Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.132 W. Main St.AsiaCommercial.A33-90Asia Commercial GN1QS A5)A 2735-124-39-070 A33-90 M ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 0 7 d 00113 -63250-134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL y U -63270-136 GMP/FINAL -63280-137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL -63300-139 SUB/FINAL -63310-140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63320-141 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REFERRAL FEES: 2 S U V 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING (j 0 i 00115 -63340-163 ENGINEERING / U SUBTOTAL County 00113 -63160-126 GMP/GENERAL -63170-127 GMP/DETAILED -63180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAL -63200-130 SUB/DETAILED -63210-131 SUB/FINAL -63220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS -63450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00113 -63360-143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 -63080-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE -63090-123 COMP. PLAN -63140-124 COPY FEES -69000-145 OTHER SUBTOTAL TOTAL Name: "-_ Phone: Address: 2 ZIL-4 'J ProjectY1 Check # Date: Additional billing: #of Hours: >ho 1 GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM APPLICATION FOR 1989 AND 1990 MAY 1990 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 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. Hammond 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 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- 1 1 TELEPHONE 303-925.1885 May 30, 1990 DENNIS B. GREEN Attorney at Law 617 W. MAIN ST.. SPITE B ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 Ms. Leslie Lamont Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 TELECOPIER 303.925.5856 Re: Asia Project, Growth Management 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 Application, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, DBG/aw Enclosure Dennis B. Green TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION - PROJECT OVERVIEW .................... 1 II. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ............................. 4 A. History Of Existing Building ................... 4 ' B. Renovation Of Existing Building ................ 4 C. Proposed Office Building •.... 5 D. Water System ................................... 6 E. Sewage Treatment System ........................ 6 F. Drainage System ................................ 6 G. Fire Protection ................................ 6 H. Stastical Analysis Of Proposed ' Uses And Zoning 6 I. Traffic Generation .... ... .................... 9 J. Affordable Housing ............................. 10 K. Stoves And Fireplaces 10 L. Location And Impact ............................ 10 M. Effect On Adjacent Land Uses ................... 11 N. Construction Schedule .......................... 13 III. ANALYSIS OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA ...... 14 A. Quality Of Design .............................. 14 (1) Architectural Design ...................... 14 (2) Site Design ••... 15 (3) Energy Conservation ....................... 16 ' (4) (5) Amenities............... Visual Impact ............................. 18 19 (6) Trash And Utility Access Areas ............ 19 B. Availability Of Public Facilities and Services . 20 (1) Water Supply/Fire Protection .............. 20 (2) Sanitary/Sewer ............................ 20 (3) Public Transportation/Roads ............... 20 ' (4) Storm Drainage ............................ 20 (5) Parking ..... •.... ........ .... 21 C. Provision Of Affordable Housing ................ 22 ' IV. RELATED APPLICATIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANDPARKING .......... ....................... 24 ' A. Growth Management Exemption .................... 24 B. Change In Use ••.. .... 24 C. Special Review ................................. 25 ' V. PHASING OF ALLOTMENTS .............................. 26 ' VI. SUMMARY - REQUEST FOR BONUS POINTS .................. 29 i 11 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 BuildingSecond FloorPlan............ Exhibit L Parking Plan ...• ... ...... • ... ......... Exhibit M Proposed Building - Lower Floor Plan ............. Exhibit N Proposed Building - Ground Floor Plan ............ Exhibit O 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 Zoning Map . ........ Exhibit W Landscape Plan ................................... Exhibit X 1 I. INTRODUCTION - PROJECT OVERVIEW ' 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 ' building. - needed for the construction of the new office The application is divided into six major sections. This First Section gives an overview of the project. Section II 1 r 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 summarizes this application and offers a justification for the request for bonus points. For convenience, relevant supporting documentation has been included in the Appendix. rThe 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 rThe basic information Land Use Application Form giving ' 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 r 2 r historic structure located in the center of the Main Street rHistoric District. The proposal will also create a significant amount of affordable housing within close proximity to shopping, employment, and public services. 1 1 I I 11 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. IB. 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 "B" detail is Exhibit (view from Main Street). Further shown in Exhibit "H" and "I" (architect's drawings of elevations), and Exhibits "J", "V , 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 rMain First Street. or ' 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", "O" and "P" (detailed site and floor plans) and Exhibits 5 "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 Committee members' comments 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 location. in terms of massing for the 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". System E. Sewage Treatment 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 System 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 2,841 square feet of 6 1 net leasable office space and for two affordable housing 1 units providing 1,974 square feet of living area. The proposal and compliance requirements of the Land Use Code are . outlined as follows: i BASIC INFORMATION ON PROPOSAL LEGAL: Block 58, Lots K, L, M, N and west half of Lot 0 ZONE: 0 - 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. t) Gross Area: 1,232 sq. ft. 141 sq. ft. C�(B�)Net Leasable: 947 sq. ft. -- GROUND FLOOR (A) Gross Area: 1,232 sq. ft. 1,232 sq. ft. (B) Net Leasable: 947 sq. ft. -- UPPER FLOOR (A) Gross Area: 1,232 sq. ft. 1,232 sq. ft. 7 ( � 1 1 1 1 i A 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I (B) Net Leasable: TOTALS (A) Gross Area: (B) Net Leasable (Office Space): (C) F.A.R. (Enclosed): (Covered Porch): AFFORDABLE HOUSING UPPER LEVEL Net Living Area: Area Per Person: LOWER LEVEL Net Living Area: Area Per Person: TOTAL %% 896.0 sq. ft. 224.0-s�� 1,994.0 sq. ft. 947 sq. ft. -- 3,696 sq. ft. 2,841 sq. ft. 2,605 sq. ft. + 98 sq. ft. = 2,703 sq. ft. I f\ 1,078.0 sq. ft. 269.5 sq. ft. �V J , ASIA REMODEL OF EXISTING BUILDING FLOOR AREA ANALYSIS BASEMENT ACTUAL F.A.R. (A) Gross Area: 4,821 sq. ft. 467 sq. ft. (B) Offices: 1,273 sq. ft. ---- (C) Affordable Housing: 896 sq. ft. ---- (D) Circulation: 257 sq. ft. ---- GROUND FLOOR (A) Gross Area: 5,833 sq. ft. 5,833 sq. ft. 0 ACTUAL F.A.R. (B) Office: 1,284 sq. ft. ---- (C) Restaurant/Bar: 3,778 sq. ft. ---- (D) Circulation: 430 sq. ft. ---- UPPER FLOOR (A) Gross Area: 1,158 sq. ft. * 1,114 sq. ft. (B) Affordable Housing: 1,078 sq. ft. ---- (C) Circulation: 80 sq. ft. ---- TOTALS (A) Gross Area: 11,812 sq. ft. (B) Office: 2,557 sq. ft. (C) Restaurant/Bar: 3,778 sq. ft. (D) Affordable Housing: 1,974 sq. ft. (E) F.A.R.: 7,415 sq. ft. ' * Including Stair and Low Headroom Areas TOTAL F.A.R. CALCULATION LOT AREA: 13,498 F.A.R. AT .75: 10,124 F.A.R. EXISTING BUILDING: 7,- 15 F.A.R. NEW BUILDING: 2,703 1 TOTAL F.A.R. REQUESTED: 10,118 I. Traffic Generation The traffic impacts are detailed in Exhibit "U". 0 I I 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 1,078-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. R. 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 ' 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 Street, the transportation, will most often use Main 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 i 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 Lsite 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 tMain Street side of the building. 