The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.gm.132 W. Main St.AsiaCommercial.A33-90 . .. GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM ApPLICATION FOR 1989 AND 1990 MAY 1990 .~ ~ ... - - . ... - . - - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - .. .. - .. .. . - - .. - Prepared By: Dennis B. Green Attorney At Law 617 W. Main, Suite B Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-1885 Charles Cunniffe & Associates Architects P.O. Box 3534 Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-5590 Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. Jay W. HaIlIIlond Consulting Engineer P.O. Box 2155 - Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-6727 and Greg Mozian Landscape Architect 117 S. Spring Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-8963 Submitted By Applicants: Steve Ko and Lily Ko 132 W. Main Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-5433 .. .. - TELEPHONE )0)-925.1885 DENNIS B. GREEN Attorney at Law 617 W. MAIN ST.. SCITE B ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 TELECOPIER 30).925.5856 - - - .. - May 30, 1990 .. - - Ms. Leslie LaIront Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 - - - Re: Asia Project, Growth Managerrent Application .. Dear Leslie: - - Attached for the review of the City and the Planning Office are twenty-one copies of the Application for the Asia project. Also enclosed in a check for $3,775.00, the required application fee. If there are any questions regarding this AWlication, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. - - - - Sincerely, - - ~" /-- "'--/- ~ . -------- - Denm.s B. Green h~"_ - .. .. .. - - - . .. - .. - .. - .. - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - .. - .. - - .. .. - I. II. III. IV. V. VI. Section TABLE OF COHTBHTS INTRODUCTION - PROJECT OVERVIEW.................... DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT History Of Existing Building .............. Renovation Of Existing Building ........ Proposed Office Building .................. Water System................................... Sewage Treatment System ........................ Drainage System ................................ Fire Protection ................................ Stastical Analysis Of Proposed Uses And Zoning .............................. Traffic Generation ............................. Affordable Housing ............................. Stoves And Fireplaces ...................... Location And Impact ........................ Effect On Adjacent Land Uses ................... Construction Schedule .......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. r. J. K. L. M. N. ANALYSIS OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA ...... A. Quality Of Design (1) Architectural Design (2) Site Design (3) Energy Conservation ....................... (4) Amenities. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5) Visual Impact (6) Trash And Utility Access Areas ........... Availability Of Public Facilities and Services (1) Water Supply/Fire Protection ............. ( 2 ) Sanitary / Sewer ............................ (3) Public Transportation/Roads ........... ( 4) Storm Drainage ............................ (5) Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Provision Of Affordable Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RELATED APPLICATIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PARKING Growth Management Exemption .................... Change In Use .................................. Special Review ................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. B. C. PHASING OF ALLOTMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SUMMARY - REQUEST FOR BONUS POINTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Paae 1 4 4 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 9 10 10 10 11 13 14 14 14 15 16 18 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 21 22 24 24 24 25 26 29 ... - ... - - - APPENDIX - EXHIBITS .. - - Basic Site Plan .................................. Exhibit A Architects Drawing - view From Main Street ....... Exhibit B Land Use Application Form ........................ Exhibit C Letter From Applicants ........................... Exhibit D Letter From Attorney re OWnership ................ Exhibit E Ownership Certificate ............................ Exhibit F Vicinity Map..................................... Exhibit G Existing Building - South and East Elevations .... Exhibit H Existing Building - West and North Elevations .... Exhibit I Existing Building - Lower Floor Plan ............. Exhibit J Existing Building - Ground Floor Plan ............ Exhibit K Existing Building - Second Floor Plan ............ Exhibit L Parking Plan ..................................... Exhibit M Proposed Building - LOwer Floor Plan ............. Exhibit N Proposed Building - Ground Floor Plan ............ Exhibit 0 Proposed Building - Second Floor Plan ............ Exhibit P Proposed Building - South Elevation .............. Exhibit Q Proposed Building - North Elevation .............. Exhibit R Proposed Building - East Elevation ............... Exhibit S Proposed Building - West Elevation ............... Exhibit T Letter From Engineer ............................. Exhibit U Adjacent.Usage Map ............................... Exhibit V Area Z0010g Map .................................. Exhibit W Landscape Plan................................... Exhibit X - - - - .. - - - - '. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - ;; .. - .. - .. .. - I. IHTRODUcTION - PROJECT OVERVIEK The Asia property is located at 132 W. Main Street. The property sits in the middle of the City' s Historic Overlay District for the Main Street area and within the Office Zone. At present, the site holds a building which received designation as a historic structure in 1976. The structure has for at least fourteen years been the location for a restaurant, currently one operated by its owners, Steve and Lily Ko, as the Asia Restaurant. This existing structure has also been used for office and residential purposes. The objective of this proposal is to develop the unused portion of the parcel, being the area to the east of the existing building, while renovating the existing building. Thus, the project consists of two parts: (1) Construction of a new office building; and (2) Renovation of the existing building. The historic aspects of both parts of the project have already been approved by the City's Historic Preservation Committee. On November 1, 1989 the Committee approved the design for the new building proposed for the site. On May 9, 1990 the Committee approved the design changes for the renovation of the existing building. This application for an allotment for office space is needed for the construction of the new office building. The application is divided into six major sections. This First Section gives an overview of the project. Section II .. .. .. - .. - - - - - - - - .. - .. - .. - - .. .. .. - - - .. - 1 - - ~ . .. .. ,- describes the proposal in greater detail. Section III applies the criteria of the Land Use Code to the project. Section IV discusses the related applications for change in use and exemption for affordable housing. Section V addresses the issue of phasing of allotments. Section VI sunnnarizes this application and offers a justification for the request for bonus points. For convenience, relevant supporting documentation has been included in the Appendix. The site plan for the property showing the existing building, proposed building, and related elements is attached as Exhibit "A". The architect. s drawing showing both buildings as seen from Main Street is attached as Exhibit - - - .. .. .. - - - - - "B". .. The Land Use Application Form giving basic information on this proposal is attached as Exhibit "C". A letter from the applicants authorizing this application and representation is attached as Exhibit "D". The disclosure of ownership requirements are met in the attached letter from Dennis B. Green, attorney-at-law, and Certificate from pitkin County Title, attached as Exhibits "E" and "F". A vicinity map showing the location of the parcel within the City is attached as Exhibit "G". Overall, the Applicants feel that this proposal meets the basic intent of the Code and its policies. The use proposed, offices, is the exact use for which the property is zoned. The proposal will enhance and preserve an existing - - - - .. - ... - .. .. .. - - .. .. - - 2 - - - - - - - historic structure located in the center of the Main Street Historic District. The proposal will also create a significant amount of affordable housing within close proximity to shopping, employment, and public services. - - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - - - - - - .. - - - 3 - .. - - .. .. - II. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT A. History of Existing Building The existing building consists of two miner's cottages both dating from circa 1888 or earlier. The portion of the structure at the corner of Main and First Street was the George Moser house, which has been confirmed to have been at this same location since at least 1888. The portion of the structure comprising the east side of the building was the Jason Freeman house, which had been located on the same block, but at the corner of Main and Center Street (now Garmisch Street). The Freeman house was moved to be joined together with the Moser house in their present location and configuration. In October, 1976 the structure was designated as an Historic Structure. B. Renovation Of Existing Building On May 9, 1990 the Historic Preservation Committee granted approval for certain changes to the existing building. These are shown on Exhibit "A" (site plan) and Exhibit "B" (view from Main Street). Further detail is shown in Exhibit "R" and "I" (architect's drawings of elevations), and Exhibits "J", "K", and "L" (floor plans). These renovations principally involve changes to the interior of the building such as interior stairways, utilization of space, and flow of traffic. The only exterior changes are minor ones that will not, individually or considered as a whole, have a significant .. - .. - - - .. .. - - - - - - - - - .. - .. .. .. .. .. - .. - - .. - - - 4 - .. - '"" .. - - effect on the character of the existing building. The exterior will be repaired, refurbished, or repainted as necessary using materials consistent with the existing ones. A handicapped access ramp will be added between the buildings. A dormer with windows will be added on the East side of the second story to provide light and ventilation to the employee units. All building materials will either be the same (wherever possible) as the existing materials, or materials closely compatible with them. The minor changes proposed should have no appreciable impact on the character of the building or on the neighborhood. The interior remodeling will maintain the present style. The exterior changes are all minor ones which do not materially increase the actual or apparent mass of the structure. All of the changes are located on the East side of the building where they will be barely visible from viewers beyond the property itself, particularly from either Main or First Street. c. Proposed Office Building On November 1, 1989 the Historic Preservation Committee granted approval for a new office building which the applicant proposes for the site. This building is shown on both the site plan and view from Main Street, Exhibits "A" and "B". Further detail is shown on Exhibits "M", "N", "0" and "P" (detailed site and floor plans) and Exhibits "Q", .. - .. - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - - - .. - .. - .. .. - - 5 .. - - - .. - - "R", "S", and "T" (architect's drawings). The Applicants presented several designs to the HPC over the course of a number of meetings. The design which was approved incorporated numerous suggestions from the members of the HPC and Planning Department staff. The COlllDlittee members' cOlllDlents included statements that the design was a good solution to a difficult space, a simple design appropriate for the site, and that the design was appropriate in terms of massing for the location. D. Water System The proposed development will be served by City of Aspen water system. The details are stated in the letter from Jay W. Hammond, P.E., attached as Exhibit "U". E. Sewage Treatment System The proposed development will be connected to the City's system at the existing sewer line just north of the project site. See letter from Jay W. Hammond, Exhibit "U". F. Drainage System A subgrade drywell system will be utilized as explained in Exhibit "U". - - - - - - - - - - .. .. - - - - - - - - - - - - G. Fire Protection Syst_ The site is currently served by two existing fire hydrants and is within a short distance and response time of the fire station. See Exhibit "U". H. Statistical Analysis Of Proposed Uses And zoning This application is for a total of 2,84l square feet of - .. .. - - - - 6 .. - - - ... - net leasable office space and for two affordable housing ... - units providing 1,974 square feet of living area. The ... proposal and compliance requirements of the Land Use Code are - outlined as follows: - - BASIC INFORMATION ON PROPOSAL - LEGAL: Block 58, Lots K, L, M, N and west half of Lot 0 ZONE: o - Office - LOT AREA: 13,498 square feet - - BUILDING SITE AREA: 4,036 square feet FRONT YARD: 10 feet SIDE YARD: 5 feet - 10 feet between building REAR YARD: 15 feet HEIGHT: 25 feet to mid-point of roof slope - '. ASIA OFFICE BUILDING - FLOOR ANALYSIS - BASEMENT ACTUAL F.A.R. '- ,- ~~ Gross Area: ~Net Leasable: GROUND FLOOR 1,232 sq. ft. 141 sq. ft. 947 sq. ft. - - - (Al Gross Area: (B) Net Leasable: 1,232 sq. ft. 947 sq. ft. 1,232 sq. ft. - - UPPER FLOOR - (A) Gross Area: 1,232 sq. ft. 1,232 sq. ft. - 7 - - - - .. - .. - .. (B) Net Leasable: 947 sq. ft. TOTALS (A) Gross Area: 3,696 sq. ft. , (B) Net Leasable ct-- (Office Space): 2,841 $q. ft. .5'-- (C) F.A.R. (Enclosed) : 2,605 sq. ft. (Covered Porch): + 98 sq. ft. = 2,703 sq. ft. .. - .. . .. .. - ------, ~--" .. AFFORDABLE HOUSING '------ 1,078.0 sq~t~t)" 269.5 sq. ~ J ..~ / .. UPPER LEVEL .. Net Living Area: ( .. - Area Per Person: - LOWER LEVEL - Net Living Area: ~- /;~6.0 sq. ft - Area Per Person: ... - TOTAL 1,994.0 sq. ft. ... - ASIA REMODEL OF EXISTING BUILDING .. - FLOOR AREA ANALYSIS BASEMENT (A) Gross Area: (B) Offices: (C) Affordable Housing: (D) Circulation: GROUND FLOOR (A) Gross Area: ACTUAL F.A.R. .. .. 4,821 sq. ft. 467 sq. ft. - "" 1,273 sq. ft. - 896 sq. ft. 257 sq. ft. - .. - 5,833 sq. ft. 5,833 sq. ft. - .. 8 - - (A) Gross Area: , 11,812 sq. ft. (B) Office: 055~Sq. f~ (e) Restaurant/Bar: 3~78 sq. ft. (D) Affordable Housing: - - - - - - (B) Office: (C) Restaurant/Bar: (D) Circulation: UPPER FLOOR (A) Gross Area: (B) Affordable Housing: (C) Circulation: TOTALS - - - - .. .. - .. - - - - - (E) F.A.R.: .. ACTUAL 1,284 sq. ft. 3,778 sq. ft. 430 sq. ft. 1,158 sq. ft. 1,078 sq. ft. 80 sq. ft. 1,974 sq. ft. /" / 7,415 sq. * Including Stair and Low - .. - TOTAL F.A.R. CALCULATION - LOT AREA: .. F.A.R. AT .75: .. F.A.R. EXISTING BUILDING: .. .. F.A.R. NEW BUILDING: - TOTAL F.A.R. REQUESTED: .. 13,498 10,124 /7,~ { 2,703\ '~ .. I. Traffic Generation 10,118 ft. .~ H~'~ Ar F.A.R. * 1,114 sq. ft. - The traffic impacts are detailed in Exhibit "U". .. .. - .. 9 - - .. - . . . - . . .- - - - - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - - . - - J. Affordable Housing This proposal provides two dormitory units, each consisting of two bedrooms with kitchens, living rooms, storage space and dining areas. Both dormitory units will be located in the existing building and are a large portion of the interior renovation of that structure. One 1,07 8-square-foot unit is located on the second floor of the existing building, as shown on Exhibit "L". Another 896-square-foot unit is located on the lower level of that building as shown on Exhibit "J". Both units will be rented in conformance with the City's guidelines and requirements for affordable housing and deed restricted for the required fifty-year period. K. stoves And Fireplaces None are to be installed. L. Location And Impact This development is in an ideal location relative to many public facilities. A park is located within one block of the site. A school with playground facilities is approximately two blocks away. There is a major bus stop nearby with service available to ski areas and throughout the R.F.T.A. routes. The size and location of the proposed building should keep the increased demand for such facilities at a minimum. The increased need generated by the provision of office space on the hospital and airport should be minimal. The intention 10 .... - .. - .. - .. - . .. - ..