- en
-
- z
.
<Il
III
...
::l
o
a:
ui
::l
l:ll
I
l~
z
0
-
ti
.-1
. ::)
0
a:
-
(J
Z
.
\.
.
IJ
.
I
.
-.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
co
:I:
>-
...
u
.
I:
co
-
III
<Il
::l
o
.c
...
~
::l
o
U
.
L
III
...
.
III
-
...
u
III
.'0
~
0..
-
-
euale~ -
I
-
-
.
III
g* ~
~
CO
.c ~.
III
~
u. .c
::l
a: .
.
II!W
~
~
CO
~. .
.
I: .
Cl
CO
~
<Il ~
4:>>Jeuow- .......: ._1: . .,- . ...
~l~L .1 il . CO Q. I:
I~ 0 'CO
~
0 ::l
(.) .-.. ~ .__.l-_
"
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
--.---
-
-----
-
-
-
..
-
..
..
..
..
..
..
III
..
III
..
..
-
-
-
..
-
..
..
..
..
..
-
..
..
III
..
110
..
.
..
110
..
..
-
..
SECTION \L
-
-
-
'{... DEVELOPMENT l;:EVIEW ~3TANDARDS
-
-
in accul'-danc:e wlth tt12 general applicatIon requirementsj the
-
fc)J.lc)v..Jinq ~:;;L'~'ctiu!""! €::~>~pl,~~lil~:;; hC_I~"} Lhf.:':' pr"Dpo::;:.E'd development:
-
conforms to the specIfic cr-iteria created for ~-2view of a
-
-
cCJmmelH'ci.:tl CJnrJS .;.;'.11otITrent:. .:;;lpplic'3ti.on"
-
-
1. Quality of Design
-
-
A. Architecture
~
-
T1"le dJn'chi "t(.?;ctUt-';;'lJ. c:lesi'df1 0+ 1:1-1[,2 prDJL?ct (j-:;':td th;?
-
following items as principal goals:
-
1. -ra irlcorporate historic elements and building
-
materials In a contemporary design.
-
...:'
TeJ have that contelnporary design be (:ompatible
-
-
with its fleighbors and tt,e t'listorlC distl-ict.
'M
~. :n gIve enough individual identity 3r,d elegarlce
-
to a building which IS flot as large as most of
i t.s nf_?i ghboI'N~~ ~
-
-
..
4.
To provide a plaza a~ea which connects Pitkin
-
..
Center and a rNedevelopeo 11ason and Morse erltry~
-
The result of these objectives lS the design shown on
..
schematic floor" plans and elevatiQn~3 contained in Section IV
-
..
D+ this proposal
The buildirlg is ~ectangular In shape
-
J'"isi!'1(] to a llei~jht of 35'811 l{.,Iell undc"?r the 40'0" m,;.J.Himum
-
height permitted in the CC zone.
The .Sf] '0'1 I..-,nde +,~0.cad(:? on
-
-12-
-
-
-
-
-
!'-I\/!T!;;..~.n ;.:.:(....:'enUL' I!'.;:! '-il J.t:,'::, ~3"/rflm(21':. 1<::::.::.\.1. . Cfn(<?:::;t.!.~,:;;\tiDn:';.n,j pedim(~llt
-
~"c~ln'fCJr'C:::'-2 the !:'r~C)jc2C:i.: ',:: t.i(~\=, t:o t.t'1':~ hl'~it.OI'-ic ijistr-ict..
The
center portion 0+ this ~~ym2n Avenue facade is set out a
-
slight distallce to crlrlanl:e th2 =ymmetrv.
-
-
Thi::?! l.:::-tor~.?fr'ont i ,'ILot-POi'-':;;".tc;!s J.~::1.1'-(]!~'2 ;::::,,',\ilC:S U)'7' 01 .;;;\SS; Ii'.!:!. t:h l,-hJood
-
;~et2ilQd ;JlJj!,~he2d5 below.
_Jlllbineo WLch trle t'listcJr-lc211y
iJrGpo~tioned g1255 and woad panel doors the plaza level
-
compliments the h:istorj,cal distrj,ct e:{tremely well. fhe
-
-
llpper level fenestration is a combinatiofl IJf 11istorically
-
prevalently (jouble hung windows and tall, thin casement
-
windows with transoms~
-
-
The rnaJO!~ t:!uildirlg mat~rial lS brick
i"!D~"E:-?Vt:::r- G ::,El.ndstDfI(?
-
:~i.Ll 02 ve~)' evident d= a base, as ::)2ndlng, 2S liiltels, d~
Jetallirlg, and 25 parapet caps.
Window 'CI~lms and (letails
-
WIll be made of wood and paintedn
Tt'lis use of mater1als IS
..
very remiscent of those on the nearby El!"_ Building and the
C:our..thouS8"
-
-
..