13 III. ANALYSIS OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA A. Quality of Design ' (1) Architectural Design As noted, both buildings involved have received design Committee. The approval from the Historic Preservation ' 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 ' building be enhance its appearance. The will 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 rsuggestions 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 1 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, rparticularly 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 ris consistent with landscaping on contiguous parcels, such as the aspen trees to be located next to the existing ones on rthe Hotel Aspen property. All utilities will be provided underground. Walkways will be provided linking the new building, parking in the rrear, and entrance and yard fronting Main Street. Requested Score: 3 points 15 r ' (3) Energy Conservation 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 1 "E" (6) feet of the floor will be low 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 1 (4) Amenities �� l The most important amenity of the project is its 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 1 stairway access, for the needs and convenience of all users. IRequested 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 purposes. 4� --� Requested Score: 3 points ,moo J �� 19 r 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 i t(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 rlocated near to a major thoroughfare. Requested Score: 1 point ' (4) Storm Drainage All historic drainage patterns and off -site discharge 1 20 1 I 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 REQUIREMENTS 1980 REQUIRED FOR EXISTING BUILDING 15 1990 NEW NET LEASABLE (2,841 Net Leasable X 1.5 min.] 4 CASH -IN -LIEU FOR REMAINDER [4.5 x $15,000] $ 67,500 SPECIAL REVIEW REDUCTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING [75% x 4 Bedrooms] - 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 i 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 1,974 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 IC. 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 i deemed to employees. generate 8.5 additional em to 9 P Y 22 1 1 I 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. 23 Requested Score: 14 points IV. RELATED APPLICATIONS FOR AFFORDABLE SOUSING 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 1 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. 25 ' V. PHASING OF ALLOTMENTS 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, ' development be they request that an excess allotment granted pursuant to Section 8-103(B). The Applicants recognize that the City has been Ireluctant 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 8-103(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 rone 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 man regards. For example, a bus stop Y g P P is currently located nearby and the site is within walking distance of the public library, retail and service is establishments, and 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 projects which were exempted provided little or no affordable housing while this proposal provides significant amounts of the needed housing. VI. SUMKARY - 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. I I 29 r ..sv sou awi... W Sw co � 1 G 1 1 � r' 1 11 i -�- ���•V 74'L Pu4 I PstC !Y_wPr4 7 W +' •r W a MAIN S(AM N r Q x K L W r o SITE PLAN ® Z MAIN m l t_ 4J t T X .9 r f Z_ 0 0 J 0� w U0 LL 0Nz aZa N Q 0 cfa A7TAO NU4r 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FC W 1) Project, Name ASIA 2) Prorjeat Location 132 W. Main Lots K L M N and the west half of Lot 0, Block 58 City and Townsite of Aspen ' (inxiicate stivet address, lot & block n=ber, legal description where appropriate) 3) Present Zoning 0 - Office 4) Lot size 13.498 sa. ft. 5) ApQlicant s Name, Address & Pt)om # Steve Ko and Lily Ko, 132 W. Main. ' Aspen, Colorado, 81611, (303) 925-5433 6) Representative, s Name, Address & phom # Dennis B. Green 617 W. Main, Suite B, Aspen, Colorado, 8161L (303) 925-1885 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply) ' Conditional Use CaxxVtual SPA _ ' X Special Review Final SPA _ 1 1 8) k ' 9) 8040 Greenline Stream Margin Mountain Vier Plane •• . •tat •. •0 a 4W - 01041AIM Final PUD Subdivision Text/Map Amendment Final Historic Dev. Minor Historic Dev. Historic Demolition historic Designation Jat Split/ -ot Line X a4Z' an AdOustamnt X Change In Use Description of E xjztirxq Uses (rn=ber and type of existing stzLx'tzl ; appprcvimate sq. ft.; n.=ber of bed; any prevlcus apgruralS gnOted to the Property) See Attached Section I. Description of Development Application See Attached Section I1. ' 10) Have you attached the following? yes pie a to Attacrnent 2, M i n i m r,n S1ub sSiOn Contents ve s Re�xiise to Attachment 3 , Speci f ;c &,�^ i �Gica� (Xntents es Re�e to Attacfinent 4, Review Standazds for Your Application Exhibit C I June 1, 1990 . City Of Aspen 130 W. Main ' Aspen, CO. 81611 To Whan It May Concern: We, Steve Ko and Lily Ko, the owners of the property at 132 W. Main, Aspen, Colorado, hereby authorize Dennis B. Green and.charles Cunniffe & Associates to act as our agents, and to present a growth management quota application on our behalf. Please accept this letter and attached material as our application to renovate the Asia Restaurant, and to develop an unused portion of the property; building offices and employee housing. Our request - this application - is pursuant to the requirements of the City"s growth ' management system. The building which houses our restaurant was originally a miner's cottage, was also used for offices at one time, and was added to the ' historic register more than a decade ago. You have already approved our plans for making Asia Restaurant more ' attractive, and efficient as a dining business. This includes design changes, and renovation. ;%le wish now to add affordable housing and office space to an area of town 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. ;e believe the changes to Asia Restaurant meet the intent of the Growth Management Code - and ask for your support. ISincerely, eve Kam/ Lily Ko ' Owners - Asia Restaurant 132 W. Main ' Aspen, Colorado 81611 ' Exhibit D 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TELEPHONE 303.925.1885 May 30, 1990 City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 DENNIS B. GREEN Attorney at Law W W. MAIN ST.. SUITE B ASPEN, COLORADO 91611 Re: Ownership of 132 W. Main To: The Aspen Planning Commission, Aspen City Council, and Planning Office TELECOPIER 303-925-5856 The undersigned has reviewed the ownership of Lots K, L, M, N, and the west one-half of Lot 0, 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 encu='rances 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 Ownership, 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. DBG/aw Enclosure Sincerely, Dennis B. Green Exhibit E ,TKIN COUNTY TITLE, Inc. _ Title Insurance Company Davishristina M. ,;ent J. HiOens $01 E. Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado 81611 C Vice President nt President (303) 925.1766 - (303) 925.6527 FAX 's CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP ,-PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., A DULY LICENSED TITLE INSURANCE AGENT FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT : STEVE KO AND LILY KO ARE THE OWNERS IN PEE SIMPLE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO TO —WIT: LOTS K, L, M, N AND THE WEST ONE-HALF OF LOT 0, BLOCK 58, CITY AND TOWNSITB Of ASPEN. DEEDS OF TRUST, MORTGAGES, ENCUMBRANCES APPARENTLY NOT RELEASED: DEED OF TRUST ----- BOOK 508 AT PACE 837 NOTE: AMENDMENT TO DEED OF TRUST RECORDED IN BOOK 509 AT PAGE 763 'FINANCING STATEMENT -- BOOK 518 AT PAGE 81 NOTE : EASEMENT ----- BOOK 525 AT PAGE 48 LIEN AND JUDGEMENTS APPARENTLY NOT RELEASED: NONE ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE THE PACTS STATED ARE TRUE, THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT TO BE'CONSTRUED AS AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, NOR AN OPINION OF TITLE, NOR A 'GUARANTY OF TITLE, AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., NEITHER ASSUMES, NOR WILL BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY WHATEVER ON ANY STATEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN. ' CERTIFIED TO: JULY 3, 1959 AT 8:00 A.M. PITKIN COUNTY INC. ' ITT BY; If AUTHORI D GNATURE ' Exhibit F off VICINITY MAP Ali Lrk �> ;7 1m -T-i-T, \� t to 1 LAKE h•.9�N SI f:t ! T ASIA ►isGr,v%Av 82 To BUTTER-ii suor - GLENYW000 SP•••N' AIRPORT - — - -- lMvF x5emnoe [a.s -- - - o - - - ER m®® — — Nb.v N.uvw1. Spmla nE N.v.l Fo.n 0 . SOUTH ELEVATION r GMQFEWJKGSTAMWUL NlMDOR EIAMIT" hiftwoeLayusoumaDmy X W (Ny Nn Ft�\ SaQie iE Fa.s ILA 0.'