-. - - - - - - '!',.">l is to provide better office space and affordable housing for existing residents and to meet demonstrated shortages in these areas. M. Effect On Adjacent Land Uses This proposed development should have minimal effects on adjacent land uses. In fact, due to the historic preservation and design aspects, the proposal should enhance the neighborhood. The office space proposed is by definition the correct, highest, and best use of the property. The site sits squarely in the middle of the Main Street Office Zone, the boundaries of which were determined by the City based on its comprehensive planning process. Other office buildings are located near the site and throughout the length of this office zone along Main Street. The site is, in fact, relatively close to government buildings and the downtown core area, thus within walking distance for many of the anticipated occupants for many purposes. The affordable housing is also well-located, near shopping, employment centers and similar amenities. The traffic generated, whether vehicular, on foot, or by public transportation, will most often use Main Street, the preferred corridor for such movement. Thus, the impact on residential neighborhoods a block or so from Main Street should be minimal. The adjacent land uses are idenfitied on Exhibit "V". - - - - - - .. - .. - .. .. .. - - - 11 .. - ~ - .. .- .. - .. - , - - - .... .. - .~ - - On either side of the proposed office building along Main Street the uses are similar and compatible with the proposed use. To the East on the same side of the street one finds a hotel, another professional office building, and the public library. To the West on the same side of the street there is a hotel. Across Main Street is a hotel and Paepcke Park. There are, of course, residential uses in the area, including those behind the site on the same block. This mixture of uses is an inherent feature of the zoning and planning for the area. The premise is that office and similar uses should be located fronting upon Main Street with residential uses located just off Main Street. Thus, it is not uncommon to find offices and similar uses on the same block as residential structures. Considerable effort was made during the HPC design review process to minimize the effect on nearby residential uses, particularly in terms of the height, scale, and massing of the proposed building. The site was placed in the Office Zone long before these Applicants made their proposal as a result of the City' s comprehensive planning process. Again, the site location is ideal. It is within walking distance of several amenities including the Music Tent and related summer activities. Overall, the proposal is supportive of and in conformity with the character of the neighborhood and the City's planning goals. The community-oriented, rather than tourist- oriented, nature of the of the proposal deserves the City's ,- - - - ... - .. - 12 - - .. - ,.. - - support. The historic aspects of the structures are discussed in more detail in Sections II(A) and (B). The already-obtained approvals of the Historic Preservation Committee demonstrate that this proposal will enhance the historic character of the neighborhood and preserve a designated historic structure. N. Construction Schedule Assuming that there are no major pre-construction delays, construction will commence in late March or early April of 1991. Construction will take approximately six months and should thus be completed no later than November, 1991. The proposed building is relatively small and construction inconveniences will be mainly limited to the alley behind the building, with only minimal impact on the Main Street side of the building. - - - .. .. .. - ,.. - .. - - - - . .. .. .. .. . .. - - 13 .. - .. ".. - - III. ARALYSIS OF GROWTH MAHAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA A. Quality of Design (1) Architectural Design As noted, both buildings involved have received design approval from the Historic Preservation Committee. The existing building dates from circa 1888 in the miner's cottage style. The renovations to the exterior of the existing building are designed to preserve the historic structure and to enhance its appearance. The building will be repainted and some construction finishing repaired or redone. All materials will be the same as or consistent with the original ones. The intent is to make it a better building and to substantially increase its usable life. The new building was also reviewed by the HPC and found to be compatible with the neighborhood in terms of style, scale, siting, massing, height, and materials. The Applicants spent a great deal of time and resources in designing the building, including implementing various suggestions made by members of the HPC. Thus, the proposal will aid the City's efforts in preserving existing historic structures while enhancing the historic feel of the neighborhood. - .. - .- - - ~ - Requested Score: 3 points . - - .. 14 .. - - - - - (2) Site Design: Similarly, the proposal represents a high-quality site design. The Applicants presented several designs to the Historic Preservation Committee. The Committee felt that the initial designs were inappropriate solutions to what several members referred to as a difficult and unusual infill space. Responding to these views, another design was submitted and approved. The HPC complimented the Applicants' solution to the problems posed by the site. The landscaping plan is similarly sensitive to the needs of the site. Whenever possible, the plan incorporates elements from the existing landscaping on the site, particularly the vegetation in front of the existing Asia building. Elements such as the hedges in the front have been continued along the same sight lines. The result of the landscape plan is to create a feeling of as much open space as possible within the small area available. The plan also is consistent with landscaping on contiguous parcels, such as the aspen trees to be located next to the existing ones on the Hotel Aspen property. All utilities will be provided underground. Walkways will be provided linking the new building, parking in the rear, and entrance and yard fronting Main Street. Requested Score: 3 points .. .. .. - - - - - - - ... - 15 ... - - - - /~ / L;J - ...-' - (3) Energy Conservation "t. - The building will be designed to maximize benefits in - energy conservation and operating costs while minimizing -. initial expenditures and system complexity. All energy- - conserving devices will be simple to understand, operate, adjust and maintain so that efficiencies achieved can be reasonably maintained over the effective life of the building systems. An infiltration barrier wrap such as "Tyvek" will be - - installed around the entire building exterior which will significantly reduce infiltration. All penetrations of the wrap will be carefully caulked and sealed to further enhance the effectiveness of the barrier. High-quality windows and doors with state-of-the-art closures and gasketing methods will be specified throughout, and bat and rigid insulation specifications will exceed minimum standards. Insulation values for the project's walls and roof will be R-19 and R-38, or better. In addition to the exterior barrier wrap and internal .- - bat/rigid insulation, an interior vapor barrier will be - provided. This vinyl vapor barrier will not only further - decrease infiltration but will tend to hold interior humidity - levels at least ten (10) to fifteen (15) percent higher than - exterior levels resulting in a greater degree of occupant - - comfort at lower room temperatures. All penetrations of the - vinyl vapor barrier at wall switches, outlets, etc. will be - 16 - - - - -- - ~ sealed. With the individual unit envelopes sealed and insulated, an air-to-air heat exchanger will be used to control the indoor air environment while significantly reducing energy losses. Comfort heating will be provided utilizing high- efficiency, state-of-the-art mechanical systems. The use of individual temperature controls for major occupancy areas will be maximized to the greatest extent possible so that building energy inputs can be matched to the occupants' daily use patterns. All plumbing fixtures and fittings will be of a low- flow, low water consumption type. Faucet aerators will be selected to provide the maximum apparent flow at relatively low actual flows. All plumbing will be fully insulated to prevent excessive water usage at the point of use while waiting for adequate temperatures to be achieved. Domestic water heater design will incorporate the latest technology and may be integrated with heat recovery from the heating system. All of the glazing in this project will be selected with the highest "R" value practicaL Glazing located within six (6) feet of the floor will be low "E" type to enhance the warmth radiating between occupant and glazing. The use of low "E" glass will permit a significant improvement in the occupants' sense of comfort because of its effectiveness in reradiating interior warmth. The selection of interior - - - - ~ - - .. - - ... - - - - - - - 17 - - .. .. .. .. .. finishes and colors, particularly in those rooms with east, -. south and west-facing glazing, will carefully consider the advantages of radiant absorption and mass heating. Both interior and exterior lighting will be specified .. - - - utilizing the latest in energy-efficient bulbs. Whether - incandescent or fluorescent, high-lumen output/low-wattage - input bulbs will be specified. In addition to using high- - efficiency bulbs, multiple switching within each space will be designed to closely approximate task lighting based on probable furniture layouts while maintaining sufficient flexibility to focus on task lighting arrangements as the - - - ,- - structure is occupied. Requested Score: 3 points The most important "yj~ amenity df the project is its (4) Amenities" ,-" .' ' , -'j_f-- - contribution to the vitality and historic character of the -- neighborhood, the Main Street area. By completion of the - infill of the site, the project replaces an unimproved lot. The project will bring new office space and affordable - housing into what is at present an unsuccessful portion of .. Main Street. The pedestrian interest and activity will be - enhanced by the proposed uses, both office and affordable .. housing. - The proposal also includes a handicapped access ramp and .. .. walkways. The new building provides elevator as well as - 18 .. - - - .. .. stairway access, for the needs and convenience of all users. .. .. Requested Score: 3 points .. -. (5) Visual Impact - As detailed in an earlier section, the design of the proposed building was reviewed and approved by the Historic - - Preservation Committee. The size and mass of the building - - received a great deal of attention by the Committee and the - owners. The design was, in these regards, changed after .. comments by the Committee. All designated scenic viewplanes have been considered, and the development does not infringe upon any of the viewplanes. - .- Requested Score: 3 points (6) Trash And utility Access Areas - The project has been designed to include two enclosed trash/utility areas located behind the buildings with access from the alley, convenient for collection/service vehicles. - .. - One trash area will exclusively serve the restaurant and the .. other, located nearer the new building, will serve the - occupants of both the existing and new buildings. The .. enclosed areas are sufficient to accomodate at least two - dumpsters, which should be more than adequate for the .. , ~._/- ~',-? '.:\ Requested Score: 3 points ,,-~) ,/ (\ . .',:) - purposes. .. ,\, ).,-- .. ;3 :~ -" J .. .. '-__7 ,~ /"-J 19 .. - - .. - .. - B. Availability of Public Facilities And Services For each of the following categories, the proposed development can easily be handled by existing facilities: (1) Water Supply/Fire Protection As demonstrated in the report from Jay W. Hammond, P.E. (attached Exhibit "U") this proposal can be served by the existing systems without any required upgrades. Mr. Hammond contacted the appropriate officials in each case to verify the information stated in this Application. Requested Score: 1 point .. - .... -. - - - - - - - - (2) Sanitary/Sewer The existing system can handle the proposed development without need for system improvements according to the Engineer's Report, Exhibit "U". - Requested Score: 1 point - (3) Public Transportation/Roads The type of project and its location mean that there will be minimal impact. As explained more fully in Exhibit "U", there is a bus stop 150 feet from the site and it is located near to a major thoroughfare. Requested Score: 1 point - - - - .... - .... .. .. - (4) Storm Drainage All historic drainage patterns and off-site discharge 20 .. .... - .. - - will be maintained at historic levels by use of a subgrade - - drywelL See Exhibit "U". - Requested Score: 1 point _. - (5) Parking - The Applicants propose to provide fourteen parking - spaces as shown on the attached parking plan, Exhibit "M". - - The parking requirements for the site are analyzed as - follows: - PARKING REOUIREMENTS 1980 REQUIRED FOR EXISTING BUILDING 1990 NEW NET LEASABLE [2,841 Net Leasable X 1.5 min.] 15 - - 4 ,- CASH-IN-LIEU FOR REMAINDER [4.5 x $15,000] SPECIAL REVIEW REDUCTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING [75% x 4 Bedrooms] $ 67,500 - - - 3 - CHANGE IN USE CREDIT - 2 - - TOTAL ON-SITE SPACES 14 - - The Applicants have significantly reduced the size of - the proposed office building to meet the .75:1 F.A.R standard and to reduce the need for parking. A reduction of 75% [3 of .. - the 4] under special review is requested for the four .. .. bedrooms of affordable housing. The Applicants feel this is .. well justified considering the total real needs for parking and the reduction of the size of the new office building. - .. - 21 - - - - Also, the elimination of use of the area on the northwest corner, which had intruded upon the right-of-way, frees up nearly two spaces for parking on First Street. Further, the Applicants are negotiating with the adjacent Hotel Aspen to acquire up to three parking spaces. These would reduce the amount required for cash-in-lieu while helping to satisfy the real on-site needs for parking. The change in use credit [-2] is based upon the elimination of l,974 sqaure feet of commercial space to be replaced with four bedrooms for affordable housing, [6-4 = 2]. In any event, the Applicants feel that parking in this area is not a serious problem. There is, in fact, ample street-side parking available in the immediate area. No particular difficulties in parking have been experienced historically in the area and the additional need for parking can be met under the proposed plan. - .. -. -- ~ '- - Requested Score: 1 point '."lII C. provision Of Affordable Housing This application proposes a total of 1,994 square feet of affordable housing in two dormitory units. The proposal requests 2,841 square feet of net leasable office space. The standards set forth in Section 8-106 provide for a calculation of 3.00 employees for every 1,000 square feet of office space. Thus, the proposal will be deemed to generate 8.5 additional employees. - - - - .. - - - 22 - - ... - - The two dormitory units are each designed to provide housing for four individuals, for a total of eight persons. Each of the units provides well over the 150 square feet of net living area required. The second floor unit provides 269.5 square feet of living area and the lower level unit provides 224.0 square feet of living area per resident. This proposal houses ninety-four percent of the employees generated by the proposal as defined in the Code. The location for the housing is ideal, being within walking distance of the residents for employment, shopping, entertainment, etc. .. - .. - - -. - .. - - - - - Requested Score: 14 points - - - - - - - - - .. .. - .. 23 - - .. .. - - - IV. RELATED APPLICATIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PARKING The affordable housing to be provided in the existing building as part of the quota application and the parking proposed require that three actions be taken under the Land Use Code. A. Growth Management Exemption First, the Applicants request a growth management exemption for the 1,994 square feet of affordable housing being provided pursuant to Section 8-104 (C) ( 1 ) (c) of the Code. This housing is designed to accomodate eight persons. The location for the housing close to services, employment etc., and the need for housing so located shows compliance with the City's housing Plan. More detail is provided in Sections II-J and III-C above. B. Change In Use Second, the Applicants request an exemption for change in use to enable them to provide the proposed affordable housing pursuant to Section 8-104(B)(1)(b). Some of the space to be converted to affordable housing had formerly been used as part of the restaurant operation. This application clearly meets the standards required for change in use and will have a minimal impact upon the City. Indeed, the change is meant to provide needed employee housing, not to generate need for housing. The existing building is not being enlarged and thus will have no visual impacts. The parking and public facilities impacts are .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. .. - .. .. 