..
We feel the care taken to make this project aesthetically
pleasing 211d c!Jmpatible with its rleighbclr-s and the tlistorical
-
-
dist~ict make this an exceptionally well designed project.
..
-
F:('~qLtE:.\Stf2d ~3core~
_ points
-
-1~-
-
-
,0
."''''''''_.......... _._~-~-----""'7'-~;::_::.~:."-..',,,....,.,,.",,,,,
".~-,---
...
B. Si te Desi gn
-
..
...
516 East ~~yman lS an in fill pro_jec~_ rhe major site design
--
-
objective was to have our open space create a link between
...
ttle plaza at Pitkin CenteJ~ and the r"edesigned plaza at the
..
Mason 0nd Mor-s2 buildingn
The exposed aggregate surface will
-
-
be contiguous from Mason and Morse to Pitkin Center.
This
-
'5urtace will tJ8 scored in a contiguous pattern so that the
-
"J.l2Z2 wl.ll seem t8 flaw ~:rom one bGllding to t~le rlext~ wtllle
...
3till tJ21ng J\Jst the foregr-ounej for three distinct buildings~
,...
i nE' n;::.,+' c.:.' + f E'::Ct
this v.Jill i::.;e ,3. half blDck_I,D~.~__e~:!_=.:.~~~~~,":;ln
-
...
flL:J.ll \'''.ih.=.c~=-~_~j"J,J1 :,rJ<';11 k ~ C.;'JT~'"Y on c.'::'~su{;.:".L c:onvi-2r.s.ati on or
----------
-
[.'J i n d 0 ~.;J~~.h 0 P _,
,_ ____...-r..
The entire plaza will be snowmelted to
...
elilninate snow storage pr"oblems and ensure year r'ound use.
F'i'-i Of' to df:.-::mc.l i ti on q i::here 1.Nas ,;'J.n Dpen i::;paC(.:e E!.rea C).t.
:J.ppl'-(J:;<im~':1tc-:':'J.y .~~:~': on ti"}..S...-~-Sl-{:E:~ 1_.Jndr~I'- ;3f2ctj.on '';-,-.103 (::)-t the
-'-- '
..---__ \ .1.
-- '\
(i'!:5pen Lancr-l.Jse CDde, t.he ,::~.ppl i c,:;-;\nT. '/,jas not f'equi ['-(-:=cj to
-
IJr"ovide aflY fnore space than previoLls.Ly existed on the
-
pt'~operty.
However, in a effort to enhance the pedestrian
..
experisnce, a building location of slightly ahead of Mason
-
-
and Morse but behind Pitkin Center was decided upon~
This
...
location yields 15% cJpen space~
..
-
~lanting will consist of specimen size trees and flowers in
-
.tree grates on Hyman Avenue~
A bench is provided along Hyman
-
-
{4vranue.
A bike rack will also be provided~
'-14-
-
-
~".~-"~-"~---'
-
-
-
.'JC:: +>:::21 ;~:U('
;','
;.... ;:..... "',' , 1,~jii'.i(;J:::i '~".(JC~2.t.hc~t- i.nto
-
c.:.ne p.l. ':..:;::,3
.:::\I'''E:?,:::l
,::;',I",c:l
,. ~J '::'?
':::,-:L ;:~I' 1 .,..
.i_'-.'
iflt..L ../
:r!Df"'('.0
upen
"3pa.ce than
-
IJreviously e~:lsted enhanc:es the en~ire 110ighbortlood and is an
-
eXCCQ'tllJI'lal 5cheme~
-
-
H€..~qu..;:-?~::;t.,z....\d ~3cor"e;~
points
..
-
-
-
c. Energy (:cnservation
..
-
~::.: I. ,=- :::: u
H"7'fTl,;;i.f'i h,;:iS unl '/
"':',."r.c'.
'.c.':.'..!
-;::;qUEi!--(::;
.'':,:-?E,t.
U"i"
!~:.j J. as:;;
{Dr" ,:;-j /1.56 ~ 6
-
square feet of heated space.
The glass area to floor a~ea
-
~atio is only 4.8%~
[I) ;::"tdditiCJrl"
. "!-':'~I
. ... /~
(250 of "~25~;quaJ'e feet)
of the gJ.~ss a~e2
"
.,.. .:.~"tce,::;
':Dutll "
Tile low glass arGO cambirled w:ith the lnsulating pl~Dp0rtie5 of
F:--19 1.'_.I,'J.l1~~:. i-J.f1d ~;:,-.:::fZi 1 ;""'~n.t"(:; ';;:nDU.LeJ m<,:~ke fDf"' ,'J.n c'.,;.:t:r-'c0incdy c.?nel'-gy
e~ficient buildirlg.