�vEw. b �4eL Evwa d b4�!'L Fip C - - Gn TAl NOTES - -__- - - -- - -eftww ®� - - — - Eeew a(mmq bilG�eynb Mwmba �vW d paoY1. _ _ Nry Ccotr�ao m )G '4 _ �Il s�mo.v�cemb mtLm9N E'YCW rn -- CA N EAST ELF\ \TMN I GENERAL!" TES per. T ._. .. — CDE mnx of .eutlgS WtliryNb Ge nlwn�fneC lL LU WEST ELEVATION V M, x EXTENSION Or EXISTING STAIRWELL 0 h NEW EMPLOYEE HOUSING ENTRY J W 10 o N.. r.o~ sarm ne Ee.a EM•S.Ygk Nn Roaf Shlye Nn Con®o Ytsae1 L E4 - —_ W 1r� b WtA E—w Z NORTH ELEVATION EYQTRM WALLS AND PARTIr10MTOREMAIN EXSSTMD MALLS ANDPARTIMMTOSEREMMED NEMMALLSANDPARTRIONS LOWER FLOOR PLAN EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO REMAIN EXISTING MALLS AND PARTITIONS TO BE REMOVED REWWALLSANDPARTTTMM J GROUND FLOOR PLAN m ■w L� r SECOND FLOOR PLAN R EUrrMWALARMV?ARTn"8ToM"Ii _= RRnMWAWMV?ARTITMMTORCRFLOVm = KVWALUAM?ARTIMM � r r r r r r m r m m S 75' 09' 1 1" E 134.98 81 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 1 ' I 6 I 7 I 8 1 9 I 10 I 11 I I I I °DI t C3 o i o o I� a I n i 1 rr K I 1 I I 1 I o � / 1 EXIST. TRANSFORMER (relocate) EXIST. SHED i� I 3p1: / (remove) I 4.2 CL.i / / ' ON STORY / �/' WO,STOR dl ASIA REMODEL / NEW OFFICE BUILDING PROPOSED PARKING LAYOUT SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. August 2, 1990 W M Si M M M M M M r M r �7 r I 12 I 13 I 14 r I z r walkway I I I I I I I 1 I I I O o 0 O I I I PROPOSED L OFFICE BUILDING I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 3 d ' I 0 o BASE MAP BY: d ALPINE SURVEYS INC. U) Job No. 81-209-2 April 7, 1986 1 I I I I � ZD' - Oil i i i i 0 y\ l I r �d ABASEMENT SCALE: 1 / 1 O" = V-O" .. CMARU CUNNIFFE 6 ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS ASIA OFFICE BLDG. MAIN ST.' ASPEN ' CO. P.O. BOX 3534, ASPEN, CCKORnDO 81611 TELEPHONE 303/915-5590 Exhibit N ��� �� �� \ 1; �. 1 1 1 ZU - G7il I - J r✓LE� 0 � i i 1 1 l� f iN I � ,UPPER FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1 / 1 O" = 1'-0" CH/1RLE5 CUNNIFFE 3 �►SSOCV►TES/ HITECTS ASIA OFFICE BLDG. MAIN ST.' ASPEN ' CO. P.O. BOX 3534, ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925-5590 Exhibit P mi t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 ASIA OFFICE BLDG, MAIN ST.* ASPEN ' CO. L hibit Q CHARLES CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTS PO BOX 3534. ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925-5590 I - I 1 ASIA OFFICE BLDG. CHMM CUNNIFFE & ASSOCIAMS/ARCHMECTS tMAIN ST.* ASPEN ' W. 10 P.O. BOX 3534, ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 TELEPHONE 303/925.5590 Exhibit R f mom on s w m m m m m m m m m s 2 Li Q m O W ~ 0. LL Q x w H Q � Z Q � 11 1 1 1 J 1 I L h F I- I SCMMUESER CORDON MEYER INC. P.O. Box 2155 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (303) 925-6727 CONSULTING ENGINEERS ✓♦ SURVEYORS I -lay 29, 1990 Mr. Dennis B. Green Attorney at Law 617 West Main Street Suite B Aspen, Co. 81611 RE: Asia Office Building Growth Managment Application Dear Dennis: This letter comprises a report on Engineering related items for an office Growth 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 I-lanagment Quota system (GI�JQS) persuant to Aspen Municipal 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 will include approximately 3842 sq. feet of leasable office space and new affordable housing is to be built in the remodeled Asia restraurant building. The site plan proposes to provide for parking spaces fronting on the alley as well as a trash and utility enclosure in the northwest corner of the site. While the project fronts on Highway 82 on Main Street it does not propose access from the 1-lain Street frontage.The following items comprise engineering analysis of available services pursant to City GI-IQS requirements. Water System I Tater is to be provided by the City of Aspen Water System as discussed with Judy I icKenzie of the City Dlater Department on I -fay 25, 1990. Water service to the project is available from an existing 8" main located in Main Street. Judy indicated that the existing crater system has adequate rapacity to serve this project without any required system upgrades. She further indicated that there were no problems on the existing crater system in the immediate area that might require construction by the applicant. Fire hydrants are already in existance on the northwest corner of the intersection of Nain and First Street as well as the northeast corner of Garmish and I•Iain both a block or less from the project site. As a predominantly office structure this project should not place high .demands on the '.rater system, we would anticipate approximately 450 gallons per day. One possible concern regarding eater service to this project involves the Colorado Department of Highways near term plan to overlay the Main Street portion of Highway 32. This would suggest that it may be advisable to tap the City eater main as soon as possible to avoid later conflict with Department of Highways overlay work. 1512 Grand Avenue, Suite 212 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 816011 Exhibit U t I•Iay 29, 1990 Asia Office Building GMA Page 2 . _ Sewer System Based on conversations with Tom Bracewell of the Aspen Metropolitan Sewer District it appears that sewer system capacity is available to serve this project. Tom indicated in my conversation with him on May 25 that service would 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. Again, as a predominantly office project, this development should not place high demands on the sewer system during normal peak flow conditions. �- D rainacie The site plan for the Asia Office Building proposes approximately 3813 sq. ft. of new impervious surface on a lot area of 4036 sq. ft. Space is available on the site to provide on site detention in the form of a subgrade drywell overflowing to adjacent storm sewer facilities. I Mould propose to locate the drywell and overflows in the parking area adjacent to the alley. The drywell system will be sized to provide on - site detention of any difference between undeveloped and developed flows. Off site discharge gill be maintained at historic levels pursuant to City Code requirements. Fire Protection The project site is currently serviced by two existing fire hydrants, one is located on the northwest corner of Ilain and First Streets about 1/2 block from the site, the other is located at the northeast corner of Main and Garmish just under 1 block from the site. Both hydrants within 300 feet of the project site. In addition, the site is located 5 blocks from the existing Aspen Volunteer Fire Department, located on East Hopkins between I lilt 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 with the Fire I,larshall's Office no special requirements were identified to provide fire protection to this site. Traffic Generation Based on the Vehicle trip generation figures generated by the Regional Transportation Flan for the City of Aspen by Voorhees and Assoc. dated 'uly -f 19?3, ":ul office facility located adjacent to a strong transit system could be expected to generate 8 vehicle trips per 1000 sq. ft. per Jay. For this project .-ith a net leasable square footage of 3842 sq. ft. 1 , the office portion of the building could be epected to generate 30.7 ehicle trips per day. These vehicles could be expected to impact First Street, Bleeker :,treet, and l fain Street as they enter and exit the site. May 29, 1990 Asia Office Building GMA Page 3 . According to the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Transportation ' Element as published in September 1987 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 Main Street experiences in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day. Traffic generation by this project at 30.7 vehicles per day will not have an adverse impact nor will 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 Main Street stopping at the Northwest corner of First and Main 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 off First Street for a total of twelve spaces. This parking exceeds the 11.5 spaces required by code for the new office building. These additional parking spaces along with the differing hours of operation of the office building and restaurant should serve to keep on street parking demand for this project to a minimum. I trust that this letter report will prove adequate for GMQS application purposes. Generally, the project site is well served by existing utilities and available street capacity. None of the utilities I contacted indicated a need for utility system upgrades in the immediate area. This project site offers a good location close to the downtown core and can be serviced with exisiting utilities in the area. Please feel free to contact me if I can provide any additional assistance on this growth managment application. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. Jay 1. Hammond, F.E. Principal -Aspen Office ?H/ja 90125 1 t- I t r AVE_ RUBEY PARK D • z TREET :-...:= D � � � D O HYMAN AVE_ ' ' Z m � z n D _ m d I E:l I :]I I o HOPKINS STREET pCITY � FIRE Ti HALL TATIO n 00000 0p0000 BUSROUTE RTHOUSE JAIL - i PARKING +CE�S GARAGE Rlp G4gNO � PARK ON P n BED AND BREAKFAST STAURA►T PAW MOTEL r X W ASIA ❑c 00000 LIBRARY PROFEONAL ES O o0000000OMAINSTREET 00 BED AND Tj MOTEL BREAKFAST YU m o BLEEKER STREET LAYGROUND m lul 1E I[, I HALLAM STREE-1 POST OFFICE iml-:1 = 0 Xi FRANCIS STREET T� NORTH ADJACENT USAGE MAP Mill met, 1=111C.1-iflil ,E�_ � t �1 �— W.—HYMAN Z U d 740 Z Q �A_ -1 --- o p z z 1 -----1 24 s 1 0 0 E t � 1 O PAEPCKE O t.. — ,- PARK 1 (O,T, H 1 TwW4 trwa., r.a- - - - - - - - - -- -- t t ILL -- O 1 1 N 1� t R M 0 or O go AREA ZONING MAP sr M N IOID-.N � .aw. ree..:r�v-av E-j 40 0 510 20 �r J!SIA �DING $Ite Plan a-r� • , • m m a mom m m i w w i wlft"Nis SITS PION 4 Fz1lor- PION �/N � IGE- �TE Fm4 IT STAI KL gh 121 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS S20 E HYMAN SUfiE 301 • AYM CO $1611 TELE 303/925-5590 FAX 303/925-SO76 300 W. COLORADOAk - KX2863 • TE LLWE C08143S-ME,303fnS-3738 FAX303/728-6722 rAL 0 COMAM 1 "2. CkVJW CLS04M AROIMCTS S 750 09' 1 1" E I I TRASH I I I ( I M I I 2 AREA 3 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I 8 19 I 10 I 11 I 12 I 13 14 I 15 >1I I I I j it f I I I / EXIST. SHED ( remove) EXIST. TRANSFORMER (relocate) 4.0 ON STORY �' ,'` % j� .i /TWO,STOR I I POFFICED BUILDING I ASIA REMODEL / NEW OFFICE BUILDING PROPOSED PARKING LAYOUT I BASE MAP BY: SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. I ALPINE SURVEYS INC. / July 13, 1990 / I Job No. 81-209-2 / April 7, 1986 • • • r 0 Ln M TO: Mayor and Council THRU: Carol O'Dowd, City Manager THRU: Amy Margerum, Planning Director'rl��fV FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planner RE: Asia 1989 Office GMP, Resolutions #q3, #YJ, #Z- DATE: October 8, 1990 SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the allocation of 1,200 square feet of net leasable of the 1989 Commercial GMP quota to the Asia Office building located at 132 West Main. Steve and Lily Ko submitted the only 1989 Commercial GMP application for the development of an office building adjacent to the Asia Restaurant. Pursuant to Section 8-106 J., Council shall by Resolution, allocate development allotments among eligible applicants who shall have met the minimum threshold. 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. The Planning and Zoning Commission scored the application at a public hearing August 21, 1990. The application exceeded the minimum threshold. The Commission also reviewed and approved a Change in Use and Special Reviews for reductions in parking for employee housing and on -site parking requirements for a building in the Office zone. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The applicants propose the construction of a 3,696 gross square foot office building adjacent to the restaurant. For employee housing mitigation purposes, the applicants will provide two dormitory style units, housing four residents each, within the existing Asia building, . The applicants applied for the 1,200 square feet available from the 1989 quota and have requested a multi -year development allotment from the 1990 GMP for 1,641 square feet of net leasable. The application also included a Change in Use from commercial to residential (to incorporate the housing within the existing building), Special Review for a reduction in parking for employee housing and on -site parking requirements, and GMQS Exemption for affordable housing. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Special Reviews for a reduction in parking, the Change in Use, and recommends allocating 1,200 of the 1989 quota for this project. The Commission also recommends a multi -year development allotment of 1,641 square feet net leasable of the 1990 Office GMP quota. The Council shall review the GMQS Exemption for affordable housing and Council may grant a multi -year development allotment. A. GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing: Pursuant to Section 8-104 C.(c) Council may exempt, from Growth Management, all deed restricted housing. The applicant proposes a total of 1,994 square feet of affordable housing in two dormitory units. The units are designed to provide housing for four individuals each. The second floor unit provides 269.5 square feet of living area and the lower level unit provides 224 square feet of living area per resident. The units shall be deed restricted to low income. Please see the attached referral from the Housing Authority regarding these units. B. Multi -Year Development Allotment: Pursuant to Section 8-103 (D) the Council may grant a development allotment available in future years if all the following are addressed: I 1 9 0 1. The quality of the proposed development substantially exceqds that established in the minimum threshold for the scoring established in Section 8-105 (F)(5) by receiving 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 requires 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. P RESPONSE: The applicants contend that there is a current demonstrated need for office space. In fact 4,000 square feet of net leasable is available for the 1990 Commercial GMP in the Office zone. The deadline for 1990 Commercial GMP was September 15. The Asia Office building was the only application submitted for the 1990 Commercial GMP in the Office zone. They submitted for the 1990 competition in case Council did not approve their multi -year development request. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST KEY ISSUES: 1. The P&Z has recommended a multi -year development allotment so the building will be built all at once. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the allocation of 1,200 square feet of net leasable of the 1989 Commercial GMP quota. The Commission also recommends approval of the multi -year development allotment request. Staff recommends approval of GMQS Exemption for two dormitory units, deed restricted to low income guidelines, housing eight employees. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The request for a multi -year allotment could be denied. The application that has been submitted for the 1990 competition will then be reviewed with referral comments and another two step review by P&Z and Council. PROPOSED MOTION: I move for adoption of Resolution#, allocating 1,200 square feet of net leasable of the 1989 Commercial GMP to the Asia proposal and approving a GMQS Exemption for two dormitory affordable units housing four employees each. I move for adoption of Resolution #_, allocating a multi -year allotment of 1,641 square feet of net leasable of the 1990 Commercial GMP. I move for adoption of Resolution #_, allocating 1,200 square feet of net leasable of the 1989 Commercial GMP. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: August 21, 1990, P&Z Memo September 28, 1990, Housing Authority Referral Resolution # Resolution # Resolution # 4 MEMORANDUM To: Leslif, L&MOnt, Planning office FROM: Yvount Blooker, gouging Authority DATEt 8eptenber 28, 1e90 RE: Aria +3omaeroial aMQs, GXQ8 Examptian, Chang* In Ura, 89e0is.1 Revi*W Paroel ID# 2735-144-39-070 REQUESTt Applicant requests approval for construction of a total of 2,841 square feet of net .leasable office space and for two affordable housing units providing 11994 square feet of living area. APPLICANTt Steve and Lily Ko APPLICANTIB RSMSENTATIVE: Dennis B. Grean, Attorney at Law LOCATION: 232 West Main, Lots K, L, M, N, and the west half of Lot O, Block 58, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: O- Of f l ce SUMMARY: Applicant requests-i,841.square feet of net leasable office space. section 8-'106 requires for the development. application of commercial and office development to be assigned points for the provision of housing which complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City, and with the provisions of section 8-109. Applicant will generate a total of 8.52 employees (3 employees/1,000 net leasable square feet ). Applicant has statsd that he will provide 94% of the employee housing generated by the construction of two "dormitory" employee units, each consisting of two bedrooms, kitchen, living room, and dining area. The Applicant calculates the upper level unit which contains 1,078 net livable square feet to provide a total of 269.5 square feet per employee. The basement level contains a total of 896.0 net livable square feet for a total of 224.0 square feet per employee. Applicant p.ropotiea; to provide housing for eicht employees by the construction of two -bedroom "dormitory" units. The 1989 Affordable Employee Housing Guidelines state that for the review and acceptance of the Housing Authority, an