24 .. - ... .. - - discussed in Section II above. - - c. Special Review - This application proposes the provision of fourteen -- parking spaces, the amount required. Also, the Applicants - propose to provide 4.5 spaces by payment-in-lieu. Thus, - application is made for approval of this process pursuant to - Section 7-404 of the Land Use Code. - - In addition, the Applicants request a reduction of a portion of the parking required for affordable housing to waive three of the four spaces usually required. Again, this - - request is made under the special review provisions of the - Code. y /~ \ / -;1 ::J c ''f" i:~1 )C-) ./ - --; '....../ r------ .', - ... ... ... - - - - .. - - 25 - - .. - .. - ~ V. PBASIRG OF ALLOTMBHTS In addition to the allotment for 1989 the Applicants request that they be awarded a multi-year allotment pursuant to Section 8-103(D) of the Land Use Code. Alternatively, they request that an excess development allotment be granted pursuant to Section a-103(B). The Applicants recognize that the City has been reluctant to grant similar requests that the City has been reluctant to grant similar requests in the past. However, there are special circumstances which justify the request made here. First, the proposal meets the standards set forth in Section a-103(D). The proposed development is for a single building which cannot be constructed or operated in phases. The public facilities such as water and sewer must be designed to handle the needs of the entire building and must be installed in the initial construction sequence. Phasing the project over two separate years of construction is logistically impractical and economically unrealistic. Only one medium-sized building is proposed and the impact on the neighborhood will clearly be less by construction done at one time. - - - _. .. - - - - - - .. - ... The attached reports make it clear that the City is capable of absorbing the increases in need for services generated by the proposal. The location of the site near established facilities and along transit corridors makes this ... - .. - ... 26 ... .. - ~ -.. - an ideal situation in many regards. For example, a bus stop is currently located nearby and the site is within walking distance of the public library, retail and service establishments, and is near to a public park. The goal of community balance is supported in that there is a current demonstrated need for office space. In the past several years, the City has experienced an imbalance between office space and other uses. Indeed, there is such a significant shortage of office space that a task force has recently been formed to address the situation and possible remedies. A multi-year allotment for this office space would serve to correct this imbalance. The Applicants believe that this is a quality project which should receive the scoring required under Section 8-103(D), particularly considering the historic and architectural aspects of the proposal and its location appropriate to the proposed use. In addition, simple fairness supports the request for an additional allocation. The Applicants began planning for this proposal over two years ago. Beginning in April, 1989 the Applicants began the application process for design approval for the proposed office building. The intent was to submit an application for the quota available that year. However, before the application was submitted the Applicants learned that certain exemptions had been granted which reduced the available 1989 quota to only the 1,200 - - - -. '- - '.. ... ,.""" - .... - - - - - .. 27 .. - "", - - .. - square feet currently available. The exemptions which reduced the quota involved additions to historic structures or sites by the consideration of new buildings adjacent to buildings with historic designations. The Applicants ask only that their proposal be fairly considered on its merits. They feel that their proposal is essentially the same as the projects which were exempted from the quota system. One fact is surely true - except for the exemptions allowed to other similar projects the full quota would be available this year. These Applicants should not be forced to wait an additional year for their project under these circumstances. Principles of equity and fairness support the request for an additional allotment under these particular conditions. The proj ects which were exempted provided little or no affordable housing while this proposal provides significant amounts of the needed housing. - .. - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - \:..) \ / cfi5C; - /qc,o / ~ c:o-.. / (-P L) .. - - - .. - .. - - 28 .. .. .. ... .. .. - VI. SUMMARY - REQUEST FOR BONUS POINTS The Applicants feel that this proposal not only meets the standards required but represents an outstanding design meriting recognition and the additional points available. This proposal has two major attributes, the details of which have already been discussed. First, the proposal provides affordable housing for substantially all of the need generated by the proposal. Second, the proposal preserves a designated historic structure while enhancing the historic character of the area. - .. .. -. - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - "" .. .. .. .. .. 29 .. .. - - ... - - - .. -. .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... - - - ... - ... - .. - 1:E8 '" - ... '" ;s ;.. 2 NORTH PlUI' snEer t r,____ I ,-- i a ~ [~ U':.."!_~______ MAIN ST.. ASPEN. CO. I Exhibit A lio"-d' i[II.1 -, [I" -. i!i!I_, 1'1': I li'l ;'1 I :'1' I :. L ,'-I 1,[ (I Ii -. I ~~ '{' I l ,1 " 0' n. ~; I, , I' ~' '-- I: - II 'If \ - t: ! I ~l~ ) g' II! Jll u <3F < CHARLES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS I 1 PO BOX 3534_ ASPEN, COlOAAOQ 81612 TElEPHONE 303/925-5590 - - .. - .. - - -. .. .. .. .. - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. ... - . .. - - - ..~.\ i :', I - ! . . . . ~ ~ Z . ~ . ~ \\\ -\ . . , I . " ~ . , ~ . . .~"~ . _.... a ~~m/~Hnw= nil ASIA OFFICE BUILDIN MAIN STREET 'ASPEN-COLORADO Exhibit 8 - - 1) - 2) - - ... 3) -. 5) ... - - 6) - - 7) - - - - '-,," - - - - - - - .. - ... .. .. - NlTJ>D.1MENl' 1 UIND USE APPLICA:l'IOO FCDt Project Nama AS I A Project Lccatian 132 W. Main. Lots K. L. M. N. and the west half of Lot 0, 8lock 58. City and Townsite of ASDen (indicate ..L......rt: aa:J,ress, lot & block IlUIIDer, legal description ..mere ~te) PreSent Z<:li'iliq 0 - Office 4) IDt size 13.498 sa. ft. Applicant's Nama, AddresS & Phone # Steve Ko and Lily Ko. 132 W. Main. Aspen. Colorado. 81611. (303) 925-5433 ~BS~~.ative's Name, AddresS & Phone # Dennis S. Green. 617 W. Main Suite S, Aspen, Colorado. 81611. (303) 925-1885 Type of AWlic:ation (please d1eck all that awlY) : _ Onl.itional Use _ <Dnoeptual SPA _ Final SPA _ <Dnoeptual Historic DeII'. _ Final Historic .DeII'. _ MiIx>r Historic DeII'. _ Historic DelJr:)lition _ Historic Designation ...2..- Speed" 1 Fsvie'W _ 8040 Greenl.ine _ stream Margin _ <Dnoeptual roo _ Final roo _ Mountain yiew Plane _ SUbiivision _ O::.nXminiumization _ Text./MaP ~ _ IDt Split:;lDt Lina 1\djustIllent ..2.... aQS Allotment -L aQS ExeIlptian 8) ~ Change In Use Desc:riptian of Ex.istirq Uses (f''''''w-",,, ard type of ex:i.stin:J struc:bIreS: approxillIate sq. ft.: ro....r-.. of Lo:o<:h..........: arrj pravic:us app:rovals granted to the property) . See Attached. Section I. 9) Desc:ription of OlI\Iel~lt AWlication See Attached. Section II. 10) Have you attached the follC7Jirg? ~ ~.se to Attad1ment 2, Min.Uwm S"rni..."ion eontents ~ ~:iIlse to Attad1ment 3, Specific s"rn;""ian cart:ents ~ Response to Attad1ment 4, Review stardardS for 'tour AWlication , I Exhibit C - - .. - .. June 1, 1990 - - -. City Of Aspen 130 W. Main Aspen, CO. 81611 - - - To Whan It May Concern: - - \-Je, Steve Ko and Lily Ko, the o.vners of the property at 132 W. ~lain, Aspen, Colorado, hereby authorize Dennis B. Green and. O1arles Cllnniffe & Associates to act as our agents, and to present a growth rranagenent quota application on our behalf. - - - - Please accept this letter and attached rraterial as our renovate the Asia Restaurant, and to develop an unused ?roperty; building offices and employee housing. OUr application - is pursuant to the requirerrents of the rranaganent system. application to portion of the request - this City's growth - - - The building which houses our restaurant was origina 11 y a miner's cottage, was also used for offices at one tinE, and was added to the historic register more than a decade ago. - - - You have already approved our plans for making Asia Restaurant rrore attractive, and efficient as a dining business. This includes design changes, and renovation. \-Ie wish now to add affordable housing and office space to an area of to.vn in need of both. - - OUr plans are sound, and we feel our changes to the building will enhance the quality of life in our neighborhood. - ~'Ie believe the changes to Asia Restaurant meet the intent of the Growth t1anagerrent Code - and ask for your support. .. ... Sincerely, - .. .. - .; _'_~';,.~ :- "'""S'Ceve Ko _.._~: .~"'- , ,- -t:..' t___ I - -,.~- --""- --- ... Lily Ko .. Owners - As~a Restaurant 132 W. ,.\3.in Aspen, Colorado 81611 ... - ... I Exhibit D I .. .. -- .. "'" TELEPHONE )0).925-1885 DENNIS B. GREEN Attorney at Law 617 W. MAIN SL SL:ITE B ASPEN. COLORADO 816] 1 TELECOPIER )03-925.5856 - - - -. May 30, 1990 "'" - - City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 .. "'" - Re: Ownership of 132 W. Main - - To: The Aspen Planning Cornnission, Aspen City Council, and Planning Office - The undersigned has reviewed the ownership of Lots K, L, M, N, and the west one-half of Lot O. Block 58, City and Townsite of Aspen, also known as street address 132 W. Main, Aspen, Colorado. - - - Said property is owned by Steve Ko and Lily Ko in fee simple. The only enCUITbrances on the property are those indicated on the Certificate Of Ownership, attached as Exhibit "F". - This information is accurate as of May 30, 1990. It is based upon the attached Certificate Of o.-mership, information provided by the owners of the property, and an updated search of the relevant records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder including all records through this date. - - - Sincerel y , - .. ~ .... .,- ..' .~........-"'" /'-.. . Cennis B. Green ~ ..,:::::;~ .,- - - .. ... - DEG/aw Enclosure .. - .. .. .. .. - I Exhibit E I - - ... ,.;ent J. Hlgens Pr.lldent ~",TKIN COUNTY TITL.E. Inc:. Title Insurance Company 60' e. Hopkins. Aspen. Colorado 8'6" (303) e25.1766' (303) e25.6527 FAX Christina M. Davl. ViOl Pr"id.n\ ... - ... - ... CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP -'PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC., A DULY LICENSED TITLE INSURANCE AGENT rOR THE STATE OP COLORADO HEREBY CERTIPIES THAT : STEVE KO AND LILY KO _ ARE THE OWNERS IN PEE SIMPLE OP THE POLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY _ SITUATED IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO TO-WIT: ... LOTS -K. L. M, N_ AND THE WEST ONE-HALP or LOT 0, BLOCK .58, - CITY AND TOWNSlTB or ASPEN. ... - _ DEEDS OF TRUST. MORTGAGES, ENCUMBRAN~ES APPARENTLY NOT RELEASED: ... DEED OP TRUST ----- BOOK 508 AT PAGE 837 NOTE: AMENDMENT TO DEED OP TRUST RECORDED IN BOOK 509 AT PAGE 763 - PINANCING STATEMENT -- BOOK 518 AT PAGE 81 ... NOTE : EASEMENT ----- BOOK 525 AT PAGE 48 _ LIEN AND JUDGEMENTS APPARENTLY NOT RELEASED: . - NONB - _ ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE THE PACTS STATED ARE TRUE. THIS CERTIPICATE IS NOT TO BE-CONSTRUED AS AN ABSTRACT OP TITLE. NOR AN OPINION OP TITLE. NOR A ... GUARANTY OP TITLE. A~D IT IS U~DERSTCOD AND AGREED THAT PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC.. NEITHER ASSUMES. NOR WILL BE CHARGED WITH ANY PINANCIAL - OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY WHATEVER ON ANY STATEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN. ... CERTIF liD TO: JULY 3. 1989 AT 8:00 A,M. - , INC. - BY: - GNATURE ... . .. - ... ... , ... ... I Exhi bit F I .. ... . ... \-:,......... --r ..., ~ ~ '," ,"" '. .... - -. - - .. - - - - - - - - - - - /1 .... :1 ... - .. - - - ~-. .. .. .( c ~ ., ~ - r) _ ~ - ~ ..J - c ~ - " 'l - - c. < ~ > I- '- Z - () 51 Exhi bit G "" .., -' out "' <( <( U.., 'I Z Q. U cr .. - " ~ . 1- J : rr: a: "" .. 0 \,j,J 0 III l- 7. 0 a.. l- vi 0 ~ :J o.q; (I) ~ o z ... '" .J \.;l ...-=-:- ~'.. ( - (J) (, t . ",','.'". '. :,: ~ . : i _, I I to" 1'.1,' '. '. ..... . . ...... . .., . W^Gt\;r:i1 I~ .'r,':;, ': ""c1E::l " -F"" ~~ I,. i ,.... )r1 ,: I 1.-; >0; .; ~ \'1 t.') a ".r ! f f I f 1 r J I il , 1 . . I if ! f 'f . Jj 11 I ~ HI j 11 I I. I. Iln~1I .. ... .. - .. .. .. ii !', _. - .. .. .. .. .. -- I I j I , .. .. - ,~ - - - ~ .- ~... - .. .. ~ .. .. ... JES J ARCHITECTS CUNNIFFE & ASSOCVi , CHARLES .. ... MAIN ST.. ASPEN. CO. t Exhibit H - - h II !I h m "Iill 11m '.1.1".111."'.' . 1'1 ,.I! :1 iliil iii il'.lljll!' 1111' 1'1 !I"I , I ' I i ' I I 88l [=:J I I ~ z E ~ .... ~ ;.. ~ ~ ~ z = .. 5 ~ , 0 '" I 5 OAADO 81612 TElE~ONE 303/925-5590 PO BOX 3534, ASPEN, COl - ,~ .. - - .. - _. - - - - .. - ,. - - - - - - - - - - - .. - ,. - - - - - - .. - - - "I 1 1 1 "I Iff [ I II IJ " J i Ii ' I " " I if I I r I I i' Ii ~ ~ '" .., .. ~. .., .. '" = i~ ... ~ '" ,:; '" o. -< ... ~. > '" .., -< ~~ ~ > 0 ::l z 0 z , ii' MAIN ST.. ASPEN. CO. t Exhibit I , ; , i i II I: , I' I il ' III' ! "I ' 'I ' I" , II II ii, ,I , "1 .1 i " II .', i ,r: I , I; I i fU n nun " J I " j . J i CHARLES CUNNIFF! & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS 6 I PO BOX 3534, IISPEN_ COlOAAllO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925.5590 - .. .. - - - .. _. - - .. - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - - - - - ~EB s ~ ll:l ;;l o o ll:l ;S ~ ~ ~ , , . 0 'V 'V , I , , z ! , ....-...._-.... u----""-/ fL.___J! 11 g r,'='.::'-_-:_:'::_-_-=-:: :' " " I, " " " " ::::. ~~.i-" , " :::'..... : : :Tf.~, " " " " " I ~----.,., I-.___...l I , " , " , " , , , , , " " 'i :~_,:""__::J_L-=: :..,-__==____-:..-:J " " " " r---, I.___.J r--, l.__-' ~ r, 1:: T'-----njr---- :: :: I' >. l..'::J t:;-_-_::::!~::':.::::I II I ill Iii ~u [ju n aa il! ~ " " ~: If c ~ ~ I~' ,/ :-':':'-1= 1: ~ c~~J II I' ~~:::~::~~~~~~~:: CHAIlI..ES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES; ARCHITECTS MAIN ST.. ASPEN. CO. I I Exhibit J PO BOX 3534, /\SPEN, COlOAADQ B161] TELEPHONE J03/9]5-55'1O r=----==':..---.= -===i , , , , , , I I I , , , I " 'I :.::-:J 2 - .. .. - .. - - - - .. - .. - - - - - - .. - .. .. - - ,... - !~ E9 .. - - ... .. - - - - - - - , _--::_-:.:\:J ~ I ~ L II II 311 h~ iU ~ilil ~; sa !~ ~ Ii , I II : '\\/, ' :: i: , I , , .r,IIIIW"I"'" ,. :' 1111 t"'\l~: "':: ,; I' 1'11,,1 :'\ .,1'1' 'I,' , ~-=-=='=I=--..l. _i_LJ-~..J_..1_ ":. 1 j I 1 , I t \ Ii Ii " " " .:::c:. , " " " " " I, " " I: " II " " Ii " " I, I: ~=i=T'~m III" 'I ,111111 j"I. 'I " <' " F -000"'], [i=':C;: I II II U'':-=:'===:::~-=:''-_-':=':::'::' :::.::"-_ J CHARLES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS MAIN ST.. ASPEN. CO. I 3 Exhibit K PO BOX 3534. ASPEN_ COlQAAOO Blbl2 TElEPHONE 303/925-5590 I tIII\ .. . . "" . ... .. ... .. III .. ... -. - ... ... .. ... .. ... ... .. .. .. .. = .. ... III ... . ... ~ ... .- ... gj (") o ~ ~ 8 " .. '" ~ I~ E9 II!!I ;11 lee ~u in aa ~! I o " If ~ ~ CHARLES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES; ARCHITECTS MAIN ST.. ASPEN. co. . I P.O. sox 3531. ASPEN. COlORADO 81bl2 TElEA-IONE 303/925-5590 4 - - -- t ?-q'.O'1 I t I , . - - ..~ d )L- 1..- I ---r-- - - - - - . . - __..... ,H'.' ur C -t r-' --- I (J; i J .' I : I'>v~v. ClI ~I I 'I -, , . ~! - . -I LIt' i \: '\- I , - - -- - - - - - - - .- L-e.-A?J!>- ?f^~ - - , . - - i I 4-: ~'-()" Zo'. t? " I ......Z'.I/" ----.---. ....--.- -----l t-- I ' I - - - . .. -. .' ., , . .. SCALE: 1/10" = 1'-0' .. - - ASIA OFFICE BLDG.... MAIN ST.' ASPEN' CO. CHARLES CUNNll'FI! & ASSOClAnS/ARCHITECTS - 7 - - t Exhibit N ~ PO. BOX 3534. NiPEN. COlOlWlO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925-55'10 , ... - .... - .... . - - . ,...... - - - .... - .... - .... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .... ( ,,~ '<dr::. "-" ~. '(, <t~ I, 0i W'-O'l " ., ' i''----,\ T p~ . ' 1-1, '\7.. ~-_.- , P N, -~-- .-;.. ~::.-.::~/ I-I- ( C"TI I- 1--1- f- l--' I- ~-- Uf " I J1ro -= [~-:~~J C "- 1-----__ t .. " Ii'-"l.n".y .. I F"'f'."-H It. i?N:.. .-1 . I;>'o'd ...... _...t~~'-:---.1'- Zpl-:".O" SCALE: 1/10. = 1'-0. .. -~ CHARLES CUNN'FFE & ASSOCIATES; .. MAIN ST" ASPEN' CO. I - ------.:.,~- Uf." ~~ II_J _-.1 . .. It + 1f'=tJ' . , \I .-~ - ~ I ~ HITECTS 8 Exhibit 0 PO, BOX 3534, ASPEN, COlOAAllO 81b12 TELEPHONE 303/'125.5590 ~ - - ,~ t zo'- C,II I )'---- - - - -~ - - - - - ,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0\'- - i l--1"^~~ :7fA"-F- f':.L-e:.v. 1I"J. - - - - .. , --ft4. I . 2-u' - 0" ( J;::'-O" -----------rf- .UPPE.B....E.LOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/10. = 1'-0. - CHARLES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES; - - - - . . - ., .. ASIA OFFICE..BLDG. MAIN ST: ASPEN' CO. I I . . HITECTS ~ , ~ -(J ! ,I - I IRi ! I ..~. 9 Exhibit P po. sox 3534_ ASPEN. COlOAAOO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925-5590 . - - - - - - .. .. - .. -= .. - - - - .. - - - .. - .. - - - - - - - - - ... - .- ~ : .- -" -~ I I ..f- -- --- -- - --- - --- I .~ ?O/..lT....J ~A..Le:. ~ t=:. L. e::. v AI.!.!.? N ___ 1":::- 10'-0" CHARlES CUNNIFF! & ASSOCIATES/ARCHrrECTS 11 MAIN ST.' ASPEN' CO. I I po. BOX 3534, ASPEN. CO-ORAOO 81bl2 TELEPHONE 303/925-5590 Exhibit Q - - - ... - ',. - ... '- ... - ... - ... - - - - - - - - - - - .- , " --B- - --.. _.-,.-. n,'._.__ ...... .- '%~c:ifJ _._ _": .,"::':":::'-;--':"-"7'" '--."" . -~- - . -a .:_ · . .':-E- I I 1-- --- - -- ~ 0 ra-r, H ~P-.Le:::.: ,"-=" ASIA OFFICE ~ MAIN ST: ASPEN' CO. J t Exhibit R E:..l-e: V A -r I 0 t--J 10'-0" CHARLES CUNNlFFE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS 10 PO BOX 35)4_ '>'sPEN_ COlOAADO 81611 TElEfl--lONE 303/915-5590 .. - ... .. ... - - - ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - - - - - - - - - ~. {1i ~ ~. 1-1\' III " \\~ tn r is m ,- <- q} Cl l. I I ! I I I I 1---- I I I I r--- I I I I I I L_ .' 