The fllechanicaJ. system will be fired by a 96% efficient gas
\:Joiler"
i~ot water will be deliver'ed to each space and then
distribu.tcd by i:an coil ur1its.
This 1~; ttle IDost e~:ficient
!"lC?~':a.ti nq :;~;"/':3t)2m f C)J'~ '..1 ,~.;;;~ .j: '>']:.\(:::~ u+ :::;'i::.I....uctur..r:;..
-
-
-
...
,-15,-
-
..
,.,--~~=--..,-"'-'-''''''''''-,;;-.-,'~;_.- - ---~.---~_.._~--_...--- --"------...,-...,.-
-
...
T"he sinall c:Jlass areaq h:iqiler- than requlr-ed insulation, the
-
-
G+fj,c:erlt i12ati:1Q system and the .i.2C~: of wood bu~ning devices
-
will ].ead to an e:<ceptional,Ly ene~qy effic:ient building~
..
-
t~equ2sted ~3col'"'~?~
, pOlnts
-
-
-
-
D. Amenities
..
~very attempt has been made 'to make ~his project an asset to
-
the neighborhood, the ~lj.s.toric district, and the erltir-e town.
As a result, the following amenities were provided~
1) (~small scale~ h~:11'f block long pedest!.-j.z..n plaza
from Mason and Morse to Pit~(en Center
'} ~
,c~ bencll
1:::'1 b i kE~ (" E~C k
1.})
Einov'Jmel t:ed pl D.~a
F:eque~;;ted ;:3COI""'8::
_ points
E. Visual Impact
....
Considerable effort has been made tc insure 516 Eb
Hyman
...
integrated lnto j,ts surroundings.
The use of bricl< with a
-
sandstone base and sandstone banding is reminiscent of the
-
-
-16-
-
-
..." .~,,--~"'-, -"""-"-~"'~-
-
El~~'_ BuildIng and the CGur.thouse~
~ parapet will screen the
-
,C!8crlD.nic:.:al E'.:qul;::'in(~nt. (-ynDlTi .~;,t.r""(:'?E::.t 1. ';;.;' v t:? 1 ~
-
-
!fle building does flot p~Dject Into
~nv view planes and In
-
fact is lowe~ t~lan permitted in the CC zone.
-
-
We feel ~ne low ~leight and exceptj.onal lJrick and ~;tone
-
-
detaIling war"v"ant special -"ccognition.
-
:<equestF!:O :~::'C::i.Jr''':."? ~
~. points
-
F. Servi c:e Y i.\rd
-
-
"The service yard at 516 East Hyman is located in the alley
completely !3creened fr-om public viewn
Each tenant has direct
access tn -the ~'eal-' P~lt WhlCtl loads dIrectlY to the service
\j '::l~" (j "
The Aspen Land Use Code ~2quires 2 200 square foot service
yard for buildings c:ontainirl9 up to 6000 squar"e feet of net
----------~~:.::._"
l..'?21s21bl" 211'"821" The applic:ant.s project will ctmtai!1,..35~~/~
~:3qu~,I'.e f(~e't uf r1'2t leasablt:2 ar-t=::a .3nd h2Vf:~ -:::\ ~,::;5~H2) s;qua,':"e foot~
/
I
-
'::;(~'rvi ce Y.:'::lf.nd ~
'rt,is service yard 15 easily large enough to
-
flat only handle the e}(pected trash gener"ated by the pr"oject
-
but also provides room for the utility meters~
In addition~
-
thel'"('? i s; r~oom +01'"" f2i ther .::t s~jiumQ_~I':J:~1:- ur~ one c.1vel'~si zed
-
dumpster which could be used by others ifl an 9'ffort to remove
-
-17-
-
-
_.-.----_.__._--".~._._. ..,-_.' ....-----.-. -...-..---.----..---..--.---"
_,,_,.... '._ ."""..,....,____"""'"-.'_~'.,...~_n ,,~............~~__,"<>_____
;~ ! \
-
oume co;. T:he dumpst,srs ",hlCh r::,r,?Sen1:J.,/ enc:rDa.ch 1nto the /
-
/
-
-
-
~ir1211\1, the applicarlt \~ishes to poin"t out that this trash
ay"ea will be fJr"otect2d by an automatic fire sprinkler systefo.
-
Direct alley access, ex"tra dumpster area and fire protection
-
311 combine to make for arl exceptionally well thOUgtlt out
-
-
"3;:":~: (' ...J !" c: c.:.\ \/ d 1"-" \J "
-
-
i:;:E0quest:ed Scor'~~
"::; points
-
2. Availability of Public Facilities and Services
-
A. Water/Fire Protection
r~s previousl)" stated~ the existing serVIce in HYlnarl !'~veflue
!13S eJ10ugrl capaclty to ~;erve ttle ~Jr-aject"
No upgrade will be
!.-'(~'?qui J'""c:d ~
T~le proxiulity to the fire house and the installation of the
automatic sprinkler system throughout the project make this
0uilding an exceptionally low fi~e ~isk.