applicant may satisfy the ras:.dent; housing requirements by the construction of dormitory/lodge units. The dormitory/lodge units shall be consistent with the fallowing standards and shall meet the appropriate Housing Authority standards and the appropriate city or County Land use Code and the uniform Building Code. Dormitory/lodge units shall be required to meet the following minimum standards: 1. There shall be between 125 and 300 average net livable square feet of living area per pperson, including sleeping, bathroom, cooking, and lounge used i.n common. Net livable square footage shall not include interior or exterior hallways, parking, patios, decks, laundry rooms, mechanical areas, and storage. Dormitory/lodge rents shall be calculated on the not livable square footage as described above. Applicant propoe.es to provide a total of 269.5 net livable square fleet pear employee for the upper level employee unit and 224.0 net livable ,square i'aot per employee for the basement level employee unit. Rent for tha. basement unit would be for no more than $564.48 per month. Calculated at $.63 (low income) X 896.0 s.f. - $564.48 Rent for the. upper level employee unit would be for no more than $679.1.4 per month. Calculated at $.63 (low income) X 1.078.0 s.f. $679.14 2. Rental rates shall include all utilities metered in common, management coetE, and taxes. 3. one bathroom shared by no more than four persons, containing at least one water rlose4, one lavatory, one bathtub with a shower, and a total of at least 60 square feet. Applicant proposes to provide bathroom accommodations to be shared by four persons per employee unit. Applicant has ncft provided infornation ae to the caicLIation of a total of 60 not livable square feet for the bathroom facility of each employee unit. 4. A kitchen facility containing a sink, stove, and refrigerator and shared by no more than four pereoris and a total area of at least 60 sure feet, or access to a common kitchen. Applicant is proposinc to have four persons share the kitchen area for each dormitc,rY u:tit. Applicant has not provided information as total of 60 square Peet of not livable facility of each. employee unit. to the calculation of a area for the kitchen 5. .Use of 20 square faet per person of enclosed storage area located within c,r adjacent to the unit. Applicant would need to supply a total of 160 square feet of storage area located within or adjacent to the unit. 6. All units e.hall comply with UBC standards. 8. A manager, aseistant manager, or lodge owner, who is in the moderate income Tanga may occupy the ur:it, however, rent will be calculated based. on the low income guidelines. Lodge owners must work full-timer for the ledge operation. STAT? REGOMNZY .TION1 Staff has reviewed the Asia GMQS Exemption for the provisic,n of dormitory/lodge employee housing units. The 1989 Affordable f'mpleyse Housing Guidelines require that certain conditions cf &pproval be met by Applicant. The following conditions for approval have not been accommodated by Applicant: I. Plane woulc; need to be provided to the Housing Authority to verify the net livable square footage of this Asia application. Employee provisions of between 125 and 300 net livable square feet of living area per parson, including sleeping, bathroom, cooking, and lounge used in common would need to be calculated for approval by the Housing Authority. The net livable square footage shall not include intario:r or exterior hallways, parking, patios, decks, laundry roortso roochanicesl areas, and storage. 2. one bat:hroc-in shared by no more than four persons, containing at least one wat-ar closet, one lavatory, one bathtub with a shower, and a total area. of at least 60 square feet. Applicant proposes to provide bathroom facilities to be shared by no more than fot.r individuals per employee unit. calculations as to the requirement of at least 60 square feet of total bathroom area per emplayce unit have not been provided by Applicant. 3. A kitchen facility containing a eink, stove and refrigerator and shared by no more than four persons and a total area of at least 60 sgtiare foot or access to a common kitchen. Applicant proposes to Drovide kitchen facilities for no more than four employees per employee unit. Applicant hay not provided information as to the requirement of at least 60 square feet of total kitchen arsa per anployee unit* or Access to a common kitchen. 4. Use 'of 20 square feet per person of enclosed storage area located Within c,r adjacent to the unit. Applicant has not provided storage of 160 square feat for the two dormitory employee units. A calculation of 20 square feet X 8 employaeq = 160 square feet. The 160 square feat of storage area shall not; be included in the net livable Calculations of 125 to 300 not liva�is square feet of living area required for dormitory employoe,units. STAFF RE40MMNDF.TION-, Staff recommends denial of the proposal by the Aoda t;MQS Exemption to provide housing for eight parsons by the use of two c.ormitory two bedroom employee units. 9 , 4 TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: Asia 1989 Commercial GMP v Iw DATE: August 21, 1990 SUMMARY This application seeks a 1989 Commercial GMP allocation for 1,200 square feet net leasable and another 1,641 square feet of net leasablo-M- the 1990 Commercial allocation for the development of 2_2,70,3 square foot Office building. Multi - phased allotments are reviewed and approved by the Council. 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.(1) 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 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. 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. Employee 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 # OF PARKING SPACES a) 1980 Arthur's Restaurant 15 Conditional Use Approval b) 1990 Asia Office Bldg. (required 3/1000 sq. ft. net leasable) (Special Review reduction 1.5/1000 sq. ft.) (cash -in -lieu) c) Change in Use from commercial (3/1000 sq. ft.) to residential (1/bedroom) d) Special Review reduction for deed restricted units e) Total on site required for office & existing restaurant (using $ in -lieu) f) Cash in lieu for 4.3 spaces 8.5 4.2 (on -site) 4.3 ($ in -lieu) 2 space credit 3 space credit 14 $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 adjacent Hotel to secure three spaces for Asia'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: �1; ) 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 Department. The plan shall incorporate extensive screening of the trash/service area. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the appli ane' t shall make a one time cash -in -lieu payment for parking in the amount of $64,500 to the City of Aspen cashiers office.If the J applicant succeeds in securing a long term leasei(99 years) for three spaces adjacent to the parcel then the cas in -lieu shall ,,_,-reflect the additional parking spaces.r,G)� 3. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, t Environmental Health Department shall review a complete plan o 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'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 Commission's scoring of the application meets or exceeds the threshold standard staff recommends approval of the 1989 Commercial 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 Commercial 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 Commercial GMP, the applicant must receive either minor development or conceptual approval by the Historic Preservation Committee. ATTACHMENTS: Application Department's GMP Score Referral Comments July 17 memo C.1 9 ASPEN•PITKIN . ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office r' From: Environmental Health Department Date: August 14, 1990 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 County Regulations On Individual Sewage 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". ADEQUATE 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 303/920-5070 Asia GMQS Modifications August 14, 1990 Page 2 Energy -efficiency measures proposed will also have an air quality benefit. The applicant will need t the State of Colorado and This will need to include onto nearby buildings and wetting of disturbed areas, required. NOISE• 0 obtain an air pollution permit from submit a fugitive dust control plan. measures to prevent blowing of dust streets. Measures such as shrouding, and daily cleaning of streets will be 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 Regulations Governing 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 ova August 14, 1990 DENNIS B. GREEN Attorney at Law 617 W. MAIN ST., SUITE B ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Aspen-Pitkin County Planning Office 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 Attention: Ms. Leslie Lamont Re: ASIA PROJECT, Growth Managment Application Dear Leslie: TELECOPIER 303-925-5856 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 Handicapped access ramp to be between (p. 5) buidings instead of behind old building * Sec II H Changes in chart reflect downsizing of new (pp. 6-9) building to meet .75/1 FAR requirements. Total FAR calculation at p. 9. * Sec II J In response to requirements of Housing (p 10) Authority, the affordable housing will consist of two, two -bedroom dormitories instead of three -bedroom units. * Sec III A (6) Two enclosed trash areas provided instead (p 19) of one. * Sec III B (5) Parking plan changed to 14 spaces on -site (p 21-22) with calculations changed per requirements Planning Comm. * Sec III C Calculation of need for affordable housing (pp 22-23) generated changed due to reduction of FAR required by Planning Comm. * Sec IV Request for FAR bonus eliminated. (pp 24-25) * 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 : S,August 13, 1990 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/asial cc: Chuck Roth cue 1Z 9 ::' _c H F 114G-:gUTH. '302' 912'0 55,60 F. C. .