'I .', [OJ] m em [I] CHIUfl.ES CUNN/FFE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS 12 MAIN ST.' ASPEN' CO. I Exhibit S I Po. BOX 3534_ ASPEN_ COlOAADO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925-5590 '"" ~ .. - '"" - - - ... - ... - .. .. - .. - - - ... .. - - - - - - - - - - - .. - .. - - - ~~ I-- I f\.\l' .. I - ~ II \ -- m I r Cl, {f\ <. }> 0 r ASIA OF.FleE BLDG.. MAIN ST: ASPEN' CO. I Exhibit T I C:J I I I ~-- ~J:.jo...n~ .. m m CHAIlI.ES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS 13 PO BOX 353.. ASPEN. COlORAOO 81611 TElEPHONE 303/915-5590 - SCHMUESE" GORDON "'EYER INC. P,O. Box 2155 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (303) 925-6727 CONSULTING ENGINEERS.. SURVEYORS .- Hay 29, 1990 - . - - - - - - - .... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .... - - ... . - - - - - Hr. Dennis B.' Green Attorney at Lal-l 617 West !-Iain Street Suite B Aspen, Co. 81611 RE: Asia Office Building Grol-lth Hanagment Application Dear Dennis: This letter comprises a report on Engineering related items for an office Grol-lth l-Ianagment Application for the Asia Office Building. I have structured this report to include the engineering related criteria of the City of Aspen Growth Hanagment Quota system (GI-fQSl persuant to Aspen I-Iunlcipai Code, Chapter 24, Section 8-106F. Introduction The Asia Office Building Project comprises a two story office building development located on lots N and the Westerly half of Lot 0 of Block 58 of the Original Aspen Townsite. The proposed structure Hill include approximately 3842 sq. feet of leasable office space and net. affordable housing is to be built in the remodeled Asia restraurant building. The slte plan proposes to provide for parking spaces fronting on the alley as Hell as a trash and utility enclosure in the northt'lest corner of the site. vlhile the project fronts on Highway 82 on J.taln Street it does not propose access from the Hain Street frontage. The follot-ling items comprise engineering analysis of avallable services pursant to City GHQS requirements. Hater Svstem Hater is to be provided by the City of Aspen Hater System as discussed \'lith Judy J..lcKenzie of the City Water Department on Hay 25,1990. Hater service to the proJect is available from an existing en main located in I lain Street. Judy indicated that the existing Hater system has adequate capacity to serve this proJect tllthout any required system upgrades. She further indicated that there tlere no problems on the existing t'later system in the immediate area that might require construction by the applicant. Fire hydrants are already in existance on the northHest corner of the intersection of '.lain and First Street as Hell as the northeast corner of Garmish and Hain both a block or less from the proJect slte. As a predominantly office structure this proJect should not place high demands on the ',later system, tie liould anticipate approximately ~50 gallons per day. One possible concern regarding Ilater serVlCe to this proJect involves the C;Jlorado Department of HighllayS near term plan to overlay tl1e Hain Street portion of High\lay g~. This \lould suggest that it may be advisable to tap the City \later main as soon as possible to avoid later conflict \lith Department of Highllays overlay \lork. 1512 Grand Avenue, Suite 212' Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Exhibit U - ,-- .~ - ,- -' . - - . - - .. .. - .. - .. - .. .. .. - - - - - - - - - .. - - . - . - - - - - Hay 29, 1990 Asia Office Buildlng GI.IA Page 2 Sewer System Based on conversations V/ith Tom Bracewell of the Aspen ~Ietropolitan Sewer District it appears that sel.,er system capacity is available to serve this proJect. Tom indicated in my conversation wlth him on ~Iay 25 that service I-lould be available by tapping the existing sewer line in the alley north of the project site. Once again, the Sewer District through Tom has not indicated the need for any system improvements in the immediate area in order to provide capacity for this project. Agam. as a predominantly office project, this development should not place high demands on the selver system during normal peak flow conditions. Dra1naae The site plan for the Asia Office Building proposes approximately 3Bl3 sq. ft. of ne\-l lmpervious sUI.face on a lot area of 4036 sq. ft. Space is available on the site to provide on slte detention in the form of a subgrade drYl-lell overflowing to adjacent storm sewer facilities. I Ilould propose to locate the drYl-lell and overflows in the parking area adjacent to the alley. The drYl-lell system Hili be sized to prOVide on- site detention of any difference betl.leen undeveloped and developed flOI-IS. Off site discharge Hili be maintained at historic levels pursuant to City Code requirements. Fire P rotectio n The project sIte is currentiy serviced by tHO eXisting fire hydrants, one is located on the northllest corner of IIa1n and First Streets about 1/2 block from the slte, the other IS located at the northeast corner of Hain and Garmish Just under 1 block from the slte. Both hydrants \-lithin 300 feet of the project slte. In addition, the site is located 5 blocks from the ~xisting Aspen Volunteer Fire Department, located on East Hopkins bettleen t.lili Street and Galena Street. Response time for the Volunteer Fire Department for this site could be expected to be under 5 minutes including alarm time. In a conversation 1'lith the Fire Harshall's Office no special requirements Ilere identified to pI.ovlde fire protection to this sIte. Tr3.ffic Generation Based on the Vehicle trip generatIon figures generated by the Realonal TransportatIon Plan for the City of Aspen by 'Joorhees and Assoc. dated .:uly d 19~3, .. ,"n office facility located adjacent to a strong tr3.nsit system could be expected to generate 8 vehIcle tnps per 1000 sq. ft. per jay. For this project ~:lth a net lE:asable square footage of 3842 sq. ft. tl1e cfhce portlon of the building could be e:~pected to generate 30.7 ':ehlCle triPS per day. These vehicles could bE: expected to impact First Street, Bleeker Street, and Hain Street 3.S they enter and exit the site. Hay 29, 1990 Asia Office Building Gt-IA Page 3 _ . According to the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element as published in September 1967 by the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office and Roaring Fork Transit Agency, First Street currently expereiences less than 1000 vehicles per day in the Summertime while Bleeker Street experiences under 2000 vehicles per day and ~Ialn Street experiences in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day. TraUic generation by this project at 30.7 vehicles per day Hill not have an adverse impact nor \./ill it exceed the system capacity of the adjacent streets. One factor that should help minimize traffic generation by the project is the availability of pUblic transit on Haln Street stopping at the NorthHest corner of First and ~[aln Street Just 150 feet from the project site. The project site plan proposes four paved parking spaces off of the alley. In addition. the remodel plan for the Asia Restaurant proposes to formalize seven additional parking spaces along the alley frontage of that building and one more oU First Street for a total of t\1elve spaces. This parking exceeds the ll.5 spaces required by code for the ne\-l office building. These additional parking spaces along \lith the differing hours of operation of the oUice building and restaurant should serve to keep on street parking demand for this project to a minimum. .~ . ... - ... - - - .. I trust that this letter report Hill prove adequate for GHQS application purposes. Generally, the project site is ,vell served by existing utilities and avallable street capacity. None of the utilities I contacted indicated a need for utility system upgrades in the immediate area. This project slte offers a good location close to the dO\/nto\.m core and can be serviced mth exislting utilities in the area. - - Please feel free to contact me if I can provide any additional assistance on this gro,-/th managment application. Respectfully submitted, .. SCHHUESER GORDON HEYER, INC. /C?-7 /J ~ -- ~ ;/Say <;. Hammond, P .E. Principal-Aspen 0 ffice ... - - JH/ja 90125 .. - - . -- -. - ... ... - - AA ~ o .L:l:H::1J..\:i 0 ....1'11 1M :c . . . -< o ~ o )> o z o ~ ~\ . I ", ,t. . ..:.....:.:. ... I II II :.:. ....'. :a :c . ~~~~ ;~j; i c:~. ., f' t. ", t:.: :.:. .. '" t, I.... fl' ....... ...,..'......................... ...... If.... II' , l "'0 0 en -i \ 0 .,., .,., I- ~ ~ - >4~'v'd ~3NE>'v'M .. .. > _ C c.. - > - 0 .. m .. z .. -t _ c: _ en > - G') .. m ,.. s: - )> "C HO~'v'NOW ) N3d I I HOSIW~'v'E> t 00; ! 8 i 133~J.S lS~I.::l - : j3' . ~ o (J) (J) ~ ~ o m .~ o o o o o o CD So: hi :J> m - :c ^ z :J> m (j') F :0 :d )> en m I1~O' lin~n ~ n .. - .. - .. - - . - ... . .. .. ... .. - S a~IHl > (J) :; Exhibit V I I - .. ... - .. -> ::D -m -> - _N o .Z ~:.... - .Z ." -3: ...> ."'C .. - . - .. - - . .. . . - - .. - .. 2 o D -f I ... a - 1,-- I n . t:::\... a . ... I - " '" . I " ~ - .:c:a I I S't ~ .... I . GARMISCH .AI . 30.0 SI-. . 2 O~ S I I I , L., - I I I 1..' ...- ..- NI ASPEN "l: I I -~j~ I I I ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ JI:~~ !f ....... -... ~~ :II .... :~ - ST. - 0- , - I;:V MONARCK , Sf. I I I z I I I ~ - I I * -I 1 I I I CP ,"' I I I , .. "" - - - ~ ~, . . - , - - - - - - - - ... - - ... - ... - .. . - - .J - .. - - - . . ... - -, lit 000 ~, ,. i: l ~ '.a... Q ~'! i\ ~ , ~ ~ -.: t 'j\ ,\ ". ! ,. . I :\f\ " 1 " j f I ' o UI .... o ~ - !liii,'i ~ J * !f ( t ~ , ~ ~~ ~ ( J 'l trt ~ J ( i ~~ ~ , ~ } ~ ill f, Exhibit X :JE9 ... 1- -- ' ~ --=.._1 i t I , :i1 t : I' ,; '.J l , , & ' I I SiTe PLAt--.!~. f2.oof PL.At--I III = 10'-0. ASIA OFF IC-e. ~1~A:re, ~IT S-p..ll=<. I I ---------, """". .... ~ ( I I I I I I I ._____ ____.1 1. I f'~ll':1Gl I . .' ~J;z:~;:,.,moN , - , . .J II I .-_ f - I. ,- :> . I_- I.... I> I. - , :". ~ il" - - I::. I. < :. " . . .:.... . . " -, . -- ." I .. ,.- . .". o . CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ~I 520 [ H'IIoW< .llJlE JOI - ASPEIt co 81611 - 1Elf; lOlI925.5590 - FN:. J03I925.5076 ~rl }Xl W. CCX-ClOIroM .1DC2w.l.1Bll.IU. CD814l5.1BBBI128-37lII-fAlC:3OlI728-6722 A .?\____"z" 1 ....1't. .c""""""..,.c.-aOH*n~ . 0'1 ~ (1E::lTdA:) ~ <<t t'1 l ';3 W $::; '- -~-- 1.~ -p i ~ , - c, - ~ --" ~ -J , . 00001 M ,,617 .O~ 0171 S lfl r-i . u Z HN 1 UlO'l ><01<> utz:!NOO ><>10'1 o:lCGl-iM Doo ~ Cf.l . r: <!;r:l0 :o.:ZZ.----l H .rl r:lo...ol--< Ul....Oo. ~<!;,.,<!; -- -- ..r - '"""---- -- ---(~ [~ -~: ~. ... r-i ~),/ c' -_/" ~r:l[;g ~t:..' UlUH OHQ o..r:..... or:. H , O:O~ . 0.. __ C"1 r-i >-J '---..\i. (/ ~."-, -\ N r-i -- - -", o r-i ., ~ '" '" '" "'. '" '" "'-, '" '" "'-'- '" .8I U -', '" '" ... C"1 tlloet: Ulr:l oet:o: ~oet: ~'~~ N r-i MEMORANDUM THRU: Mayor and Council Carol O'Dowd, city Manager Amy Margerum, Planning Director ~V TO: THRU: FRO~: Leslie Lamont, Planner #i3, #!1!J, # ~ RE: Asia 1989 Office GMP, Resolutions DATE: <Jc ================================================================= SUMMARY: allocation Commercial West Main. The of GMP Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the 1,200 square feet of net leasable of the 1989 quota to the Asia Office building located at 132 Steve and Lily Ko submitted application for the development the Asia Restaurant. the only 1989 Commercial GMP of an office building adjacent to Pursuant to Section 8-106 J., Council shall allocate development allotments among eligible shall have met the minimum threshold. by Resolution, applicants who The applicants also request a GMQS Exemption for employee housing and a multi-year development allotment. Those reviews are included within this memo. Three Resolutions are attached for your review: Allocation of 1989 Quota and GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing for Asia, Allocation of 1989 GMP Quota, and Allocation of a Multi-Year Allotment. The August 21, 1990 memo to the Planning and zoning commission is also attached for your review. COUNCIL GOALS: The application supports Council's goals to encourage growth that will reinforce our sense of community, to preserve the traditional character of the town, and to develop a consistent and fair government so that citizens know what to expect. BACKGROUND: The annual quota for the office zone is 4,000 square feet of net leasable but GMP exemptions in 1989 eliminated the quota in the Office zone. The Land Use Code requires 30% of the annual quota to be available for competition, therefore the Commercial GMP quota for 1989 was 1,200 square feet of net leasable. Because of the demolition moratorium during the fall of 1989, the deadline for 1989 Commercial GMP applications was postponed until June 1, 1990. The Asia application was the only one received in June. ..- - ~ 1. The quality of the proposed development sUbstantially exce~ds that established in the minimum threshold for the scoring established in Section 8-105 (F) (5) by rece~v~ng 67% of the points cumulatively available at the time of its scoring by the Commission. RESPONSE: There are 43 points available and the application scored 32.8 points which is 76% of the points available. 2. The site design of .the proposed development makes construction phasing infeasible. This requ~res but is not limited to a demonstration that economies of scale will result from construction occurring at once: the proposed development is intended as a single building which cannot easily be constructed or operated in phases: and the public facility investments for the proposed development such as roads, water and sewer facilities, must all be installed at the initiation of the project, making phasing economically unrealistic. RESPONSE: This proposal is for a single building (3,696 gross square feet) that cannot be built in phases. According to the application the public facilities such as water and sewer must be designed to handle the needs of the entire building and must be installed in the initial construction. Phasing the project over a two year period is logistically impractical and economically unrealistic. 3. The impacts of construction of the proposed development on the surrounding neighborhood will be reduced by construction at one time rather than phasing it over two or more construction periods, and such impacts can be tolerated by the city. RESPONSE: It is believed that the impact on the neighborhood will be less if construction is done at one time. 4. The City is capable of absorbing the accelerated rate at which impacts on its services and public facilities will be experienced. It shall be considered sufficient evidence of service and public facility availability if it can be demonstrated that sufficient capacity is available in the following public facilities to accommodate the City'S planned rate of growth and the accelerated rate due to the proposed development: RESPONSE: According to the application, the location of the site near established facilities and along transit corridors makes this an ideal location. The referral comments from other public service agencies indicates that service is available to meet the needs of this project. 5. It can be demonstrated that granting allotments from future years will be in support of the goal of community balance. 3 \ .; '........,/ 'ROM I DATIl RBI JWCC)lU\mlUM L..lit> Lamont, 'lanDinq Office YVount, Blooket', ItOUdllq Authority 'TO I 'lilt Ada l'OIIIll.roial GMQ', GKQ8 lI.aption, Cbanq. III U.., Ip.old...,i.. 'aro.l %D* 21)5-1~4-3t-070 ..=====...IIIt:==~~====~~-===t..a:a:====I'"=====-.cw~~!!!!!! UQUI8'1'1 Applic:ant requ..ts approval for construction of a total of 2,841 .quare f_et of net .leasable office space and for two affordable hous:lng units providing 1,994 8ql.lare teet of living area. AnLICAlIt'I etave and Lily Ko AIILICaHT'. RlIS~SIHTATIVI: Dennis B. Gre.n, Attorney at Law LOCATION: 132 West Mo.in, Lots K,L, M, N, and the west half of Lot 0, Block S8, city and Townsite of Aspen. .Il0NIltGl o-otnc. SUJC/D.RY: I..pplioant requests-4": 641 square feet of net leasable otfice spacE!. seotion 8-106 requires for the development application of commercial llnd .,ffioe d&VeloplII&nt to be a8.iqned points for the provision of hO\lsinq Which complies with the housinq she, type, income and occupancy gUidelines of the city, and with the provisions of SU:ltion 8-109. Applicant will trjenerate a total of 8.52 employees (3 employaes/l,OOO net leasable square feet ). Applicant has stated that he will provide 94' of the employee housing qeneratE,d by the construction of two "domitory" employee units, each conl!iIilting of two bedrooms, kitoh.en, living room, and dining area. The Applicant calculates the upper level unit which oontains 1,078 net livable square feet to provide a total of 269.5 square teet per employee, The basement level contains a total of 896.0 net livable square feet tor a total of 224.0 square teet per employee. Applicant propOII~61 to provide housing for eight employees by the ~ Applicant haa nc,t provided information as to the calculation of a total of lIO square feet ot net livable area tor the kitchen faoility ot aact. employee unit. . 