It should be noted
that this fire sp~inkler system is only requir-ed il"l the
.~
basement and is being provided in the ~est of the p~dject,
iJ1cluding the s;erVlce yard as an extra rneasure of safety to
-
the neighbDrhood.
F=i:equest2o ~3corc?:
.-'.1 poi nts
-18-
""",,"",--~,,~-;...-"."_.,.-."._-"
<-
-
B. Sanitary Sewer
-
-
fi'12 e>:lstirlg ~r2a'tment plarlt
i.ll ~)e able to handle .the small
-
irlcreased loads Ijener2ted
T:h-r:.? pr~D..Jf~ct"
rhE~ collG:'c:tion
-
~;v~~,t:em~ hOI.",eVE'r-
will r2qulre 111f1or IJpg~ading~
Tom .Ur.:3sewell
-
IJf the Sanl'tation I)istrict has ~~tated~ Lha.t t~lis upgrading is
-
a system wide pr'oblern and not ~lnlqlle to this individual
-
-
::)!---OJ,:.?ci: "
-r!'10 applicants ai'OS will:irlg
-1.,-...
i,::Dn"l::r.i but,:: i.:;"lE,~i I'.
-
':".:1'"1 ~).r' E.' C)-t- c". !'-: ':.:~' ;-.'.i--, t], (: j_ ~:' i;"F.-i:: o:.::.'CI i..i.p':1 f' ::".;::: 1 ;--,f,:! "
r:;;c~que<:.:,ted ~:3COI'-(0~
point
C. Public Transportaion /Roads
TIle project l:an be served by tt1S existirlQ roadway system a No
safety ~lazal-ds wlll be crea.ted and ]10 traffic patterns will
b(:;" ~:\l tet-'.pd"
:::::;(-~f'".\!:i.ce tCj t:.h,:.::! prmDji;:::!c:t: ~:,:i.n C-~'~j-:;~ll-':' [:)>':0
accomplished fy"om the alley 3no all tenant spaces will direct
-..,.
access to the rear" entry,
-
The Ruby Park Tr"arlsit Center is Oflly ~ blocks away~ meaning
-
public transi.t users from MOulltairl Valley to El J~bel will
...
-
have convenient accessu
..
-
Fi:equ.e~:.ted f.3cor-c::
point
..
-
-
.-19-
-
-
, ~"....<....~,"_,,,~__.....,.,_~_,,,__,,,,,,,,,,","''''.~'~M'~_'''4'_ ,
-
-
OM
...
-
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-~_........-..~,-~"~~_.-.
D. Storm Drainage
'Ttle const~uctiorl at 516 Eg f~yman will gJ~eatly upg~ade the
dy"ainage patterns that historically el<isted on the property
~or the following reasons~
1& The pitched roofs which shed water onto
adjoining pr-operties to the east and west have
been ro' emovf.:~d ~
Site drainage onto Hyman has been eliminated by
the addition (Jf site drain in the plaza~
~. Site drainage to the alley has been eliminated
by tt,e addition of __ roof over the ser"vice yard~
4. A drywell has been added to collect and
disperse, under the applicants pr-operty~ water
which lands in the plaza i'Jr on the fl.at roofs.
F~i:?qLlE~=;t.€2d ~~;cor'c~ ~
poi n"l:s
E. Pi~rking
The off street parking requirement for the project b~eaks
down ~':tS .foll 0\0-'..,5:
Deed rest~ict2d employee unit
by special review
\~ll
1125 gain in net leasable space
:2 spaces
Unfortunately, the dimensional constraints of the applicants
property does not allow tar parking Cln sitsm
The i:1pplicant,
-2lZl~-
---- ----.-..
,_~ .... "_~ .."~..-__. _"._~~..., "7"""-'"
.-
\::i'ler-E'+DI'.e~ i,~!:i.1J iU;2QU(;?;;;t ,I ':~,':J.tis+v
his requirement by
-
~~ovldir'q a C2stl",'irl-lieu ~laYfnen~.
'"his payment may be used
to offset "t!"18 (-i'~~ Q'f -2CGlltly a~)prD'/ec munIcipal park:ing
':';;.3r. :;'.g(:! ~
...
r~le detailed specIal review requiremeflts appear ill Section VI
-
ot ~his pr-oposal~
...
-
I::;,~ E' Cl u. c::~ ::5 t 2':' d ::.:! c: (J ~~. F2 :;
pCJl fli:
...