• 0 MEMORANDUM Tot L*9iial LxMtInt, planning Department FROM: Yvonne B:0—.)kerf Housing Authority DAM August Ilf 1990 RES Asia Com"Mtroial QMQ8 UMA:AF:`'€ Api�llc rzM hav resubmitted his prop:)aal to revise his re oast Of ?,642 leasable cffi,:e sc:tare feet `c 2,341 of net q ne leasable office Spac.01 A �car� wi,i efexa�a 8.52 emplcyeQ� by the nature of this FF- - 1 OGG ecuare of net. leasaNle X 3 request. 2,�4:' _.f. a�vided by , emplcyaea = c ..�.i E'T,r`�la���3611. Appljcln ir:tencs tc ::,s�ig:z�e the employees cares-ted by housing on -sloe Haight (6 =% -he 8.`- employees yi, two dormitory unite. :na :.pFe; :eNlel unit shall cc�ntai.n a 1, G7a t;;o bedroom > nit to house fa:.r er;-'-!C Dees and the basement_ level ;snit shall eonr.ain a 89 a . f . ttiro bse, : is^ unit to house four' erjplo,,-ees . The upper lgvy_. u- it ac:co�d:..c� tc Cal-Jlatiors suppl.iet by Applicant will prcvi^9 for a t.c-,-&l cf 26S!.5 net iivr�',le area and, the base ,en: live. u.^.it e1 pr:'•'i.de a tots: of 224 net lilrable square feet per employee. BTAF? App.. i cant's _rap;reaenta;-ive, Mr. Green was f rr:ia-hed w .t't; a ^cc, of the recuir4men--s fcr the construction and approval c' d{=:-raitor /lo+ige employee units prior to the subr+iss ion of Yh:.n staff recommends that the Applicant Must p:^vide a, 1 -.rj corjration required for the construction of j. dormitory/ l(;dge 'ar? +_s that shall be cons..s tent with tile following standar,:'.s an& -:set tre appropriate Ho'lsirig F:\.ithoiity standards, City oz Cau ,ty La.: Use Codes, and the nifora, Building Code. Dormitory/lodge w:=ys shall be required to nee-: the following minimum standards: 1. There shall' h�j, bFt_�ger� 12� and 30G avera�se net livable square feet of lit'ing arsa -3r person, inc:.uding siesping, bathroom, coQici. �g, and lc.�r= ie uaej in commen. :;et li*.'Iab1E square footage shall not inc' u v. .`:.�=`'1or or exterior ht_lways, parking, patios, decks., laundry io",V, s �'?eo1:anio�il areas, and stor•a:4e. Dormitory] lodge rents s;:al: bs Cj' C'ulated on the net livable sq.,-,are footage as described above. &_' 1 -�, 91�- 1 _ f- �_---fig:: P . c l' Appl -can* prod .-'ises t,; prc>vide a total of 26S.5 net livable square feet per person it the upper level unit and 224.G net livable square feet of net. 11-vable square fo^tage per Ferson in the base.,ient level Unit. Th- calculations o°s the upper level employee dwelling unit shall contain a total of 1:078.0 aquare feet and the loner -evel basement employee dwelling must contain a total of 896.0 not livablc feet. The computationE: of -he net livable square footage o .hese two employee dwelling units will be verified at plan check. 2. Rental unit: :s:.all include all utllitiss ratered in common, management costs, and tares. The total a1lowa Jlc mont}lly rent for the uppar level unit would be $67Si . 14 per mom:h f.nd ti,.e total al.lowtble monthly rent for the baseCent level uiiz� would be $ 564.40. 3. One batnroon s :area by no more tha-: four pers ns, containing at least one water c ose. , one lavatory, one bathttuh with a shower, and a total of at !east 60 square feet. App'_ .cant has prov led i.nfcrmation that the employee units shall be occupied t•y ff;ur pefscns. Housing would request that the deed restriot ion venal). jra :.E that the employee units can not be occupied by trore than the f::t: anpioyees allowed by the desinn of the units. Applicant will. b,, .:aga.ixed to verify by plan check that the batter `xms prcpoe-46 :may ;_cylirant meet all requirements as stated in paragraph 3. 4. A kitchen fact -ty c.onr.alning a sink, stove, end refrigerator and shared by no mcre than four persons and a tot -al area of at least 60 square feet cr• access to a common kitchen. Applxcanc. v:i11 he rsquired 'oy plan check to abide by the revireme:nt t'l,.at. t.y.e k: _chin. area proposed for both employee units mee rs t a 6k:' s.qt are fees requirement and by deed restriction that the kitchen in each unit shall be shared by no more than the allowed four erplcyees per unit. S.Use of 2C square feet per person of enclosed storage feet of storage area locat.U4. within or adjacent to the units. Applicant will be required to provide 20 square feet of storage space per emplo;eu *.e be located within or adjacent to the units. The location and, sglua:a footage of the eight storage spaces shall be approved at plan check. 6. All units cozply with VBC standards. STAFF REQUESTS AS A CON:)ITION OF APPROVAL FOR THE ASIA COMMERCIAL GMQ8 APPLICATION, TH&_, PRIOR TO APPROVAL BY HE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL, APPLICAN, SHALL MERT ALL ABOVE CONDITIONS TO THE SATISF'AC^.iION OF TA? HOUSING AUTHORITY. • • MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: Asia, 1989 Office GMP Allocation DATE: July 17, 1990 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 4 (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 O, Block 58, Aspen ZONING: Office, "H" Historic Overlay District (Lots K & L are landmark designated REFERRAL COMMENTS: The following referral agencies have submitted comments: 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, Arthur's Restaurant was granted a conditional use approval to expand the restaurant (that was when the small E 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 a) 1980 Arthur's Restaurant Conditional Use Approval b) 1990 Asia Office Bldg. (required 3/1000 sq.ft. net leasable) (special review reduction 1.5/1000 sq.ft.) (cash in lieu) i) Change in use from commercial(3/1000 sq. ft.) to residential (1/bedroom) # OF PARKING SPACES 15 11.5 5.7 (on site) 5.8 ($ in lieu) 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 Summary: The applicant may provide parking via a payment in lieu pursuant to Special Review, but no fewer than 1.5 spaces/1000 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 subject to Special Review. The applicant'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. In 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, massing, and design perspective. However, this proposal is already very deficient in their parking plan. The applicants are requesting to reduce the parking required to 1.5 spaces/1,000 square feet. With 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. 21 MEMORANDUM TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department DATE: July 2, 1990 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- recommended scoring: 0 points - The proposed parking plan does not meet the needs of this commercial development considering that existing parking will be removed to accommodate the new building and that the proposed three spaces located on the west side of the existing building are in the public right-of-way and are not available to the applicant. MEMORANDUM TO: 1,66114 ''.xaont; Planning office FROM: Yvonho 2Yo;�lkaer j Housing Auth.:irity DATE: Viune 29, 1900 RE: Aei.e Ccrisrtres al QMQS, QXQ6 Exemption, Change In Use, Special Review Parool 1D# 2713-124-99-070 REQUEST. Ap li ran.- regs-)ssts approval :or co„sLruction of a total of 2,842square feat of net aaaeable office ape(.-e and foY two affor�?µbla hake ink. ::r:_t providing 2,390 square feet of living area. APPLICANT: Steve- and Lily Ko APPLICANT'S RVPRZr YN1AT:IvEt Dennis B, Green, Attorney at Law LOCATIONS 122 .-JeSt. Main, Lote K, L, If, 11, anO the west half of Lot 0, Block K8, C'.ty and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING 1 0-Office SUNDRY: App.' icant requeSts 3, 842 square fee: of net leasable office space. SeCtiun 8-106 raagraires for the develop -meat appli.ca%icn of corrmarcial ani off;, --a davelopmert to be assigned points for the provision of hcasing w^ick: Complies with the roueing size, type, incor^e a.nd occupancy guidelines of the City, and with the provisions of Section 8-109. Applicant will generate a total of 11.56 employees (3 employees,'1, 0010 net ].r.agabl a square feet ) . Applicant has stated that he will prcvide 100% cf the employee housing generated ry the construction of two "dorm Ltory" employee units; each consisting of t1Z^ree bedrooms; kitchen, living rcom, and dining area. The Applicant wt.-ulates the upper 'Level unit which contains 1,151.0 net livable SgU:t2e feet to provide a total of 191.83 square feet per enploy€o, Tl-,o basement level contains a total of 1,239.0 net 'Livable sq<<are peer, for a total of 206.5 square feet per employee. Applicant prorosea p-rov ide housing for twelve employees by the co►;srruotion of two thee -bedroom ltdor::,Atory'• Mini=s. :he 1959 AffordNble En _oyes Housing Cuidolinee state that, for the review and acceptance of the Housing Authority, an applicant :gay satisfy the resident, rousing req.Urements by the construction of dormitory/lodge The dormitory/lod_ge ::nits shall be consistent sit:i thG Following standards and ehail neet the appropriate }icuair:y A%Atho::-ity strndarc-s and the appropriate City or County Land se C'o.3e and the Cniforr" Building Code . Dorn tort'/ lodge units shall be required to ±nee-_ the following minimum standards: 1. "Phere b�: bst.weer. 125 and 300 average net livable square feet of living arse; �-psr parson, in^_uding aleeping, bathroer, cook_ng, and lr`u:tz;e uead in c:ctircn. `?et livable square footage shall, not inclu4e ::eta, or or exterior hallways:,, parking, patios, decks, IL',undIy reor"s, machanicel areas, and storage, Dorn—" to_y/ledge s nal?. be calculated on tr.s net livable square focetage as above. Applicant prop:,= an 'c c ;>rovide a total c f 191. F.ne;: livable square feet per ar_ loyse foj� , the appar level e.mployee unit. and 206.5 net livab' s square .fee.. pt.,, eriployes for the bang„en` level employee unit. Rent for this linit would be for no note :.liar. $760.57 per month. CaIc,_1a� el -.t $--. 63 %1OW i'-4=me I X 1, 2:35. 0 S. f , s $; 60. 5" Rent fcr the employee an:t world be fc�r no core than $725. !3 per n anth. C_,I ct lsted at $.63 (log in-,orne X 1,151.0 s. f. s $725..13 2. Rental r.•aaae s—ia1 1, ir.c> ide ail ut itie s met¢red in common, management ousts, rant; taxed. 3. Ore bat":ro�_,m }.ate eM by no hors thz.n four per�ions, : ontair.ing at least one water ..-Ioset., one lavatory c►ne bathti;k: with a shower, and a total of dt least 60 square feet. Applicant proposes ta provide bathroom accc•mmc•d.ati, ns to be shared by six persons pe.0 eirp=^yee unit. Applicant has not pr.;.,%- ded information as to the calculation of a total of 60 net lip aa_c square feet for the bathr�:om facility of each employee unit. V A kitchen facility -ontaining a sink, stove, and refrigerator d shared by no Liore than four pe+racne and a total area of at least 60 square feet, or access to a co::non kitchen, Applicant is pr=F'-::.nc; to have six persons share the kitchen, area for each do"_ .itcpry ur:' . • • TO�'-ated Use of 2G a.L ire Blot perperson: of enc.osed storage area within cr adjazant to the unit. Applicant has n ,t. --rcv d6? storage of 24) eq;.ai.e "met ?or the two dor,aitcdy e:rpieyet units. A ca=,t,,Iatiur, of 2C aawarF feet X 12 er;plcyees - 240 el-,aart feet. This 240 e-juare feet of storage area shall not be inc_JuE? i -, t::e net livable calo::latia: s of 225 to 30,C net livable s7�,avii, f'ew W of living are- rcviz,e3 for dornito•ry employee units. Staff racommandc of the propo,�a; '-y the Asir GYIQS Exeript i on to provide h,us .ng twelve persons by the use of two dcrmitary three bedroom units. • is Applicant has r 0t. f rov.-ded information as total of Cc feat of net livable facility of each em;lo%pae unit to the calculation of a area for the kitchen 5. Use of 20 scfjade feet per person of encloE7ed storage area located withLn or adjacent to the unit. Applicant ;;oul"; naad to supply a to -al of 240 square feet of storage area ict�ated thin or adjacent to the unit. 6. All units shalt comply with UBC standards. 6. A manager, assistant manager, or lodge owner, who is in the mocar,ate income rbn a ,.gay 00cupy the unit, hov:ov.sr, rent will be calculated teased on tha low in one guidelines. Lodge owners rust work: full-time foi tho lodge operation, STAFF REC4MMATION 2 Staff has reviewed tt a As a G^^QS Exempt ion for the provision o' d4,mitory/kedge employee housing units. The 198-S Afforc!a�,>ls Es..r,lc':die Housing Guidelines rrqui►°e that certa n cor-di;,ions of &p; ro4al be net by Applicant. The follow: ng car c i ti.cr;s for approval `lave not bean acccrsz odate? by Applicant: 1. Plans would nesd to :ba rrovided to the Housing Authority to ve;�"v the ::at li.�.�able square Qootage of. tl'o A�; .a application. Employee provie.ic s. of be --wean 1.25 and 30C nor. livable square feet of living area. par ;;�ar5on, inc:l'udinq sleeping, bathroom, cooking, and lounge used In -_—:,n �,on Mould need to be calculated for approval by the Horsing The net liva'3la square Footage shall not include intericir or exterior hallways; pari,ing, patios, deeds, laundry rooms, mec':ani:.al areas, and storage. 2. One bathroo: shire-51 by no :,.ore than. Pour persons; containing at least one water ::l.c.se;, one lavatory, one bitht'.;k) with a shower, anc9 a total area of at least 60 square feet. Applicant proposes to provide bathroom facilities to be shared by six individL:alta rir employea unit. calculations as to the requirement of "'feast 60 square feet of tote,. !�athroom area per employee unit have not been provided by Applicant. 3. A kitchen facility containing a sink, stove and refrigerator and shared by no mare than; four persore and a total area of at least, 60 square feet c,: access to a co:^zon kitchen. Applicant proposes to j:rovide kitchen facilit_es for six er.ployees per employee unit. rpp-icant has not providedinfo: r•.ation as to the requirement of at 14ast 60 square feet of total kitchen area per employee unit or a-:�ces.j tc a common ki chen. • ASPEN#PITKIN • ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office From: Environmental Health Department Date: aJune 27, 1990 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: i N 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 County Regulations On Individual Sewage 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". ADEQUATE 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• tyiThis 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 303/920-5070 • • 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 VI\`" 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 MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont, Planner From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Re: Referral comments on 132 W. Main, Asia parcel, GMQS Application Date: June 26, 1990 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 19801s) 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 conditions of the alley. Although 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. FYou should be aware that the neighbors ,had grave concerns about reduced parking on this parcel. On designated parcels, the HPC has the ability to grant a parking variation (if findings are made), however, as the designated portion of the parcel CAN accommodate parking, 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 significant 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 Consolidated Sanitation District 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele. (303) 925-3601 %414J 25, 1990 1990 Leslie Lamont 6 Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen. CO 81611 Re: Asia Commercial GMQS Dear Leslie: Tele. (303) 925-2537 The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has sufficient line and treatment capacity to serve this development at this time. As soon as the detailed drawings are available we would be able to approximate the connection fees for the project. and issue a tap permit. All connection fees associated with the project must be paid prior to connection. Sincerely, 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 June 24, 1990 Leslie Lamont Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 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 13 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, 1�k- Steve Standiford Director SS/ss ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT TO: Buddy Lucero FROM: Jim Markalunas SUBJECT: Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, Special Review t. DATE: June 14, 1990 --- ---------------------------------------- We wish to confirm t 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. I ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 June 11, 1990 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 TO: City Attorney City Engineer Housing Director Aspen Water Department Environmental Health Department Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Parks Department Fire Marshal Roaring Fork Energy Center �� Aspen Historic Preservation Committee /, FROM.