5. . Use of 20 square f.at per p.raon ot enclosed storage area located within e,r adjacent to the unit. ApplicaRt woUld. need to supply a total ot ~60 Ilqu$re teet of IItora;. area loc:ated within or adjacent to the unit. 6. All units I.hall comply with UBC standards. B. A manaqer, a..iatant manaqer, or lodge owner, who is in the moderate inoome range may occupy the unit, however, rent will be calculated balllac_ on the low income quidelines. Lodqe owners must work full-time tor the lodge operation. STArr RlllClOaddlWJ.'rtON' Staff has reviewed the Asia GMQS Exemption for the provisic'n of dormitory/lodge employe. housinq units. The 1;89 Affordable Employee Housin; Guidelines require that certain conditione of aI:,proval t.a 1'llet by Applicant. The followinq conditione for approval have not been aCCo1Ulllodated by Applioant: 1. Plans woulcl need to be provided to the Houainq Authority to verify 'the net livable square footage of the Asia application. Employee provisions of between 125 and 300 net llva~le square feet of livinq area I,er person, including sleeping, bathroom, oooking, and loun,_ used in COMon would need to be oaloulated for approval by the Housing A'lthority. The net li""able square footage shall not includ.intcllrio:~ or exterior hallway., parking, patios, decks, laundry t'o01l18 t n:8cnanioal area., and storage. 2. One bathroc~ shared by no more than four persons, containing at least one wa~lr oloset, one lavatory, one bathtub with a shower, and IS total aret. of at least 60 iIlquare feet. Applioant proposes to provide bathroom !acilities to be shared by no more than fo\;_r individuale per employee unit. calculations as to the requ.!.remlllnt ot at least 60 Ilquare feet of total bathroom area per emploYE,e unit have not beem provided by Applicant. 3. A ki tohen iaeil! ty containinq a sink, stove and refriqerator and shared by no lllot'e than four persons and IS total area of at least 60 square feQt or access to a common kitohen. AppliClIntpropolies to provide kitohen fac1litiea tor no more than four employees per employee unit. ./l.pplicant has not provided information as ':0 the requirement of at least 60 square feet of total kitch.n area per employee unit or access to a common kitchen. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, planning .v\V RE: Asia 1989 Commercial GMP DATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- , , SUMMARY This application seeks a 1989 Commercial GMP allocation for 1,200 square feet net leasable and another 1,641 square feet of net leasablez:;~:::~~rom~he 1990 Commercial allocation for the development of 2,7,0 square foot Office building. Multi- phased allotments are reviewed and approved by the Council. , -::s / The applicants also request Special Review for the reduction of parking and Change in Use from commercial to residential. The Commission tabled review of this proposal at the July 17 public hearing. The Commission, referring to the technical correction language in Section 8-107 B.(l) of Chapter 24, directed the applicant to resubmit their proposal. The Commission also requested new Departmental referral comments regarding the technical corrections to the application. Attached for your review is the amended application, the Planning Department's recommended GMP scoring (which has not been amended), referral comments from the Engineering, Environmental Health, and Housing Departments, and the July 17 memo. This memo also includes Special Review for reduction in parking for the deed restricted employee units and reduction in parking from 3 spaces/1000 square feet to 1. 5 spaces/1000 square feet with a payment-in-lieu. A Change in Use review is necessary for the inclusion of the employee dwelling units in the existing Asia building. REVIEW PROCESS staff recommends the Commission first review the entire proposal including the Change in Use and special Reviews for parking reduction, followed by the scoring of the proposal. staff has not rescored this proposal because the Commission did not score the application at the July 17 meeting and the revisions were to be technical in nature. REFERRAL COMMENTS Engineering: The applicant has proposed a utility/trash service area that is insufficient in size. Pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 24 section 5-210 D. (6), the Comme~'cial Core (CC) Zone District is required to have an area a minimum of twenty feet in length parallel to the alley, with a m~n~mum vertical clearance of ten feet and a minimum depth of ten feet at ground level. Environmental Health: Please see the attached referral comments from Bob Nelson. The Environmental Health Department will require a complete plan review of the changes to the food service facilities prior to the issuance of the building permit. Housing: Please see the attached referral comments from Yvonne Blocker. The Housing Authority recommends approval with the condition that prior to approval by the Aspen City Council, the applicant shall meet all the conditions, as identified in the memo, to the satisfaction of the Housing Authority. REVISIONS Floor Area Bonus: The original application requested a FAR bonus from .75:1 to .85:1. Because of the complicated on-site parking situation the Commission expressed strong opposition to granting a floor area bonus. The new application has reduced the proposed building from 3846 square feet to 2703 square feet. The proposed floor area ratio for the parcel is now .74: 1. As a result of the revisions to the building the applicant must submit a new application to the HPC. It will be determined whether the revisions necessitate a minor development approval or require conceptual and final approval by the HPC. Parking: Please see the attached site plan. In response to the Commission's comments and staff's analysis of required parking, the applicants have revised their parking plan. Two walkways and two trash areas are included on the parking plan. The provision of fourteen spaces is consistent with staff's original calculation. The Engineering Department allows 20% of the spaces to be sized for compact cars. The applicants are also negotiating with the Aspen Hotel to lease three of their parking spaces. Emp10yee Housing: The original application proposed two dormitory units housing six individuals in each unit. The Housing Authority Guidelines would only permit four residents per unit. The storage, kitchen and bathroom facilities were not sufficient for six employees per unit. The amended application proposes two dormitory style units housing four residents each. The original housing requirement for 11. 5 employees was based upon the office building's 3842 square feet net leasable. The building has been reduced to 2841 square feet net leasable, generating 8.5 employees. 2 SPECIAL REVIEW Parking: a) Pursuant to section 7-404 B., off-street parking requirements may be reduced subject to Special Review by the Commission. The applicants seek Special Review for the reduction of the required on-site parking from 3 spaces/1000 square feet net leasable to 1.5 spaces/1000 square feet net leasable, with cash- in-lieu. Based upon the amended office building size, 2,841 square feet of net leasable requires 8.5 spaces at 3 spaces/1000 square feet. Reducing the required parking from 3 to 1.5 spaces/1000, 4 spaces are required on-site with $64,500 cash-in-lieu. Prior to a cash-in-lieu approval, the Commission shall consider the practical ability of the applicant to place parking on-site, whether the parking needs of the development have been adequately met on-site and whether. the City has plans for a parking facility which would better meet the needs of the development and the community than location of the parking on-site. b) Pursuant to section 5-301 the Commission may reduce the parking requirement for affordable housing through Special Review. The applicants also request to reduce the parking required for deed restricted employee housing. The applicants propose to reduce the four spaces required for the four bedrooms to one on- site parking space for residents. Change In Use: Pursuant to section 8-104 B.1(b) an applicant may receive a GMQS Exemption for a change in use of an existing structure between the residential, commercial/office and tourist accommodation categories. The applicants propose to convert 1,994 square feet of commercial space within the existing restaurant building to deed restricted employee housing. This requires a commission review for a GMQS Exemption for a change in use from a commercial space to residential space. The applicants shall demonstrate that the change in use shall have minimal impact upon: 1. The number of additional employees will be generated and employee housing will be provided for the additional employees generated; RESPONSE: The change in use is necessary for the applicants to 3 provide on-site employee housing to mitigate the number of employees generated by the development proposal. 2 . The amount of additional parking spaces demanded by the change in use and that parking will be provided; RESPONSE: The change in use is required for the provision of employee housing, however this change in use does not increase the amount of parking needed on site. The required parking for the housing proposal (1 space/bedroom) is four spaces while the parking required for 1,994 square feet of commercial space use is six spaces. STAFF COMMENTS Parking: The applicants have gone through considerable effort to mitigate their parking impacts. Based upon staff and commission comments, the applicants have submitted a revised site plan. Using a similar analysis presented by staff at the July 17 meeting, the following parking requirements of the revised proposal are as follows: Table 1 PROPOSALS 11 OF PARKING SPACES a) 1980 Arthur's Restaurant Conditional Use Approval 15 b) 1990 Asia Office Bldg. (required 3/1000 sq. ft. net leasable) (Special Review reduction 1.5/1000 sq. ft.) (cash-in-lieu) 8.5 4.2 (on-site) 4.3 ($ in-lieu) c) Change in Use from commercial (3/1000 sq. ft.) to residential (l/bedroom) 2 space credit d) Special Review reduction for deed restricted units 3 space credit e) Total on site required for office & existing restaurant (using $ in-lieu) 14 f) Cash in lieu for 4.3 spaces $64,500 Staff recommends Special Review for both a reduction in resident parking and on-site parking with cash-in-lieu. staff and the Commission have encouraged the applicant to pursue off-site parking. They are working with the adj acent Hotel to secure three spaces for Asia I s use. However, it must be determined whether the extra spaces the Hotel would lease were not a 4 condition of prior approval. Trash/Service Area: Staff has a strong concern about the location of the trash/service area for the restaurant. We understand the site plan is very tight, however to place a trash receptacle for a restaurant adjacent to the pedestrian path creates an undesirable environment for the pedestrian. Unless the applicants can demonstrate that odor and visual problems may be mitigated, staff recommends the relocation of the trash service area. As pointed out in Engineering referral comments, a restaurant in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District is required to have an area a minimum of twenty feet in length parallel to the alley, with a minimum vertical clearance of ten feet and a minimum depth of ten feet at ground level. The trash/service area that has been proposed for the restaurant is 102 square feet. The applicant may request, but has not, a Special Review for a reduction in the dimensions of a utility/trash service area. The applicant may also request to reduce the resident parking by all four spaces instead of only three spaces. The elimination of one more space would provide another 85 square feet for the trash/service area. The Commission did request that the applicant incorporate pedestrian/service access to the office building and the restaurant into the site plan. The applicants propose two pedestrian paths 4 feet and 4.5 feet in width. However this amenity does reduce the amount of space available for parking and trash/service facilities. RECOMMENDATION staff recommends approval of the Special Review for reduction of parking for the office building and the deed restricted employee ,housing, and Change in Use with the following conditions: ~ Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicants shall submit a site and landscaping plan to be reviewed and ~ approved by the Planning Departme~t. The plan shall incorporate extensive screening of the trash/service area. L 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the apPli~ t? ' (. shall make a one time cash-in-lieu payment for parkinglK~~~ LA 4 -;h(ffr<-f amount of $64,500 to the city of Aspen cashiers office. If the u~' C,X,. applicant succeeds in securing a long term leaSe~(99 ye rs) for . ~ , three spaces adjacent to the parcel then the cas -in.-lieu shall .1" c"~reflect the additional parking spaces. r fJG rcJll",-- ;;;. 3. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, fop ~~, 'nviro~ental Heelth Depertm~t :hell review e complete plen o~ F ~ fls \8~vO~ti\ ~~ ~ ~l {\~;y;~:2 0 ~_5e C\ (kJ)~o~oj)]J;'t O~S)'~~-Lj~m < "...., I ......., the changes to the food service facilities. 4. Prior to the issuance of any building permits tree removal permits shall be obtained from the Parks Department for trees to be removed with a caliper of 6" or over. 5. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of Occupancy for the new office building a site inspection shall be conducted to ensure that the parking plan/site plan has been completed as was reviewed. staff I s GMP score of the application did not meet threshold standard for section 8-106 E 5(a) and staff did not rescore the technical corrections to the application. If the cOll\Il\ission' s scoring of the application meets or exceeds the threshold standard staff recoll\Il\ends approval of the 1989 COll\Il\ercial GMP allocating 1400 square feet of net leasable to the Asia Office Building with the following conditions: 1. Prior to Council's allocation of the 1989 COll\Il\ercial GMP, the applicant shall submit the following information to the Housing Authority for their review and approval: net liveable square footage for verification; deed restrictions for the two units including a statement that the units cannot be occupied by more than four employees; bathroom, kitchen, and storage space plans for dimensional verification. 2. Prior to Council's allocation of the 1989 COll\Il\ercial GMP, the applicant must receive either minor development or conceptual approval by the Historic Preservation COll\Il\ittee. ATTACHMENTS: Application Department's GMP Score Referral Comments July 17 memo 6 , C ASPEN.PITKIN :: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OEPARTMENT From: MEMORANDUM Le"'1e Laoont, P1annln.Offlce 17,1(tJ Environmental Health Department~U To: Date: Re: Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, Special Review Parcel ID# 2735-124-39-070 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the MODIFIED land use submittal for the following concerns. The authority for this review is granted to this office by the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office as stated in Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: The applicant has agreed to serve the project with public sewer as provided by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. This conforms with section 1-2.3 of the Pitkin Countv Reaulations On Individual Sewaqe Disposal Svstems policy to "require the use of public sewer systems wherever and whenever feasible, and to limit the installation of individual sewage disposal systems only to areas that are not feasible for public sewers". ADEOUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: The applicant has agreed to serve the project with water provided by the Aspen Water Department distribution system. This conforms with section 23-55 of the Aspen Municipal Code requiring such projects "which use water shall be connected to the munici- pal water utility system". AIR QUALITY: This development has a potential air quality benefit, due to the fact that it is within walking distance to downtown, so that employees, office clients, and customers can travel to and from the site without using cars. The commitment to not install fireplaces or woodstoves is also and air quality benefit, which could be guaranteed in the future by a deed restriction. 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/990-5070 I"" C ,-/ /"'", , / Asia GMQS Modifications August 14, 1990 Page 2 Energy-efficiency measures proposed will also have an air quality benefit. The applicant will need to obtain an air pollution permit from the state of Colorado and submit a fugitive dust control plan. This will need to include measures to prevent blowing of dust onto nearby buildings and streets. Measures such as shrouding, wetting of disturbed areas, and daily cleaning of streets will be required. NOISE: No long term noise impacts are anticipated on the immediate neighborhood as a result of the approval of this project. However, it is predicted that short term noise impacts on the neighborhood will occur during the construction phase of this project. Should complaints be received by this office, Chapter 16 of the Asoen Municioal Code, titled Noise Abatement will be the document used in the investigation. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: The Rules and Requlations Governinq the Sanitation of Food Service Establishments in the State of Colorado contains specific prohibitions that "no operation ... shall be conducted in living quarters and that ... food service operations be separated from any living or sleeping quarters." The proposed changes still incorporate separate dwelling units with kitchens and a separate entries to enable the restaurant to clearly maintain the required distinction between the commercial food service establishment and the employee living areas. We will require a complete plan review of the changes to the food service facilities prior to the issuance of the building permit. , TELEPHONE 303-925-1885 """ ~ DENNIS B. GREEN Attorney at Law 617 W. MAIN ST" SUITE B ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 TELECOPIER 303-925-5856 Aspen-Pitkin County Planning Office 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 Attention: Ms. Leslie Lamont Re: ASIA PROJECT, Growth Managment Application Dear Leslie: This letter outlines the changes made in the Application in response to the conditions imposed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. For your convenience the changes are outlined following the sequence of the Revised Application, with reference to the section, page, and exhibit numbers. The sections and exhibits to which no reference is made received no changes in the Application. * Sec II B (p. 5) * Sec II H (pp. 6-9) * Sec II J (p 10) * Sec III A (6) (p 19) * Sec III B (5) (p 21-22) * Sec III C (pp 22-23) Handicapped access ramp to be between buidings instead of behind old building Changes in chart reflect downsizing of new building to meet .75/1 FAR requirements. Total FAR calculation at p. 9. In response to requirements of Housing Authority, the affordable housing will consist of two, two-bedroom dormitories instead of three-bedroom units. Two enclosed trash areas provided instead of one. Parking plan changed to 14 spaces on-site with calculations changed per requirements Planning Comm. Calculation of need for affordable housing generated changed due to reduction of FAR required by Planning Comm. . "- '-. ~ -- * Sec IV (pp 24-25) Request for FAR bonus eliminated. * Ex A Site Plan changed to show downsized building, required parking plan. * Ex H-L Floor plans and elevations of existing building redrawn to show changes to handicapped ramp, access light and ventilation for affordable housing, and two-bedroom, rather than three-bedroom, dormitories. * Ex M Revised parking plan, two trash areas, walkways and landscaping adjacent to alley. * Ex N-T Floor plans and elevations of proposed building changed to reduce size of building to .75 FAR. * Ex X Landscape Plan not redrawn, but parking aspects replaced by Ex M. I hope the foregoing chart is helpful. Don't hesitate to call if you need further information. Sincerely, ~~~ ... . > ~~.- Dennis B. Green - MEMORANDUM TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ~ DATE: . <, "f.,.,.' . RE: Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, Special Review --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant has proposed a utility/trash service area that is insufficient in size. Pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 24 section 5-210 D. (6), the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District is required to have an area a minimum of twenty feet in length parallel to the alley, with a minimum vertical clearance of ten feet and a minimum depth of ten feet at ground level. jg/asia1 cc: Chuck Roth 08.139C 11' _t= H F rL'__', Ii .C, HUTH, :;D: '32D SSE:D F', D2 JROM: K1XORANDUM Lealie Lamont, tlanninq Department YV:lnn. uocker, Hcuainq Author!. ty TOI DJ.TII all Alia Commeroial GKQ8 =.=:=$===a.===:.==~~=====-=============~==C=====~=:===--========== 8UW".AJ<YI Appl1cant hall r8su~lliitteCl hie propoaal to revise hiB requeat of 3,842 net leasable office square feet ~o 2,841 of net leasable offioe space. Appl icant win 9...::erll,,:-e B. 52 employees by the nature of this request. 2,841 a.f. divided by ~,OOO square of ne~ leasable X 3 employaea = a.32 e~ploY96', Applicant intencs to ~itig~te the employees generated by housing on-sits eiqht (8) of the 0.5 employees in two two-bedroom dormitory units. The u,ppe~' :ievel unit shall oontain a 1,078 hiO bedroom \'nit to houae fou:' 6r:f'lo!~es l!lnd the basement level unit shall contain a 896 a.f. two bec,:"Qcm unit to house four employees. The upper level unit accol"di.'~9 t:o calculadons suppli$d by. Applicant will provide for a total cf 269.5 net livable area and the basement laval unit Bh&.ll p::c",i.da a total of 224 :'let livable square feet per employee. STAr? R!COW~ENO~TICNI Applicant!s representative, Mr. Green was f~rniehed with a copy of ~he requirements for the construction and a:;:lprovel of dornitory/lodqe employee units prior to the submission of this ~~plicatio~. staff recomm$nds that the Applicant must provid& a~l inronnation required tor the construction of dormitory/lodge un!ts that shall be consistent with the following standards and l:'1.aet tl':e appropriate Housing Author ity standards, City C%.- count.y Land Use Codes, and the t1niform Building Code. Dorrnitory/lodqe unit.s shall be require'! to meet the following minimum standards: 1. There 8h~11 b~ between 125 and 300 AV$rage net livable squ~re teet ot livinq ar..a per perSOn, includinq Ell.eping, bathroom, cooking, and lC'..m;rEi UIOB-:! 11'1 conuuon. Net liva~le square footage shall not inCludE> intedor or Qxterior hdlways, parking, patios, decks, laundn' r::lOlne !n4lchanioal areas, e>hd storage. Dormitory/lodge rent!! sM.ll l;>1I calculat.ed on the net livable square footage as described above. DE: 1.3.-'?C r--: F --'. :' ii it:: ~1_:Ti-" 303 :'2[; :::,580 P.D:; .. AppEcant. prOp,;H'leS to provid~ a total of 269.5 net livable square feet per penwn in t.he upper level unit ar.d 224. C net livable square feet of net l:l. val'le square footage per person in the basement level uni~. Th0 calculations of the upper level employee dwelling unit shall contain a total or 1,078.0 square feet and the lower :"evel basemM,t employee d~/tallinq must oontain a total of 896.0 net livabl~ e;u~r.e feet. The computations of the net livable squa~e footage fO.(" these two employee dwell inq units will be verified at plan check. 2. Rental units ahall include all utilities metered in common, management costs, and taxes. The total allowablQ ~ont~ly rent for the upper level unit would be $679.14 per n,on1:h I1nd tl\e t.ot<l.l allowtlble rnont.hly rent for the basement level uni~ would be , 564.40. 3. One bathroom ah<llred by no more tha;"; four persons, containing at least one water close~, one lavatory, one bathtub with a shower, and a tot<l.l of at least 60 square teet. Applicant has pl:Qvi:led i.nformation that th6 employee unite shall be occupied by ff)ur persons. Housing ~J~uld request- that the deed restriction $~all scate that the employee units can not be occupied by l"cre than the feet' amplorees allowed by the design of the units. AppHcant will b" req:uired to vedfy by plan check that the bat.hrc~~e propos~d by Applicant IDeet all requirements as stated in paragraph 3. ' 4. A kitchen facll~ty containing a sink, stove, and refrigerator and shared by no more than tour perso~9 and a total area of at least 60 square !fi;l:t or aCClllse to a common kitchen. AppllC'lInt. ~!ill bEl raquired ::'y plan checl( to a.bide by the requirement that the kitch~n area propo~ed for both employee units mee~s the 6G sq~are feet requirement and by deed restriction that the kitchen faciL';y in each unit shall be shll.red by no more than the allowed four sl:,ployee6l per unit. 5. Use of 2 C square feat per person of enolosed storage feet of storage area locat.ed wi thin or adj acent to the uni ts. Applicant will be required to provide 20 square feet of storage space per employe~ to be located within or adjacent to the units. The location and aq~a~e footage of the eight storage spaces shall be approved at plan check. 6. All units ~h8~1 comply with UBC standards. STAFF RBQUISTS A~ A OO~PI~ION OP APPROVAL FOR THE ASIA COMMIRCIAL GMQ8 APPLICATION, 'I'M:''.:, palOI'<: TO nV:aOVAL BY 'l'HE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL, APPLICANT SK1LL MEET ALL ABOVE CONDITIONS TO THB SATISfACTION OF Ta~ HOUSING AUTHORITY. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: Asia, 1989 Office GMP Allocation DATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The applicant requests a growth management allocation to. develop a 3,842 square foot (net leasable) office building adjacent to the Asia Restaurant. The 1989 Office GMP competition was postponed until 1990 due to the demolition moratorium in effect much of 1989. Projects exempt from the GMP competition used up the total allocation for 1989. However, the Code requires that 30% of the allocation must be made available for competition. The annual quota for the Office zone is 4,000 square feet of net leasable. Therefore, 1,200 square feet is available for the 1989 Office growth management allocation. As is clear, the 1989 allocation will not accommodate the amount of square footage the applicants require to develop their project. utilizing the multi-year allocation provision found in section 8-103 D. of the Code, the applicants have requested a future allocation from the 1990 GMP Office Zone allocation. Pursuant to the Code, this request must be reviewed by City Council. There are three categories that were scored by staff for this application: 1. Quality of Design 2. Availability of Public Facilities and Services and 3. provision of Affordable Housing. Proposals for Office GMQS must meet the all of the following minimum thresholds: 1. a combined threshold of 16.8 points for both categories Quality of Design and Availability of Public Facilities (60% of total 28 points) 2. a minimum threshold for Quality of Design of 7.2 points (40% of total 18 points), and for Availability of Public services of~ (40% of total 10 points). 3. a minimum threshold for Affordable Housing of 10 points (housing for 60% of employees generated). Please find attached staff's recommended scoring of this proposal. The score for the combined categories of Quality of Design and Availability of. Public Facilities does not meet the minimum threshold. ADDITIONAL REVIEW: Review of the proposal also requires a Special Review for an increase in the allowable FAR from .75:1 to .85:1 and a reduction in parking. A Change in Use is requested for the conversion of commercial space to employee housing within the existing Asia building. APPLICANT: Steve and Lily Ko, as represented by Dennis Green LOCATION: 132 W. Main street, Lots K, L, M, ,N, and the west half of Lot 0, Block 58, Aspen ZONING: Office, "H" Historic Overlay District (Lots K & L are landmark designated REFERRAL COMMENTS: submitted comments: The following referral agencies have Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Aspen Fire Protection District Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Aspen Water Department Engineering Department Environmental Health Department Pitkin/Aspen Housing Authority Roaring Fork Energy Center Please see attached comments from the various referral agencies. STAFF COMMENTS: The remainder of this memo will address the Special Review criteria for an increase in FAR and reduction in parking. It will also review the Change in Use. The GMQS Exemption for affordable housing is a Council review as well as review of the multi-year allocation. A. Project Description In November 1989, the Historic Preservation Committee granted final approval for the development of an office building. The applicants propose to develop 3,842 (net leasable) square feet. The application also includes two affordable housing units, with six dorm-style rooms, for a total of 2,390 square feet of living area, to be located within the existing Asia building. B. Parking Plan The parking plan for this proposal is deficient. Therefore this section of the memo presents a separate study of the parking plan for this proposal. Additional reviews required for this application are closely tied to the deficient parking plan and follow this Section. The parking for this proposal is deficient for the following reasons: a) In 1980, approval to Arthur's Restaurant was granted a conditional use expand the restaurant (that was when the small 2 structure was added onto the west side of the building). The applicants requested Special Review to reduce the required parking from 20 space to 15 spaces. provision of 15 spaces was a condition of approval. The 1980 file includes a site plan showing the 15 spaces identified all along the rear of the Asia building including four spaces located in the area where the new office building is proposed; b) the parking plan in the new application includes three spaces along First Street which are located in the Public Right of Way, all other spaces along the rear of the building have been identified as parking for the previous approval and therefore these spaces cannot be counted as parking mitigation for the new building. . The following table summarizes the parking requirements for this proposal: TABLE 1 PROPOSALS # OF PARKING SPACES a) 1980 Arthur's Restaurant Conditional Use Approval 15 b) 1990 Asia Office Bldg. (required 3/1000 sq. ft. net leasable) (special review reduction 1.5/1000 sq.ft.) (cash in lieu) 11.5 5.7 (on-site) 5.8 ($ in lieu) i) Change in use from commercial(3/1000 sq. ft.) to residential (1/bedroom) 1 space credit ii) Total on site required for office & existing restaurant (using $ in lieu) 20 iii) Cash in lieu for 5.8 spaces $87,000 Summarv: The applicant may provide parking via a payment in lieu pursuant to Special Review, but no fewer than 1.5 spacesj1000 square feet shall be provided on-site. Thus the on-site parking required for the new building would be 6 (5.7) spaces with a payment in-lieu for 5.8 spaces, $87,000. C. Special Reviews 1. Reduction in Parking: Pursuant to section 7-404 B. off- street parking requirements may be reduced subj ect to Special Review. The applicant I s proposal identifies 12 parking spaces on the 3 entire site to be used to comply with the parking requirement for a building of 3,846 square feet of net leasable in the Office Zone. Based upon the information in Table 1, staff concludes that the proposal is deficient in parking. The applicant may request a reduction in parking from 3 spaces/1000 sq. ft. to 1.5 spaces/1000 sq. ft. with a payment in lieu and with no fewer than 1.5 spaces/1000 sq. ft. provided on- site. Please see Table 1 for those numbers. Approval of the payment in-lieu shall be at the option of the Commission. The Commission shall take into consideration the practical ability of the applicant to place parking on-site, whether the parking needs of the development have been adequately met on-site and whether the City has plans for a parking facility which would better meet the needs of the development and the community than would location of the parking on-site. The applicant may also request a reduction in parking for the employee housing. Pursuant to section 5-301 the Commission may reduce the parking requirement for affordable housing through Special Review. 2. Increase in Allowable Floor Area - Pursuant to section 5-214 the external floor area ratio of .75: 1 may be increased to 1: 1 with Special Review. In the Office Zone, the applicant is required to provide 60% of the floor area over .75:1 as affordable housing on-site. The applicants propose to increase the floor area from .75:1 to .85:1. which is an increase of 1350 square feet. Sixty percent of the additional floor area equals 800 square feet. This proposal far exceeds this requirement as the affordable housing proposed equals 2,390 square feet of net living area. According to the review standards of section 7-404 A. for Special Review for dimensional requirements, a development application shall only be approved if: a. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying Zone District. RESPONSE: This proposal complies with all the required dimensional requirements of the Office Zone district. The proposal was carefully reviewed by the Historic Preservation Committee and received final approval by that review body. The desire to increase the floor area by 1350 square feet should not affect surrounding development or compromise the underlying Office zoning of the parcel. 4 b. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts, including but not limited to the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of a designated viewplane. RESPONSE: The proposed development has been found by the Historic Preservation Committee to be compatible with the surrounding developments from a site, masslng, and design perspective. However, this proposal is already verv deficient in their parking plan. The applicants are requesting to reduce the parking required to 1. 5 spaces/1, 000 square feet. wi th the reduction, the proposal still inadequately mitigates the effects of parking and staff recommends denial of the increase in floor area. D. Change in Use Pursuant to section 8-104 B.1(b) an applicant may receive a GMQS Exemption may apply to any change in use of an existing structure between the residential, commercial/office and tourist accommodations categories. The applicants propose to provide employee housing within the existing Asia building. This requires a commission review for a GMQS Exemption for a change in use from a commercial space to residential space. The applicants shall demonstrate that the change in use shall have minimal impact upon: 1. The number of additional employees will be generated and employee housing will be provided for the additional employees generated; RESPONSE: The change in use is necessary for the applicants to provide on site employee housing to mitigate the employees generated through the development proposal. 