~. Employee Housing
-
.-
As stated in section 3 of this proposal, the applicants
pr"opose to provide emplcJyee tlousing far 76% of the flew
employees generated by a comblflation of an on site Unl"t and
.....
c2sh-irl'-ilc!1 fLlflds.
F<[~~qu.eS;i.tc?;d ::::)c CJ!'" (::: ::
'.":'" points
4. Bonus Points
The applicants feel they are pr"oposing 2n exceptional project
-
which is deservirlg of addi"tional bonus pointsa
TrH?
..
p.;::n-t.icu:J.df' a~""E:E:\";::'; V-iDf'thy LiT r">2cognitiDn ,3!""f2::
-
:ta
The s'tr-ong ties to the histo~ic dIstrict in the
..
':::1.r-ctli tectu.re"
..
..
-21 ~-
...
..
.~,.-;:;_._~,~,~.."~,,,.,~_77::7.-'-'~-'-~-"------'-+-'-"--~---, -.-~-:7.~~'---7.'
-
-
-
~'he cr~2tion of the pedestrian plaza orl Hyman
{i\;;;;:~nu.e~
-
-
r-r,e oversIzed ~erVlce yard pl~ovided lrl an attempt to
-
..:.\11i~'2viate. the fE:~~<:L':;:it.if1g ",;~)11f2~--/ r::lu"t'te!r"ll.
+. Thr:? ImprUDVF!!d stor'fi1 dt-i;";\in.3qE~ in the <:':..rea.
-
t~~
'-' ~
The Ilnproved i:i~e safety 1n the ar'ea because of the
-
.Fire sprin!<ler svstem~
-
(j.
Tt1e providing of 2f1 (In s te deed restric"ted employee
..
..
IDusing uflit with out ~eques'ting an F.Agf~u ~'!_oor
.:'0.1'"" (:?::,_:'~1. [:) DnU.~:5 ~
-rt1cse Items were explained in Sectiofl ill ot this pr"oposalM
-
-
..
..
..
..
-:22-
..
..
-...-.........--- ._......,.._~..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
SECTION VI
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
V!. pPECIAL !3EVIEWq
A. Introduction
,~, .::1.ddi ti en T.U 'j'-h,~::, i::J"K1S .:;;\1:L (JtmC?rl"C ~"'c::'qu.est ~ t.heJ....e -:3Tf? d seri es
of ~ipecial i'"evj,ews r-equGs~ed i'Qf- tile pr-oject~
rh8 +ollowing
section details those ~eque5~ and addresses the criteria for
,:='/.::.\i ui..~ti ng -i::i'-iG::m.
B. Parking
1. Description of Request
"rhe applicants request that the par~ing requirement for the
(jeed r"estricted studio apa~tmerlt be set at zero.
Additionally, given ,the dimensional constrai!"lts oi: the
applicants pr'oper-ty~ they ~2quest to ~;atisfy t~leir off street
parkiflg r-2qui:""emer-lt n\! P!~o~lcjir'g
c:;;;.s,h. Y"j"-j. J. ;';:'11 i..; ~;\vm(;;:nt."
2. Discussion
The applicants request to set the par~~ing I~equirement at zero
is based on tIle tlistor-ical F~recedent tha.t tlas been long
/7
//
established in the CC ZQne~
None
of the approximately thirty
---
cJeed r.€~stl'-ic:tc.\d ~:_!~~.=-~~C?y-'(~e u~i ~5 J.II
the CC zone has access to
un si te parol< :i.J"I,(J...-
---- ~--".--'
In addition~ for the reasons presented
below, the dimensional constraints of the site preclude on
site parking.
-23~-
--~"...~
....- """",_,":;""'e___,""'--"'~'_"_'
...
The applicants r-equest to satisfy their on site parking
-
requirement by p~oYiding a cash-in-lieu payment to the city
-
is tJased on the followiflg two arguments.
Fir~st, gi yen the
small site, there is physically not enough land area for
-
;Jseable open space, a service yard, on site parking, and
-
...
still have a marl:etable gr-ound floor ~'-etail space..
In this
-
particular case. the irlclusion of on site parking would have
-
moved the tJuilding sou'th causing 2 loss of open space..
in
addition, the service yard would have had to be reduced. On
this specific site, the applicants feel the open space and
service yard provide sigrlificant benefits.
f="inally,
provlding parking on this site would lead to potential
c:onflicts between cars and service trucks.
Tile second argument is the anticipated construction of the
'.....",
municipal parking garage.
This garage will be located 2 1/2
blocks from the project and should adequately serve not only
this pr"oJect the entir-e comme~cial care.
~. Neighborhood Analysis
There is very little on site parking in the commercial core
on developed parcels.