— Leslie Lamont, Office �(� RE: Asia Commercial GMQS, GMQS Exemption, Change in Use, Special Review Parcel ID# 2735-124-39-070 DATE: June 11, 1990 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. XC C6710/0 'Xd N CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: 611190 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: 9 2735-124-39-070 A33-90 Op-riG STAFF MEMBER: PROJECT NAME: Asia Commercial GMOS, -GMOS Exemption, Change 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 & Lily 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 APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: P&Z Meeting Date :! /::�- PUBLIC HEARING. 'YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO -- y VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO Planning Director Approval: Paid: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date: -------------------------------------------------------------- ,:,. ./ City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District ✓ City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat Gas / Housing Dir. Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW) J Aspen Water Fire Marshal State Hwy Dept(GJ) City Electric uilding Inspector/ 1�1� � Roaring / 1-i Envir. Hlth. Fork Other Aspen Con.S.D. Energy Center DATE REFERRED: zed/ 6 INITIALS: FINAL ROUTING:. \ DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: City Atty City Erg}n'er Zoning Env. Health Housing Other• ) FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: 1 0 0 ORDINANCE 61 (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING 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 prior to the applicants, Steve and Lily Ko, obtaining a building permit; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a six month extension of 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 t • C� WHEREAS, until all conditions of approval have been satisfied no building permits will be issued; and WHEREAS, the Planning Office, having reviewed the application ; 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 CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1• 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 0 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. �, !vim --'� John 9. Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 8th day of November, 1993. k� �rl John S. Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Exhibit A i RESOLUTION NO. 4 (Series of 1990) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ALLOCATING 1,200 SQUARE FEET OF NET LEASABLE 1989 COMMERCIAL GMQS ALLOTMENTS TO THE ASIA OFFICE BUILDING, 132 WEST MAIN, LOTS K, L, M, N, AND THE WEST HALF OF LOT O WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8-106 of the Aspen Land Use ✓ 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 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 v'� 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 WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project successfully 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 office 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 i 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 E development plan unless a building permit is obtained and the i project is developed, or unless an exemption from or extension of the approval is obtained. Dated: 1990. William L. Stirling, Mayor 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 �-lf �Iril" 1990. cc.1989.comm.gmp 3 Kathryn S Koch, City Clerk 1 RESOLUTION NO. 45 (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 O WHEREAS, the 1989 'Commercial GMP application submitted by 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 ✓ 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 L' 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 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 - 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 V--' 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. Dated: /0 , 1990. William L. Stirling, Mayor 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 pthe City of Aspen, o Colorado at a meeting held , 1990. cc.1990.multi.gmp 2 �J )tV 4�/ Kathry S..Koch, City Clerk F E�/ISION New Handicap Ramp ?mployee housing Entry I I Nev Employee Housing Entry I Light W61: r OPOSED OFFICE BUILDING t I I I I MAIN STREET SITE PLAN -- 0 5 10 15 in U W U W Uj H U. 1 L. Z U W .J ct I H Q ORAWING <. - i JOB NO. 900 3 DATE 3/16/90 SHEET NO 1 SHEET 0F EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO REMAIN EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO BE REMOVED NEW WALLS AND PARTITIONS LOWER FLOOR PLAN REVISION O` V L!1 W u-, H _ ri V C) M W H W _J Lu rN H 10 8 O W LL O u Z Z Z CL V HLn ry) W m � O m J w o ° a 0 0 u w W a N Q F W W 41 a DRAWING 11 .No. �looA-io � DATE -51 16 SHEET NO 2 SHEET OF REVISION L— uP P� EXISTING KITCHEN ENTRY VEST. _o GROUND FLOOR PLAN DINING m IMIkiIi`ral 0 1 2 3 4 5 Housing Entry EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO REMAIN EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO BE REMOVED NEW MALLS AND PARTITIONS V W _H V W Uj lL tL Z z V H W V ME ORAWING JOB NO. 900 -5 OATE -51I61 '90 REVISION t EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO REMAIN EXISTING WALLS AND PARTITIONS TO BE REMOVED NEW WALLS AND PARTITIONS O O` u "n L!1 W Ln fN I ry) V o W O LA W n- �,,., w J LU F- ILA�O 8 O � o LL u z w CL D u LA W m J X O m O V li J w o a 0 ell u w W a N a W W � F N z a DRAWING JOB NO. 90075 DATE 31I614n 1 SHEET NO SECOND FLOOR PLAN • 1 2 3 4 5 E71 REVISION Nw Windows to Match SOUTH ELEVATION NEW DORMER ADDITIOI, KT. C­C.,Ff:1e —A 17—, ,.I - __ cc r ­.j_ _._ — i i—t- EXTENSION OF EXISTING STAIR. WELL & NEW EMPLOYEE HOUSING ENTRY I New Columns to Match E:dsting New Siding & Trim to Match Existing ENSION OF EXISTING STAIRWELL : I V EMPLOYEE HOUSING ENTRY �! - -- - New Fascia, Soffits and Eaves - -, to Match Existing -_ - - New Siding & Trim to Match Existing New Handrails, Spindles and Newel Posts to Match Existing GE" FERAL NOTES Etstzng Building E,Arior of existing building to be refurbished repaired and painted. - New Construction All new construction to match existing building materials mid detailing. CD W I fV Q` r M V � w O W S w J W �V 30 8 a O LL L O U Z V Z w w � Wry)M � O m u 0 CL J W o a 0 O I W i W a N Q Q F W W � H F y tla f DRAWING JOB NO. 900 / GATE '5/ 16 / `q 0 SHEET NO EAST ELEVATION SHEET 0F REVISION Neva Fascia, Soffits and Eaves to Match Existing New Siding & Trim to Match Existu New Roof Shades to Match Existtr4 New Columm to Match Existing New Handrails, Spindles and Newel F to Match Edsting WEST ELEVATION EXTENSION OF EXISTING STAIR WELL & NEW EMPLOYEE HOUSING ENTRY NORTH ELEVATION 'JENERAL NOTES Etsting Building Exterior of existing building to be refurbished repaired and painted. New Construction All new construction to match existing building u H W W LL LL z z u H W u Q H Q DRAWING joe NO. 900 3 DATE 3/16/Q0 rXl�l�9 �i�i. I I P,d•blpJ-�T G{�� �3% 0 5 10 20 40 GrREC MOZIAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 117 S. Spring Street Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-8963 K :I Site Plan date: drawn by revised 1tM "V of Nl. tr..ltp I. only to prgt,1.j1y o�ltt " 9—.l -tY. of tt.. . lf. CO V.Ctor Ic req—lot. for conflniro di—loomvtl select 11V fOrl-tlm preLtl.6.e. tedn)p of mMt"tlM. Tt .rdiltwt "it b mt[IW of My v.fl.t lone fr. ti ol.NCI— Wd a Itl— Nan by lhl. Mulrg. -"fir• 1 �� a' VvV NO �'sv •`vv D Pt fe ptw +•v�4 ryX zlo W v t. a 1 V, r Off' Pp, At V Q n P �P 9 +�C��CCQ n'�a� �F p•rnp d _i� p np e P Pam �2:p PD — > rlbF, p rap aflv LPG = _ n�>p D"ObO� p pD A pig P o Opp1771 17 il Q..V4vD 4- -.. QQ Cpp c+VO V44.. "� o Q ev MAIN F +1 �oLJ"T�'1 �L�'✓ATION L kr L N noo'i\ T W S � N z 4dJ V A CoCC E"0 VWQ 0 z 44a aTa 047E S•-WF I *ar Sh E T OF F7'sl7 L-IqWT WELL. E-A 1'5TfWT L1604T \VRL-L- V, K 4�17 7 .461 to oRTW I L-4- LottT Li I UppePL FLoorzL A, �' F- m F-w - TCTAN. LI&WT WeL-L/S5rR-F---5 F Lr) r-4 O ry) LU z 0 LLJ 60 0 i 0 u V � Lf) rf) x Q- IORAWING I I Joe NO. LDATE L SHEET NO, Lim( \vEL1._ fl ' 1 I I I ' 1 s I'- C711 U'` Lf W Ur, M O M W H O LU �o 8 o U. u Zui u � M Ln M V O A �1 A lil DRAWING JOB NO. DATE IC31-« �'} SHEET NO 7 SHEET 7— OF RE V iSION 0 0 S 'S' ©W7-1 Ci It t L'LF-EV71i:,- >NJ i i l i V- . S z z u DRAWING SHEET NO 3 SHEET '5 OF I? F T rlj M lU z W J N �2 00 8 9i 0 J 0 U-) m X O CL i 1 I a L _--`", I�' , j 1■� ��'1�-� LG�"�-Tim � Ilk- -- i Cr . 9 `� ) i� '� ��'---'�" -, �. ,---�--�.;�-�'--.-,- - - � 1 �{ •a _. _. �- � `I it _ .� � -- I 7 I!` Iol 01?-I `i � %J