2. The amount of additional parking spaces demanded by the change in use and that parking will be provided; RESPONSE: The change in use is required for the provision of employee housing, however this change in use does not increase the amount of parking needed on site. The required parking for the housing proposal (1 space/bedroom) is six spaces while the parking required for 2,390 square feet of office use is 7 spaces. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the proposal for a new office building on the Asia site for several reasons: 1. The application does not meet the GMQS threshold standard for section 8-106 E 5(a). This deficiency is primarily a result of the proposal's inadequate parking plan. 5 2. The parking is deficient for the new development on this site. As a result of the deficient parking plan and the problems associated with providing more parking on site, staff also recommends denial of Special Review for an increase in floor area ratio above the required .75:1. 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ~ DATE: RE: Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, Special Review --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- Having Reviewed the above application and made a site visit, the Engineering Department recommends the following scoring for GMQS: (1) Quality of design (b) site design- recommended scoring: 2 points Acceptable but no provision for snow storage areas proposed. (d) Amenities- recommended scoring: 2 points Acceptable but not much usable open space proposed. (f) Trash and utility access areas- recommended scoring: 2 points- An acceptable design. (2) Availability of Public Facilities and Services (a) Water supply/fire protection- recommended scoring: 1 point - An acceptable design. (b) sanitary sewer- recommended scoring: 1 point - An acceptable design. (c) Public transportation- recommended scoring: 1 point - An acceptable design. (d) Storm drainage- recommended scoring: 1 point - An acceptable design. (e) Parking- rec d ommen ed scoring: o points Th needs of ~hise propos~d parking plan does not meet the eXisting parki~;~~ff~~l development considering that building and that th e removed to accommodate the new the west side of thee p:oPt~Sed t~ree spaces located on . h ex~s ~ng bU~lding . r~g t-of-way and are not available are ~n the public to the applicant. ,< ~- -< , ' '-...."" '1'0: MIMORANDUM Lulie ::,:MIO::1t, Planning- ottia. PROMI Yvcn.ntl !HoQlter, Housiug Aut.h':lrity DATEl RE: Ada Cct.ll'I'c.rdal GMQ5, GKQS Exemption, Ollan<;. In U88, 8pacial aeview 'arcel IDt 27~5-124-39-070 ==~=~=========:~=~~~~=:=~.~~====~===~=~~=:===~=~==~=======:====== REQUEST: Ap>>licb.'!'c. recp.esta app~oval =or =o!'lstr1JGi~iOli of a total of 3,842 square f.at Qf net lea.able office space and for two affordable t,')\;oeil1g ur.:.t!i providing :2,390 sq',Jare feet of living area. AP1'1.ICAN'1': steve and Lily Ko APPLICANT'S aEPRE$~UT~TIVE: Dennis B, Green, Attorney at Law LOCATION: 132 ;-lest Msin, Lots K, X., H, N, and the west half of Lot 0, Blook S,il, Cay and Townsite oE Aspen. ZONING: O-Office SUMMJJlY, Ar;,;:>: icont requests 3,842 square feei:. of net leasable offiC:Gl space. Slection 8-106 r<!';!'-l:r~.. for the d..velopll\Elnt applicat.ion of commercial and office davelopment to be a8sig~ed points for the provision of housing which complies with the ~ouelnq size, type, income and occup~ncy quidelines of the City, and with the provisions of Section 8-109. Appl icant ...ill generate a tctal ot 11.56 employees (3 emploY$es/1,OOO net leasable ..quare feet ). Applicant has stat..d that he will provide 100% r-fthe employee housing generated hy the c,:)nstruction of two "Ciorr>itory" employee units, each consiGting of three bedrOOMS, kitchen, living room, and dining area. The Applicant. c~ln:ll'ltes the upper level unit which contains 1,151.0 Mt livable squat'. feet to provide 6 tc'tal of 191.83 square feet per employs$. The basement level contains a total of 1,239.0 net livable aqtlar~ t'eli'ct. for II total of 206.:; square feet; par employelii. "' . --'"" AppllOllTlt propo;;<;o.. tc, provide ho\':'sing fct. twel V6 employees by the cor.atructic,n of t.wo <:'ilJ:'ee~bedroor:: "dorrdtory" \lni ':;9. The 1989 Afford~b:~ Employee Housin9 Guidelines state that for the review and accepta~ce of the Housing AuthQrity, an applicant may Mtisfy the, resident bousing req.'.lirements by the construction of dorll'_itory/loctge unit.s. The dormitory/locge units shall be consistent ,'i t:l thi:> f:lllowing stanc',ards and shall meet t.he appropr late Hou~ ing A\.l'tho::ity standards and the appropriate Cl ty or CO'.lnt.y I,and :Ja~ Code and the t7nHorrl Bulldbg Code. Dormitory /1 octg., u.ni tE> shall be req\!ired to meet the following minimum standards: 1. There shall b~ bat~een 125 and 300 average net livable square feet of living area 9~r person, including sleeping, bathroorr., cooking, and lounS" u~,..d in c:cmmon. )let livable square footage shall not inclu1e ,nt~,ior or exterior hallways, parking, patios, decks, laundry rQQ~a, mechanical areas, and storage. Dormito~y/lcdge rents shall be calculated on th. net livable square footage as de8c~1bed sboV~. Applicant propo~e2 to provide u tetal of 191.83 net livable square feet per employee for the ~pp8r level smployee unit and 206.5 net livable EQuare feet P('~. el1lployee for the ball3\':lent level er.1ployee unit. Rent for th$ baa.~6nt unit would be fer no Dore ~han $7BO.5~ per month. Calc'..la::ed ,.,t_ $.63 (lov! i'ncome) X 1,23".0 s.f. a $780.57 Ren't fo:: the "'Pf"H 1 ",ve}_ amployee u!"',it woulD be for no !:iore thar, $725.13 per month. Ci'l]<;>datad at $.63 (10,,' b-.:ome) X 1,151.0 s.L " $7~5.13 2. Rental rates .~all include all utilities met~red in common, management cvsts, an~ taxes. 3. Or-a bathro>;)ltl Gh;..,red by no more th..-" four per..ons, ~ontaining at lea!it one water ..;.loset., one lavatory, ona bathtl;b with a shot-Ier, and a total ot at l~aGt 60 square feet. jAPPlicant proposes to provide bathroom accommoddtio~s to be shared by six persons pe~ sffip:oyee unit. Applicant has not pro~id6d information as to t~e calculation of a total of 60 net livab~e square feet r~r the bathroom facility of each employee lln1 t. ~ A kitChen. faoilit::' ::ontaining a sink, steve, and refrigerator ~d shared by no :~ore than four perscns and a total area of at least 60 sq\ldre f,*f,t ur access to a co~:mon kitchen, Applicant is pr~pcslng to have six perso~s share the kitchen area for each dormitor~ unit. ~ Use of 20 Iiq\.Oere f..t per persel, of ltmclosed storag.. area ~cated ~ith1n ~r acjacent to the unit. Applican'l: hall n,:.t pn'v:'d"d stereqe of 240 equal's ~",et fOl. the t~!O <1orm1t;o::y employe.t,lr:ita. A calculation of 2C e~uare feet X 12 employees . ~40 &q~a~e teet. The 240 ~~uare feet of storage a::ea shall not be lncl",d6': in the net livablll calculations of 125 to 30e net livable. sq..U'", flio$1:: ot living areEl requ1.red for dormitory employee units. Staff recommand~ d6T,ial of the prop~~&l by the hsi~ GMQS Exemption to provide hous.in'J f,:'l: t;iel va persons bi" the use of. tlvO dormi t.ory three cadro,,;!. e;Jp~.oY"8 t.:.ni ts. Applicant has not prov~ded informati~n as to the calculation of a total of E:O sCju;I';:o; teet ot net. liv.'.lble area for the ki t~h~n facility of each employae unit. 5. Uae ot' 20 lI'i!u/!re teet per person of enclo&ed storaga area located within or ~djacent to the unit. Applicant ';/ould l".sad to supply a to':-al of ;;40 square feet of storage are~ lo~ated within or adjaoen~ to the unit. 6. All unit& shut ctjmply with UBC standards. S. A ~anager, ansistant manager, or lodge owne~, who is in the moderate ir.come range may occupy the unit, how.v~r, rent will be caloulated baS6d on t.ho. low income guideline!'!. Lodge owners l~USt work full-time fOl th~ lOd~e operation. STAr!' RI!lCOY.Y.l!INOATIClNI Staff hes reviewed the Agi_" GMQS Exemption fOl: tht!l provision o~ dCl."mitory/loClqe employee hous,ing units. 'I'he 1985 Afforda~)l$ El\;"lc::,('.. HOl,lslng Guidelines .",qui te that certain conditions of. ap;.roval be me~ by Applicant. The follcw:ng cor<d ti_Gns for approval tlava l"H,t be-en accommo::late::l by Appl iCant: 1. Plans wculd t\e.SO:l. to .be provided to the Housing Authority to verify the net livable square footage of the As1.a applicatio:1. Employee provlslc1')s of bet\.,aen 125 and 300 net. livable square feet of living area p~r ,erson, includinq sleeping, bathroom, cooking, and lounge use~ ir-, ceo!M:on would need to be calculsted for approval by the Hou.it,g Aut!;o:r.i7.Y. The net livable square footage shall not include interiDr or exterior hallways, parking, patios, decks, laundry rOOThA, me~~anical ar~as, and storage. 2. One b&thro~~ a~ared by no rrore than ~our persona, containing at least one w=te~ ::1"98':., one lavatory, one batht:,b with a shov!er, ana a total area of at leaat 60 square feet. Applicant prOp03E\S to proviae bathroom facilIties to be shared by .1x individual~ p~r employee unit. Calculat~ons as to the requlrement of ~t laast 60 square feet of tcta~ bathroom area per employee unit ~ave not been provided by A~~licant. 3. A Kitchen tacili~y oontaining a sink, stove and refrigerator and shared by no more the!'\ four perlJor.s and a total area of at least 60 square feet O~ access to a com~on kitchen. Applicant prcpo~~s to provide kitchen facilities for six employees per employee unit_ ;'pplioant has not pr{lvided :i.nfo:')n,at1on as to the requirement of at l.ast 60 Bquare feet of to~al ~itchen area per employee unit cr aCC$~8 to a oommon ki~chen. ~~~ ~x~ "'"' ASPEN.PITKIN 0 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office From: Environmental Health Department Date: Re: Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, special Review Parcel ID# 2735-124-39-070 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the above-mentioned land use submittal for the following concerns. The authority for this review is granted to this office by the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office as stated in Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: The applicant has agreed to serve the project with public sewer as provided by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. This conforms with section 1-2.3 of the Pitkin Countv Requlations On Individual Sewaqe Disposal Systems policy to "require the use of public sewer systems wherever and whenever feasible, and to limit the installation of individual sewage disposal systems only to areas that are not feasible for public sewers". ADEOUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: The applicant has agreed to serve the project with water provided by the Aspen Water Department distribution system. This conforms with section 23-55 of the Aspen Municipal Code requiring such projects "which use water shall be connected to the munici- pal water utility system". AIR OUALITY: ~ThiS development has a potential air quality benefit, due to the fact that it is within walking distance to downtown, so that employees, office clients, and customers can travel to and from the site without using cars. The commitment to not install fireplaces or woodstoves is also and air quality benefit, which could be guaranteed in the future by a deed restriction. Energy-efficiency measures proposed will also have an air quality benefit. The applicant will need to obtain an air pollution permit from the State of Colorado and submit a fugitive dust control plan. 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/920-15070 ~~ ~~ -,-", ., .' Asia Commercial GMQS Review June 27, 1990 Page 2 This will need to include measures to prevent blowing of dust onto nearby buildings and streets. Measures such as shrouding, wetting of disturbed areas, and daily cleaning of streets will be required. NOISE: No long term noise impacts are anticipated on the immediate neighborhood as a result of the approval of this project. However, it is predicted that short term noise impacts on the neighborhood will occur during the construction phase of this project. Should complaints be received by this office, Chapter 16 of the Aspen Municipal Code, titled Noise Abatement will be the document used in the investigation. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: The Rules and Requlations Governinq the Sanitation of Food Service Establishments in the State of Colorado contains specific prohibitions that "no operation ... shall be conducted in living quarters and that ... food service operations be separated from any living or sleeping quarters." The proposed changes with separate dwelling unit kitchens and a separate entry will enable the restaurant to clearly maintain the required distinction between the commercial food service establishment and the employee living areas. I '- j To: From: Re: Date: ~, '"... .-1' MEMORANDUM Leslie Lamont, Planner Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner i Referral comments on 132 W. Main, Asia parcel, GMQS Application _ _Jf",-.. u, __~~ ----------------------------------------------------------------- The following information is offered as referral comments to help you prepare your review memo and staff scoring of the GMQS application for the Asia parcel. 1) The application discusses the landmark designation aspects of the parcel somewhat inaccurately. Only the furthest west structure and lots H and I are designated; the remaining parcel including the entire east half of the existing restaurant building (relocated and connected in the early 1980 I s) is not designated as "H". This should be carefully clarified, as this is the primary reason why the applicant has submitted this application for GMQS allocation. 2) During the HPC public hearings, a few neighbors located to the north of the alley appeared at the meeting, voicing their concerns about general alley conditions. Their concerns focused on parking, trash and general I conditions of the alley. Al though the HPC did not directly require the paving and striping of the on-site parking area, this may alleviate many of the problems the alley and neighbors have been facing in the past. If a paved parking surface is not required, another form of surface treatment should be considered. The application is confusing on exactly what the applicant is providing in the form of on-site parking space. They are required to provide at least 12 spaces, which they state they can provide, yet they also state they will make a payment-in-lieu for three spaces. \3ou should be aware that the neighbors had grave concerns about reduced parking on this parce~ On designated parcels, the HPC has the ability to grant a parking variation (if findings are made), however, as the desiqnated portion of the parcel CAN accommodate parkinq, a variation from the HPC is not reasonable. 3) Exhibit Q, the sketch plan, is a very rough illustration of the infill building, which has received / """"' ,<", "-" " . . HPC's Final approval. It should be noted that the structure is more finely scaled and detailed than this sketch indicates. 4) A mixed use structure is appropriate within the Main street Historic District, and is consistent with the direction the Main street District study is heading. Office space is badly needed, and the HPC supports this proposal. 5) To be consistent with the Main street Plan and the Aspen Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Plan, a planting strip must be provided between the sidewalk and the curb. Currently, this area is paved with a hard surface, and is incompatible with the district and the direction of the two plans currently underway. The planting strip shall include cottonless cottonwoods, spaced traditionally, with adequate irrigation. One siqnificant element of the Main street District Plan is the restoration of the narrow irrigation ditches between the sidewalk and the curb, designed to provide irrigation for the street trees. The Main street District study Team has identified this block as needing improvements in the area of street plantings and (cottonwood) tree replacement within the public right-of-way. The parcel could be significantly improved with attention to this detail, in our opinion. 6) The elimination of a large percentage of decorative lights has also been identified as an important character-enhancing activity of this parcel. We recommend a 50-75% cutback, and seasonal use of lights. The HPC will be making strong recommendations in the future for the elimination of significant, random use of decorative lights year-round throughout the districts. memo.LL.132wm.GMQS Aspen C9onsolidated Sanitation 1Jistlfict 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele, (303) 925-3601 Tele. (3031 925-2537 ~i!\'jjf'5~~'~~!fi' Leslie Lamont Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen. CO 81611 JUN 2 6 I~' Re: Asia Commercial GMQS Dear Leslie: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has and treatment capacity to serve this development soon as the detailed drawings are available we approximate the connection fees for the project. permit. All connection fees associated with the paid prior to connection. sufficient line at this time. As would be able to and issue a tap project must be Sincerely, o '''''M~\./ er~-- () Bruce Matherly District Manager cc: Steve and Lily Ko. 132 W. Main. Aspen ROARING FORK ENERGY CENTER . 