The alleys in this area are heavily
-
. . .
useo tlJr serVlce.
The addition of a parking garage on the
.-
Rio C3,..ande Fwoper-ty should free up ,::;tn"et parking.
..
..
..
"-24-
-
..
-,.._~~...,- .,~-+~-"".,
".....~"'-"-"'"._~,..,-~,.,y>.~...-~-;_.,--.'"-
4.
Payment
.....
"'..,
If this request is accepted the applicant will provide a
-
cash-irl-lieu payment to the city.
-rhis payment will be used
...
...
to satisfy the on site parking requirements -for the project
This payment will comform to all applicable regulations.
c. Histo~ic P~ese~vation
The project received unanimous HPCfinal approval June 14,
1988.
...
-
-
-
-
-25-
...
-
"'~" .,
"-~
.-."-.
.~ M__'
_...~.,_~..._...--.._.._..______........--___~"_w.._____~...,~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
SECTION VII
-
-
,-
-
,-
...
-
...
V I I GMQS EXEMPT! ON
-
1. Description of Request
-
The applicant ~equest a 400 square foot GMQS exemptiQn~
square footage will be used for a moderate income, deed
This
-
Qo....
restricted employee unitg
-rhere will be just one studio unit
on the property and it will conform to all the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority 1988 Employee Housing Guidelines.
,,,>OJ
>~
-
...
-
..
-
-26-
-
-
-
."',~
"'~~,~_, ,. '_~'N",.","...-' .
,_,_ "',",' ."~___"N""_.~>_""._~
.---~.....,.,--'''---~
-
..
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
..
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
..
-
-
APPENDIX
-
,"
.. -----
----'
~
1)
-
... 2)
-
...
- 3)
... 5)
-
-
6)
-
...
- 7)
...
ATJ2IQlHENr 1
rAND USE APPIJ:CATICN RlRM
PJ:Oject Name. r; 1 r; b~c::.r 1-Jym:m
PJ:Oject I!lcation .:;1(.. ~:;:JC!t- -1ym::ln: T,...~ 13 UifV';.,.... ront-o.... C111-...rl.h~;C'.;nn
(indicate ~L..cc<t aQiress, lot & block J1Imn>x, legal descripti.a1 'WheJ:e
awraPriate)
PreSent zonin:J
CC
4) lot size 3010 S.F.
Applicant's Name, AddDesS & Phcne f SVA Associates. c/o Steve Marcus.
P.O. Box i709.Aspen. Colorado 81612. 925-7615
,Representative's Name, AddDesS & libJne f Bill Poss and Associates.
605 East :!ain. Asoen. Colorado 81611. 925-4755
Type of Applicatian (please check all that aw!Y) :
a:nlitional Use
_ a:n::epblal SPA
Final SPA
_ a:n::epblal Historic DeII'.
_ Final Historic DeII'.
--...:. HiIxJr Historic DeII'.
_ Historic I'\<omnl iti.i:n
....
- ...1L- sr--i" 1 Review
8040 GreeIlline
_ stream Maigin
-
_ Ch~ roo
Final roo
__--.~~ n' . ftI_"-, ~.....~...;~~.....
.... _ rAA&l1~..~JS!!fIl r.&.ala:o _ ~V......-a
_ 0::inkIDiniumiz _ 'l'eld;/HaP ""cudi..cad:
_ IDt Split/IDI: Line
. Mj...",Lu.:..t
~. Historic DeSignatiat
....L. QQ> Allotment
....L. QQ> ExeIpti.cn
-
..
-
...
-
8). .
nesc::ripticn
~
l'L~ty) .
of ElCist:iri3" uses (,.......... an:! type of exist::in:J st:mct:ures:
sq. ft.: JUIiJer of beCh...........: any previaJS ~ gr.mted to tbe
1 At:rnct"nrp. c.ont~inina 7..'11'1.4 O"rm:;~ SQuare feet of retail snace was demomlised
in July 1988. Final r~C approval was granted in June 19S8.
9)nesc::ripticn of Ilev'E'lT,-lt ~
GMOS allotment: 1571 S.F. Commercial
Special Review: Cash - in - Lieu of on site parking
(;;10S Exemption: 400 S. F. Enployee !lousing
10)
Have you a~ tbe fall.owinP
~ . -de to .111_1 -tt. 2 M1niJua 9.....~QC:il'Wl o...Lcad..:.
- '
- ,"lSl! to A11- J d. 3 S[-"'i ~i", St_i_i""l Ch&l.:aL..
- '
- I ,,*lSe to At;h-I.....d. 4, Beview stardards far Your ~li..."ticn
VPCl.
n/~
y~~
.-,.-,.
"'i..~:.~~7 ~
__.0_0'_'_ _..__..._._____ _ _______________________ _.._______4___"_'.. .--.,-
..... ,_~_". ""._'_'''_'~.'~""""",~"_,"_._~",,,,'''''''h'' ~ .... "'".. _,.._"~.,''-
.~-...
".'---' -
~ _. -':'
___ __'._m ,,'
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
SJA Associates
c/o ~3teve I'olar-eus
P.O. 8m: 1709
Aspen, Colorado 81612
j"!r ~ {.:\l an i~i chman
!~lannlng Director
i..~:ity of nspen
L:::0 South (3al ena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
)::;:1:::: ~
:::.:!:L,:~; Ea.st Hyman
;)c::etl'- (.':\1 dn '!
If' reference to the above referenced project the applicant:
SJ?\ Associates
c/o Steve l'1arcus
P. O. Bm: 1709
Aspen, Colorado 81612
925-7615
tlereby ~uthorizes~
Bill Pass and Associates
605 East Main Street, Suite 1
Aspen, Colorado 81611
925-4755
to act ifl their behalf in all matters ~Jertairling to the
cammer"cial GMQS allotment procedures for 1988.
::::il ncerel y ~
A~ k,.. ~'Y
::3l.:ev€-: l"'!arcus
.. ,--",,~,,-~-~.'_'~-';
-----._-~_. .-. ,
...
~,..
...
-
-
-
-
...
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
-
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, Inc.
Title Insurance Company
601 E. Hopkins
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-1766
CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP
Pitkin County Title, Inc., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the
State of Colorado hereby certifies that S3A ASSOCIATES, LTD., are the
owner's in fee simple of the following described property:
LOT 1, PITKIN CENTER SUBDIVISION (A LOT SPLIT), as shown on the Plat
thereof recorded February 22, 1983 in Plat Book 14 at Page 36. COUNTY
OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
SUB3ECT TO THE FOLLOWING ENCUMBRANCES:
1. Deed of Trust from: S3A Associates, Ltd.
to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin
for the use of Pitkin County Bank & Trust Company
to secure $475,000.00
dated August 1, 1988
recorded August 1, 1988 in Book 570 at Page 9.
Subject to easements, rights-of-way of record,
This certificate is not to be construed to be a guarantee of title and
is furnished for informational purposes only.
PIT
1988
..LE, INC.
BY:
nature
DATED: AUGU
-
...
-
-
-
-
-
...
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
...
-
...
-
,..
-
..
'""
.
-
..
-
...
-
...
CIT
PEN
August 8, 1988
Kim Weil
Bill Poss and Associates
605 E. Main
Suite #l
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 516 E. Hyman
As you requested, this letter is
able and can be provided to the
payment of the required fees. We
service be abandoned at the main.
to verify that water is avail-
above referenced sight upon
also require that the existing
Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
~t'5'\~
Jim Markalunas, Director
Aspen Water Department
JM:ab
--~-~.~,~-.............._~~..~ "".~''''
.-.,,-,
-
-
Aspen C9onsolidated Sanitation ,District
565 North Mill Street
Aspen. Colorado 81611
Tele. (3031 925-2537
-
...
Tele. (303) 925-3601
-
-
-
,-
August 23, 1988
..
-
Bill Poss & Associates
605 E. Main St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
-
Attn:Kim Weil
-
-
RE: 516 E. Hyman Building
Dear Mr. Weil:
..
..
The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has sufficient capacity at
the treatment plant for the additional demand. However, the collection
system will need some minor upgrading to accomodate the relatively minor
additional demand. It is the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's
understanding that the owners at this project are willing to contribute
their share of the anticipated upgrading.
Sincerely
':3...-.---.~ r...-.x~
-
Bruce Matherly
District Manager
'""
-
BM/ld
RECEIVED
AUG 2',1988
""
-
-
-
OILL I'OSS AND ASSOCIATES
"'" . "'o"\1r':'..'"l~
-
-
. ....._.-."'-,"..- -",.~.,..--".,..--_"'"
..
'""
-
...
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
-
-
-
-
-
w~ ~~ cffrtw!PJ)~
420 E. HOPKINS STREET
ASPEN, COLORAOO 81611
(303) 925-5532
TO: Kim Well fV
FROM: Peter Wirth
RE: 516 E. Hyman Project
DATE: August 16. 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
In regards to your second floor project at 516 E. Hyman I see
no problem in providing fire fighting service to the project.
The location is approximately 2 blocks from the fire station
and our response time averages 3 minutes to the site 24 hours
a day.
I also understand that the second floor of your project
is to be fully sprinklered.
If you have any questions please
feel free to call me.
,.....~~____.____OC,,",.,.....~.~,__
z
oC
..J
a.
..J
w
>
W
..J
<C
N
<C
..J
a.
.
,.... QI
U
III
J Q.
m
z
J III
..
QI
a:
..
-
QI
.!:!
>'0
.. ..
QI III
. ...-. !'l>.
-------
.
"
-
\
~~
o
N
o
...
REFERRAL FEES: IclS-UU
00125 - 63730 - 47380 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123 - 63730 - 47380 HOUSING /~:5. CO
00115 - 63730 - 47380 ENGINEERING e'~OO (/0
SUB-TOTAL /1 ,;(,0'/0 00
County
00113 - 63711 .47431 GMP/GENERAL
- 63712 - 47432 GMP/DETAILED
- 63713 - 47433 GMP/FINAL
.63714 .47441 SUB/GENERAL
- 63715 .47442 SUB/DETAILED
- 63716 - 47443 SUB/FINAL
- 63717 - 47450 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
- 63718 .47460 ALL 1-STEP APPLlCATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
REFERRAL FEES:
00125 - 63730 - 47480 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123 - 63730 ~ 47480 HOUSING
00113 .63731 - 47480 ENVIRONMENTAL COORD.
00113 . 63732 . 47480 ENGINEERING
SUB-TOTAL
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-2020
~
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
City
00113
- 63721
- 63722
- 63723
- 63724
- 63725
- 63726
- 63727
- 63728
- 47331
- 47332
- 47333
- 47341
- 47342
- 47343
- 47350
GMP/CONCEPTUAL
GMP/PRELIMINARY
GMP/FINAL
SUB/CONCEPTUAL
SUB/PRELIMINARY
SUB/FINAL
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
ALL 1-STEP APPLlCATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
- 47360
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00113 - 63061 - 09000 COUNTY CODE
_ 63062 . 09000 COMP. PLAN
~ 63066 - 09000 COPY FEES
_ 63069 - 09000 OTHER. ,i,,' r
SUB-TOTAL
TOTAL
Phone:
prolect::-'-/ l:-
. ,
'1);/1,1'1"".
Name:
Address:
I.
-1-,
~,' L"~)!
Date:
Check #
Additional Billing:
'//4 .Y' Y
/- ;' /3()!)!:f
-# / (</0
& (j
/)
-ff-
f.>;'._
,
"-,,,
r-/ ,/ If) .:" j'J
, r:.';/'/j /-;
o~
{;/J 1
# of Hours: c/t
/>/. 'ttf
t...HI" IjI (
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611 7" J'A - f? 3'
(303) 925-2020 ::J 7 ~ 7 I
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES 0' J - "Q-/3 ()Jlf
City
00113
REFERRAL FEES: /02:;-.00
00125 - 63130 - 47380 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123 - 63730 - 47380 HOUSING /c)5. rJO
00115 - 63730 - 47380 ENGINEERING ,:;100.00
SUB-TOTAL j/ .;l, () yO. (}O
County
00113 - 63711 - 47431 GMP/GENERAL
- 63712 - 47432 GMP/DETAILEO
- 63713 - 47433 GMP/F1NAL
- 63714 - 47441 SUB/GENERAL
- 63715 - 47442 SUB/DETAILED
- 63716 - 47443 SUB/FINAL
- 63717 - 47450 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
- 63718 - 47460 ALL '-STEP APPLlCATIONSI
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
REFERRAL FEES:
00125 - 63730 - 47480 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123 - 63730 - 47480 HOUSING
00"3 - 63731 - 47480 ENVIRONMENTAL COORD.
00113 - 63732 - 47480 ENGINEERING
SUB-TOTAL
- -
....
- 63721
- 63722
- 63123
- 63724
- 63725
- 63726
- 63727
- 63728
- 47331
- 47332
- 47333
- 47341
GMP/CONCEPTUAL
GMP/PRELlMINARY
GMP/FINAL
SUB/CONCEPTUAL
SUB/PRELIMINARY
SUB/FINAL
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
ALL l-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
- 47342
- 47343
- 47350
- 47360
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00113 _ 63061 - 09000 COUNTY CODE
_ 63062 - 09000 COMPo PLAN
_ 63066 - 09000 COpy FEES
_ 63069 _ Q9000 OTHER - G mf
SUB-TOTAL
TOTAL
it- /, (.,,<:/0 170
~O;I '-'C
,;;~o;-o. aD
Name:
.Jt! ,
I(..fl lf5
--ISo"" ({J P(,.)
Phone:
Proiac!: 5/{., E Ilv/>< an /-IvP.
(/)fh/>' {'ro 1.1 Gl'l P
Data' ({- ? . 8 f\
,(... .
Address: '"/
r::.c .
, "'
0'-"1
Check If /t -5
Additional Billing:
oq
{:;/) 1
# of Hours:
/>I,c/<- 'tlf
t.oHI" rr (