242 MAIN STREET. CARBONDALE, CO 81623 · (303)963-0311 .rnn.'-FilIIU~ Leslie Lamont Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8l61l 12 Re: Asia Commercial GMQS - Comments Dear Leslie: Our comments are addressed to the energy conservation components of the project. An overall observation of the section on "Energy Conservation" starting on page l3 is that specific details are lacking. For example, we are more interested in the delivered efficiency rating for the heating system rather than hearing it will be "state-of-the-art". without this additional information, all we can say is that it sounds like a good approach. We are pleased to see that attention will be given to air infiltration and that all penetrations of the building envelope will be caulked and sealed. Although, this statement does not guarantee that the building will be energy efficient. We would like to see the building tested before occupancy to determine the actual amount of air infiltration. This could be done with tracer gas or, even easier, with a Blower Door. This would enable the project applicant to achieve a specific level of air infiltration that will maintain adequate air quality while being energy efficient. Without the testing, we are all guessing how much air infiltration the new building will have. The buildings insulation levels are quite adequate for the roof and walls. There is no mention of the floor or perimeter insulation details. The use of water efficient plumbing fixtures and pipe insulation will conserve water and energy. We would like to see what exactly is the "latest technology" for the domestic water heater design. Without any details, it is hard to comment again. The project seems to pay close attention to the glazing requirements relating to energy use and comfort. Specifying the use of energy-efficient lighting products is good to see at this stage of project development. This component has great potential for energy savings. . -----'/ ROARING FORK ENERGY CENTER. 242 MAIN STREET. CARBONDALE, CO 81623 · (303)963-0311 The author of this section has given attention to the energy and resource consumption characteristics of the project. For this, they should be commended. The only negative comment we have is with the lack of specific details. At this stage, it is impossible to comment on the relative energy efficiency of the proposed building without further specific details on products and materials. We are very interested in what they decide on for their heating, glazing, lighting, plumbing, insulation, and infiltration needs. We would appreciate if the applicant would let us know these details as the project develops. Sincerely, ~ Steve Standiford Director SS/ss \. , ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT Buddy Lucero Jim Markalunas Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, Special Review f" ill: FROM: SUBJECf: DAlE: ~/.. ---'" " ---~--------------------------------------- We wish to confirm the Water Department can provide water in sufficient quantities for the Asia Commercial development. Therefore, this memo shall be confirmation that the Water Department has sufficient treatment and distribution capacity to provide service to this project. 1\1:,1 \ r:; v' ... ..- ,.".,..." - ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 Dennis B. Green Attorney At Law 617 West Main street, suite B Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Asia GMQS Application Dear Mr. Green, This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing before the Aspen Planning and Zoning commission on Tuesday, July 17, 1990 at a meeting to begin at The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planning Office. Please note that it is your responsibility to post the subject property with a sign for the public hearing and mail notices to adjacent property owners. If you have any questions, please call Leslie Lamont, the planner assigned to your case. Sincerely, Debbie Skehan Administrative Assistant ~o TO: ;;; '"'f'nf"\M- RE: DATE: .- ~ ~...., " ~~... ... , MEMORANDUM City Attorney City Engineer Housing Director Aspen Water Department Environmental Health Department Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Parks Department 4Fire Marshal Roaring Fork Energy Center Aspen Historic Preservation Committee ."... ~lie Lamon~anning Office Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Special Review Parcel ID# 2735-124-39-070 13 Change in Use, ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- . Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Dennis Green on behalf of Steve & Lily Ko requesting GMQS allotments for office development. Please return your comments to me no later than June 29, 1990. thank you. )!)C, CC#',4;/ [/..75 . . ...." ..... CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET city of Aspen DATE DATE RECEIVE~ COMPLETE: r , CI PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. 2735-124-39-070 A33-90 STAFF MEMBER: L I....- PROJECT NAME: Asia Commercial Chan e in Use. Special Review Project Address: 132 West Main Street Legal Address: Lots K. L. M. N and West 1/2 of Lot O. Block 58 APPLICANT: Steve & Lilv Ko Applicant Address: 132 W. Main Street. Aspen. CO REPRESENTATIVE: Dennis B. Green Representative Address/Phone: 617 W. Main. suite B Aspen. CO 81611 5-1885 PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: $3755. NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED: 21 TYPE OF APPLICATI9N: P&Z Meeting Date ':+ / 1+ 1 STEP: 2 STEP: HEARING~ NO ',/ , / PUBLIC VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date /~-......, PUBLIC HEARING: YES ~ VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO ~ r r C'-' .' f-,. \-~, -~-:.-h \ ,'0 II! Planning Director Approval: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Paid: Date: REF~~~ AttO;:;~~ 'h'JA '~~~~"'B:~-;' ' .,'~- / '~~hO~~'~~:~~i~t v City Engineer V Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat Gas ~ Housing Dir. Holy Cross state Hwy Dept(GW) -V Aspen Water / Fire Marshal State Hwy Dept(GJ) /City Electric ./Building Inspector/""" \,1' rV> ,/ .-Envir. Hlth. \r Roaring Fork V Other t1\Y~ ~ Aspen Con. S.D. Energy Center INITIALS: W . DATE REFERRE : to, 1IIIreo DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: FINAL ROUTING: City Atty Housing Env. Health FILE STATUS 1""',,- ,~ ORDINANCE 61 (SERrES OF 1993) AN ORDrNANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTrNG A SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF THE 1989 OFFICE GMQS ALLOTMENT GRANTED BY RESOLUTIONS 90-44 AND 90-45 FOR THE ASIA OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, 132 WEST MAIN STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-8-108 of the Aspen Municipal~ Code, City Council may grant an extension of GMQS allocations up to six months; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 1990 city Council approved a GMQS / allocation for the development of the Asia office at 312 West Main Street; and WHEREAS, development allotments expire on the day after their ~. anniversary of the date the GMQS allocations, or other development approvals have been awarded; and WHEREAS, the allocations will have expired on October 10, 1993 v'/ prior to the applicants, steve and Lily Ko, obtaining a building permit; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a six month extension of V' the GMQS allocation in order to commence construction of the approved development; and WHEREAS, the extension request was submitted prior to the /' third anniversary of the date of approval of a site specific development plan; and WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted development plans for ~ building and zoning review; and WHEREAS, plan check review has determined that there are several conditions of approval that have not been met and staff has requested more information; and I . I"'" '- WHEREAS, until all conditions of approval have been satisfied no building permits will be issued; and WHEREAS, the planning Office, having reviewed the application v' recommends approval of a six month extension of the GMQS allotments approved in Resolutions 90-44 and 90-45; and WHEREAS, the planning Office also recommends that this be a ~ one time extension because the GMQS program ,will be amended in 1994; and WHEREAS, the Aspen city council having considered the Planning ~/ Office's recommendation for the GMQS extension does wish to grant the requested extension for six months beyond the approval granted in Resolutions 90-44 and 90-45 for the 132 West Main street, finding that the applicant has begun to pursue the project by the ') submittal of building plans and intends to commence construction in the near future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CrTY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: section 1: t/ Pursuant to section 24-8-108 of the Municipal Code, City council does hereby grant the applicant a six month extension of the 1989 office GMQS allocation approved by Resolutions 90-44 and 90-45 for 132 West Main street beginning October 10, 1993 and ending April 10, 1994. section 2: / If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is fore any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such /r", ......... section 3 This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. section 4 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 6th of December, 1993, in the city Council Chambers, Aspen city Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the city of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City council of the City of Aspen on the 8th of November 1993. ATTEST: ~J..._, )d~ _ 1~~;~~OCh, city Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 8th day of November, 1993. ~ 7; {7~ John S. Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: ~j? Kid.*: Clerk / c Exhibit A ,- RESOLUTION NO. tit (Series of 1990) RESOLUTION OF THE OF NET LEASABLE OFFICE BUILDING, HALF OF LOT 0 ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ALLOCATING 1,200 SQUARE 1989 COMMERCIAL GMQS ALLOTMENTS TO THE 132 WEST MAIN, LOTS K, L, M, N, AND THE FEET ASIA WEST WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8-106 of the Aspen Land Use v' Code, September 15 of each year is established as the deadline for submission of applications for Commercial development allotments within the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, because of the administrative delay regarding y/' Resolution 35 (Series of 1989), the submission date for 1989 Commercial GMQS applications was postponed until June 1, 1990; and WHEREAS, the annual quota for the Office zone is 4,000 ) square feet of net leasable but GMQS Exemptions in 1989 have eliminated the quota in the Office zone and the City of Aspen / Land Use Code requires 30% of the annual quota to be available for competition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Office has calculated the Commercial GMQS quota in the Office zone available for 1989 as 1,200 square feet of net leasable; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed Public Hearing was held by the Aspen ~ Planning and Zoning commission (hereinafter "commission") on August 21, 1990 to consider the Growth Management Quota system competition for commercial development, at which time the Commission did evaluate and score the only application that was received: the Asia Office Building; and \ i WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project successfully c , met the minimum threshold of the individual and combined categories for a total score of 32.8 points; and WHEREAS, review of the GMQS application for Asia was consolidated with Change in Use and Special Reviews for the reduction of parking for employee housing and on-site parking requirements for an offi~e building; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommended approval of the change in Use and Special Reviews for the reduction in parking subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission moved to accept the scoring, subject to an audit, and forward the score of 32.8 points for the Asia Office building with conditions to the Aspen city Council; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommended to the Aspen city ~ , , ) Council approval of the multi-year development allotment for 1,641 square feet net leasable of the 1990 Commercial GMQS allotment in the Office zone. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO that it does hereby grant, with conditions as recommended by the Commission, from the available 1989 Commercial Growth Management Quota 1,200 square feet of net leasable to the Asia Office Building. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED by the Council that the above allocations shall expire pursuant to Chapter 24, Section 8-108 of the Municipal Code, this allocation shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the date of approval of a site specific I 2 r.... '-' development plan unless a building permit is obtained and the ) project is developed, or unless an exemption from or extension of the approval is obtained. Dated: (I~ /0 , 1990. .~~;t~~ I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado at a meeting held r1le:r~ K 1990. ~~h,1;;f~k ) cc.1989.comm.gmp I 3 f c I / RESOLUTION NO. L/,::> (Series of 1990) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING A MULTI-YEAR DEVELOPMENT ALLOTMENT OF 1,641 SQUARE FEET OF NET LEASABLE FROM THE 1990 COMMERCIAL QUOTA IN THE OFFICE ZONE TO THE ASIA OFFICE BUILDING, 132 WEST MAIN, LOTS K, L, M, N, AND THE WEST HALF OF LOT 0 WHEREAS, the 1989 'Commercial GMP application submitted by V steve and Lily Ko for the Asia office building also requested a multi-year development allotment from 1990; and WHEREAS, the applicants have requested 1,200 square feet of v net leasable from the 1989 Commercial GMP quota in the Office zone and now request 1,641 square feet of net leasable from the 1990 Commercial GMP quota in the Office zone; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8-103 D. of the Aspen Land Use / Code the city Council may grant a development allotment for proposed development that requests development allotments which would be available in future years; and WHEREAS, the 1990 Commercial GMP quota for the Office zone v/ is 4,000 square feet of net leasable and the deadline for the 1990 Commercial GMP submission was September 15, 1990; and WHEREAS, Asia was _the was the only application submitted V' requesting 1,641 square feet of net leasable; and WHEREAS, the Planning and zoning commission recommends to / council approval of the multi-year allotment so the building may be built at one time; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the request and the v/ criteria for approving a multi-year allotment, pursuant to \ section 8-103 D., and does wish to grant a 1,641 square foot of " \ / ,....., "-" " net leasable allotment for the Asia Office building from the 1990 ! Commercial GMP Office zone quota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ~ CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO that it does hereby grant from the available 1990 Commercial Growth Management Quota in the Office zone 1,641 square feet of net leasable to the Asia Office Building. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED by the Council that the above ~ allocations shall expire pursuant to Chapter 24, section 8-108 of the Municipal Code, this allocation shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the date of approval of a site specific development plan unless a building permit is obtained and the project is developed, or unless an exemption from or extension of ) the approval is obtained. &~/O ~~~ William L. stirling, Mayor Dated: I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting city Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the city Council of the ~8 city of Aspen, Colorado at a meeting held , 1990. (~Ko1: ~erk cc.1990.multi.gmp 2 16/ ~ ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street A 33 -;0 Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES ,J.. 73S'-/;).<f-3'j~~ City 076 00113 -63250.134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL ,::5dS-'U 0U .63270.136 GMP/FINAL .63280.137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL -63300.139 SUB/FINAL -63310.140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63320-141 ALL I.STEP APPLICATIONS! CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 00125 00123 00115 County 00113 00125 00123 00113 REFERRAL FEES: -63340.205 .63340-190 .63340.163 .63160.126 .63170.127 -63180-128 .63190.129 -63200.130 .63210-131 -63220.132 -63230-133 .63450.146 REFERRAL FEES: .63340-205 .63340.190 .63360.143 PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 .63080-122 .63090.123 .63140-124 .69000.145 Name: () . } t /.c_ Address /';:2 (J' /1/_ ( . ~ J (/ ,) ,)(.)/ ('0 / " " Check # Additional billing: :z - ::,- 00 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HOUSING ENGINEERING 0. (k) /,-U SUBTOTAL GMP/GENERAL GMP/DETAILED GMP/FINAL SUB/GENERAL SUB/DETAILED SU B/FI NAL ALL 2.STEP APPLICATIONS ALL 1'STEP APPLICATIONS! CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HOUSING ENGINEERING CITY/COUNTY CODE COMP, PLAN COPY FEES OTHER SUBTOTAL TOTAL ,~ c::;"S":" 00 Phone: Project! ( .(1, ,:z" c;l1 '7 S Date: I. /'Z0 ,.,&~ # of Hours: