The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.411 S Monarch St.0012.2008.ASLUTHE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER PARCEL ID NUMBER PROJECTS ADDRESS PLANNER CASE DESCRIPTION REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 0012.2008.ASLU 2737 182 19 002 411 S. MONARCH ST ERRIN EVANS PUD AMENDMENT TOM GILCHRIST, DAVID BROWN 06/23/2008 CLOSED BY Angela Scorey . l DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development. Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order ", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders ", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights ", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three -year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Dancing Bear Land LLC 210 North Mill Street Aspen Colorado, 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lots P O R & S Block 77 City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado more commonly known as 411 S Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property The Applicant received approval to enclose two covered outdoor seating areas with glass materials that have the capacity to open with an Insubstantial PUD Amendment Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review subject to the approved conditions See attached site plan Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and /or Attachment Describing Plan Grant of a an approval of an Insubstantial Amendment Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and associated approvals via Resolution No. 22, Series of 2008 July 15 2008 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this Ist day of August, 2008, by the City of Aspen Community Develeoment Director. Community Development Director a RECEPTION #: 551560, 08/01/2008 at 10:23:20 AM, I OF 5, R $26.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO RESOLUTION No. 22 (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM REVIEW, INSUBSTANTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT, AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENCLOSING TWO OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS OF THE DANCING BEAR LODGE LOCATED AT 411 SOUTH MONARCH STREET, LEGALLY KNOWN AS LOTS P, Q, R AND S, BLOCK 77, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Parcel Identification Number 2737 -182- 19-002 WHEREAS, Eben P. Clark of Klein, Coti and Edwards, LLC located at 201 North Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, Colorado on behalf of Dancing Bear Land, LLC, 210 North Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado, submitted a request for Growth Management Quota System Review, an Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment and Commercial Design Review dated February 15, 2008 to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located at 411 S. Monarch Street, Aspen, the parcel is identified as parcel number 273718219002, and the legal description of the property is: THE DANCING BEAR LODGE ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PUD PLAN AND PLAT RECORDED JUNE 8, 2004 IN PLAT BOOK 69 AT PAGE 80 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 498443, IN THE RECORDS OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO and also known as Lots P, Q, R and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado ( "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Planned Unit Development approval for the Property was originally approved by the Aspen City Council in 2003 in Ordinance No. 29 Series of 2003, and the Dancing Bear Lodge Final PUD Plan and Plat is recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County at Plat Book 69 Page 80, Reception No. 498443 (the "PUD "); and WHEREAS, the current request is to receive approval for Growth Management Quota System Review allotments, an Insubstantial Planned Unit Development amendment, and Commercial Design Review to amend the PUD to permit the enclosure of 386 square feet of outdoor seating to create indoor seating, therefore increasing the net leasable commercial area; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the application for Growth Management Quota System Review pursuant to Code section 26.470.080 (Major Planning and Zoning Commission Applications), an Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment pursuant to Code section 26.445.100 (A) (PUD Insubstantial Amendments), and Commercial Design Review pursuant to Code section 26.412.040 (Review Procedures) under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on July 15, 2008; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the request; and, WHEREAS, a change order to the Building Permit application will be required; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO IN REGULAR MEETING ASSEMBLED, THAT: Section 1: The Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A request for Growth Management Quota System Review, a Planned Unit Development amendment, and Commercial Design Review application was initiated by: Eben P. Clark of Klein, Cote and Edwards, LLC located at 201 North Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, Colorado on behalf of Dancing Bear Lodge, 210 North Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado. 2. Notice of the proposed Growth Management Quota System Review, Planned Unit Development amendment, and Commercial Design Review has been provided to surrounding property owners in accordance with Section 26- 304- 060(E)(3) of the Aspen Municipal Code. Evidence of such notice is on file with the City Clerk. Section 2: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the Growth Management Quota System Review for new commercial development under Major Planning and Zoning Commission Applications, Insubstantial Planned Unit Development amendment as requested, and Commercial Design Review application request for the Property. The approval granted herein is conditioned on the following: 1. The applicant shall meet all of the conditions of Ordinance No. 29. of Series 2003; however the applicant has approval to develop an additional 386 square feet of net leasable area by enclosing some outdoor seating as shown in Exhibit A; and 2. The walls enclosing the seating areas shall be constructed with transparent glass materials, have the capability to be opened and have the capability to permit passage to the patio on the south side of the building. Section 3• This Resolution shall not affect any 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 conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Planning and Zoning Com isSi n of the City of Aspen on the 15th day of July 2008. pamer Chairperson Attest: ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ames R. True, Special Counsel List of Exhibits Exhibit A — Approved Exterior Elevations and permitted area to be enclosed. D n =� �Z o'er m m D 71 O p m m N M D m zr- �m D ti Z I I , � I I N m7Cp F C) X Zzi m I . v z z I 0 j I p r _ m = 70 Zo rn fT zi 4 II I 1 � 1 � 1 i.z17, - 4 - I I I I I I AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070, ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 40 S • Mo,-uo rt.1. r Dan S; �- Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, .�z42XG. — GcTI f7t) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to fSe City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Signat re The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 2$ day of 7 2005, by 2i0t SCC -11' 1:110 4:TO1iIUT111 \DIFT the COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PublisM1ed M fie Aspen Times Week1Y on JuIY 27, si City 0f Aspen 2008.(1919328) - ULAURA My Commission r0res 08110@010 £6 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL © My commission expires. LJ APPPOVAL e 9enerment Plan antl opeSY v'9ht pursuaTi le antlePain (' 1 '\f I � tN 4 A �� /�_ Git. 0f Asp.^ evisetl W&ales• Ott S. Notary Public ibetl propeM1Y� oc L01s 1:110 4:TO1iIUT111 \DIFT the COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PublisM1ed M fie Aspen Times Week1Y on JuIY 27, si City 0f Aspen 2008.(1919328) - ULAURA My Commission r0res 08110@010 £6 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: lam- 1l s • M0n0Ntt' SJrr4zgk ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: IV67 / 7, 6) Zv.2og , 200,?; STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, —,,+ VI 9 (Z4A ---�Gcr & % (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of 200, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (3 )00) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signat6e The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 2 day of .J uN E 1200y, by A-I\1 i E2 A 5'64 -Q 1 PUBLIC NOTICE RE :"I S. I ARCH STREET, INSUBSTAN- TIAL PUD AMENDMENT, GROWTH MANAGE- MENT QUOTA SYSTEM REVIEW, AND COM- MERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: (Jiew(p/ oip� 1 C� Notary Public LAURA MEYER space; Ineubstgnfiel PUD Ame dZ 7t ". ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: °�%'•y 9 '•' merpN Design Review. TM properlps ere I aescrlMtl es Lp1e R, o. R .ntl S. Black ]T' C�ityy. "OF THE PUBLICATION `' °F co'I- antl Townsite a Aspen, Colorado 81811 For foMepen Comoe,contaclal.mm.t D.,au iffin City of Aspen Community Development OGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) ply Commission Fw,ps 0811012010 meat 130 an S. Galena St., Aspen, , (W0) CO, (17' 429 2145, emne�ci.aspen.cp.us. DF THE OWNERSAND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED Aspen Planning antl aningCOmmission Published in the Aspen Time¢ weakly pn June ,, JAIL .ICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE 2008.(1811828) FQUIREDBYC.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 AH3AV-O"08-L uolpnrysuw,p luaw85J84� ap suaS 009LS ®AH3AV luege6 al zas!113n woa-Ajane•mmm apina; el zaMnsu .salad @ selpe; sauanbl44 VALYEMENI MOHAMMED & ALICE 3109 OAKMONT DR STATESVILLE, NC 28625 BERHORSTJERRY BERHORST CAROLE 7161 LINDENMERE DR BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 BRAYMAN WALTER W & PATRICIA 844 ROCKWELL LN KANSAS CITY, MO 64112 -2363 ASPEN KABINN LLC C/O NIKE COMM /NINA KAMINER 75 BROAD ST RM 500 NEW YORK, NY 10004 -2415 BLUE LLOYD JR PLEAS ALEXA PO BOX 1569 GRAYTON BEACH, FL 32459 BRIGHT GALEN 205 E DURANT AVE #313 ASPEN, CO 81611 BROWNELL LORRAINE B CALKINS GEORGE W 1030 SECOND ST 105 S CHEROKEE MORGAN CITY, LA 70380 DENVER, CO 80223 -1834 CARRIGAN RICHARD A JR CAUSING JENNIFER M 25526 WILLIAMS RD PO BOX 10343 WARRENVILLE, IL 60555 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHRISPAT ASPEN LLC CHRISTENSEN EUGENE J 1107 5TH AVE PO BOX 10061 NEW YORK, NY 10128 ASPEN, CO 81612 CITY OF ASPEN CLAUSEN FAMILY TRUST NO 1 130 S GALENA ST C/O GUNDY MGMT CO ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 47 MORRIS, IL 60450 CROSBY CHRISTINE ANN DANCING BEAR LAND LLC 1050 E WATERS AVE #15 210 N MILL ST #203 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DONCER JOYCE TRUST ELLIS DIANA L ROQUE TRUSTEE 7641 W 123RD PL 13320 MULHOLLAND DR PALOS HEIGHTS, IL 60463 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 FAULKNER JOHN L FELDMAN SELMA 2433 ROCKINGHAM ST 300 S POINTE DR APT 2403 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 -7329 BENNIE THOMAS E EXHIBIT PO BOX 9884 ASPEN, CO 81612 H BOGIN ROBERT M 4280 S MEADOW BROOK LN EVERGREEN, CO 80439 BRIGHT GALEN 407 S HUNTER ST #3 ASPEN, CO 81611 CALLAHAN PATRICIA 0184 MOUNTAIN LAUREL DR ASPEN, CO 81611 CHAPLIN ARLENE & WAYNE 54 LAGORCE CIR MIAMI BEACH, FL 33141 CHU FAMILY TRUST 213 INT LU NANCY CHAO TRUST 1/3 INT 38 CORMORANT CIR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 COHN PETER L 1601 S CENTRAL AVE GLENDALE, CA 91204 DOLLE NORMA 124 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 EVANS DAVID COURTNEY PO BOX 952 ASPEN, CO 81612 FOX THOMAS H 119 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 T n Tangead lead Ase3 jo; jaded paaiT 00915 31VldLJ31 ONany esn 1 e09�5®AUSIAV i xwuc uomnnsul aac w i .n sleoe-1188.1 Rsea A83AV- O9-008-L uolpn��sul,p luawa6iey3 ap suaS 009L5 ®AH3AV 3Nege6 al zoslum worAtane•mmnn apinaj el zmpsua011 V taled a selpe; sManbRl FREIRICH MARK A PO BOX 774056 STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO 80477 FUQUA ALVAH D JR & DIANNE L 446 LAKE SHORE DR SUNSET BEACH, NC 28468 GEORGIEFF KATHERINE TRUSTEE OF GLICKMAN EDWIN C THE 2322 LAZY O RD KATHERINE GEORGIEFF REVOCABLE SNOWMASS, CO 81654 LIVING TRS #11 TOPPING LN ST LOUIS, MO 63131 GREINER JERRY M GROOS NICHOLAS D GREINER TERESA U 210 N INDUSTRIAL PARK RD 330 BICKLEY RD HASTINGS, MI 49058 GLENSIDE, PA 19038 GUNION JOHN F GUTNER KENNETH H REV TRUST 1004 MARINA CIR PO BOX 11001 DAVIS, CA 95616 ASPEN, CO 81612 HERRON SANDRA A HOLLY TREE INVESTMENTS LLC 119 E COOPER AVE APT 19 4823 HOLLY TREE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 -1761 DALLAS, TX 75287 HOSKIN REEDE HOTEL DURANT PO BOX 2478 122 E DURANT BASALT, CO 81621 -2478 ASPEN, CO 81611 ICAHN LIBA IMHOF FAMILY TRUST PO BOX 11137 2409 GREEN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 -9627 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 J &E HANSEN LLC JACOBSON FAMILY TRUST C/O EDWARD HANSEN 2168 SANTA MARGARITA DR 255 SEASPRAY AVE FALLBROOK, CA 92028 PALM BEACH, FL 33480 KAUFMAN STEVEN B TRUST KEBER VINCENT M III C/O VIRGINIA HARLOW 1301 WAZEE #2E 0554 ESCALANTE DENVER, CO 80204 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 -8770 KINGSBURY FAMILY TRUST KULLGREN NANCY A PO BOX 198 205 E DURANT AVE UNIT 2 -C HOLDERNESS, NH 03245 ASPEN, CO 81611 FYRWALD JON ERIK & GUDRUN L 4348 PLUMWOOD DR WEST DES MOINES, IA 50265 GOLDSMITH ADAM D SMITH RONA K PO BOX 9069 ASPEN, CO 81612 GUBSER NICHOLAS J PO BOX 870 ASPEN, CO 81612 HATCHER HUGH S 205 E DURANT AVE APT 2E ASPEN, CO 81611 HORTON KAREN JANE TRUST 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 IAVARONE GIANFRANCO & RITA 341 ORIENTA AVE MAMORONECK, NY 10543 IMREM SUE GORDON TRUSTEE 219 E LAKE SHORE DR #51D CHICAGO, IL 60611 KAPLAN BARBARA 3076 EDGEWOOD RD PEPPER PIKE, OH 44124 KEITH JOHN III 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #203 -230 ASPEN, CO 81611 LACY ROANE M JR PO BOX 367 WACO, TX 76703 -0367 T � Tam;ead lead Ase3 Jo} jaded peadT ® 091S 3iVIdW31 aAV asfl G09LS ®AH3Ad►►�T%J i zeaut uoummui sec w i clanin laa.4 Asia A89AV-O9-009-1, uol�¢m}sul,p 1,uawa6aey� ap suas ®0916 ®A83Atl 1!aege6 a! zas!y ;D worAjeAe•mmm apma; e! z.%nsu{1 V r^� salad 9 salve; smonbl34l w . ,LARRABEE DONALD C JR LEATHERMAN ROBERT D LEVY HELEN JOAN TRUST 411 LAKEWOOD CIR #A110 PO BOX 11930 421 WARWICK RD COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80910 ASPEN, CO 81612 KENILWORTH, IL 60043 -1145 LIFT ONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC LIFT ONE LLC 72.40% LIMELITE REDEVELOPMENT LLC 131 E DURANT AVE 24 LINDENWOOD LN C/O GENERAL MANAGEMENT ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLETON, CO 80127 1201 GALAPAGO ST #101 DENVER, CO 80204 LOCHHEAD RAYMOND R & EMILIE M LORING PETER & ELIZABETH S MACDONALD KENNETH HUGH REV 200 SHERWOOD RD LORING WOLCOTT & COOLIDGE OFFICE TRUST PASO ROBLES, CA 93446 230 CONGRESS ST 44 W HANNUM BOSTON, MA 02110 SAGINAW, MI 48602 MAGES LAWRENCE M & MARY K 84% MARCUS ANN H MARK KENNETH A 216 LINDEN AVE C/O S MARCUS 200 PANTIGO RD WILMETTE, IL 60091 117 N MONARCH ST #01 EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCCONNELL THOMAS W & KAY L MCKENZIE BART B & PAIGE PARAVANO MESSNER CHRISTIAN 3814 OAKHILLS 4840 30TH ST NORTH 3111 BEL AIR DR APT 202 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 -2716 LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 MILLER R GREG MOUNTAIN CHALET ENTERPRISES INC MULKEY DAVID A DR PO BOX 4577 333 E DURANT AVE TRUSTEE 2860 AUGUSTA DR ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 NELSON ARLENE NEWMAN KERRY & RICK[ R ONEAL PROPERTIES LLC 119 E COOPER ST #6 617 PRINCE DR 8100 E CAMELBACK RD #31 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWBURGH, IN 47630 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251 -2773 PASCO PROP LLC PAY ERIC GEOFFREY PHILLIPS B R SMITH PATRICK A 119 E COOPER AVE APT 12 311 S ASPEN ST #1 360 SOUTHFIELD RD ASPEN, CO 81611 -1772 ASPEN, CO 81611 BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009 PIECE OF THE PIE LLC PINES LODGE CONDO ASSOC PINES LODGE DEVELOPMENT LLC PO BOX 2492 152 E DURANT AVE 2353 IRVINE AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 PITNER N KATHRYN POPKIN PHILIP G PRASAD REV TRUST PO BOX 11930 PO BOX 7956 3776 W 3700 N ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 DARLINGTON, ID 83255 T p71 Tam3ead load Ase3 Jo; � jaded paelT Gons uvidwu many asD ®09Ls ®AH3Adn �y i muc uoinnmui aac i town maj Acoa A83AV-O9-008 -L A worArane AAAAAA 111PRODINGER IRMA PO BOX 1245 ASPEN, CO 81612 uopniuul,p a0lne; el zmpsu� wJ ROARING FORK PROPERTIES C/O HOWARD A WILL JR 5055 26TH AVE ROCKFORD, IL 61109 RUMSEY DANIEL W 13700 MARINA POINTE DR #512 MARINA DL REY, CA 90292 -9259 SCHUMACHER JUDY M 0115 GLEN EAGLES DR ASPEN. CO 81611 SHEFFER BARBARA & DOUGLAS PO BOX 250 ASPEN, CO 81612 SKY BLUE LLC 27.60% 5743 CORSA AVE # 101 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91362 SOUTH POINT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 205 E DURANT AVE #2F ASPEN, CO 81611 STAPLETON DAVID W 206 E DEAN ST #2A ASPEN, CO 81611 STEINER DONALD R BUCKHEAD GRAND 3338 PEACHTREE RD #3307 ATLANTA, GA 30326 SZYMANSKI WILLIAM R & LYNNE E 2220 E SILVER PALM RD BOCA RATON, FL 33432 juawa5iegs ap sues V PURVIS ROBERT K & CAROLYN K PO BOX 3089 ASPEN, CO 81612 ROBLES ENRIQUE ALVAREZ ALVAREZ CRISTINA MONTES URALES 350 LOMAS CHAPULTEPEC MEXICO DF MEXICO, 11000 SCHAPIRO MARC & PATRICIA 1685 TAMARAC DR GOLDEN, CO 80401 SCULL JAMES E PO BOX 2051 ASPEN, CO 81612 SHENNAN MELISSA 822 LANE LORRAINE LAKE FOREST, IL 60045 -1643 SLT ASPEN DEAN STREET LLC C/O EPROPERTY TAX DEPT 206 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85261 -4900 SOUTHPOINT - SUMNER CORP 4828 FORT SUMNER DR BETHESDA,MD 20816 STARK RENEE A 205 E DURANT AVE APT 1D ASPEN, CO 81611 -3813 STITT ELIZABETH WILES IRREV TRUST 1450 SILVERKING DR ASPEN, CO 81611 TAROCH HOLDINGS LTD C/O PATRICK D MCALLISTER PC 315 E HYMAN AVE #305 ASPEN, CO 81611 -2909 009 LS ®AN3A11 iljege6 al zeslll ;n salad g selpe; smanbiq RINGSBY GRAY PO BOX 1292 HAIKU, HI 96708 ROSSI ELAYNE R 700 LITE AVE #710 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHAYER CHARLES M III 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 SHAW ROBERT W 5208 A PERSHING AVE FORT WORTH, TX 76107 SILVERMAN MARC A & MARILYN L 937 DALE RD MEADOWBROOK, PA 19046 SOUTH POINT CONDO LLC 150 N MARKET WICHITA, KS 67202 SPAULDING RICHARD W THOMPSON ELEANOR M PO BOX 278 CONCORD, MA 01742 -0278 STARWOOD VACATION OWNERSHIP C/O JOAN LAND ACCT MGR 9002 SAN MARCO CT ORLANDO, FL 32819 SULLIVAN JOHN B TRUST 1300 E REUSCH RD ELIZABETH, IL 61028 THALBERG KATHERINE C/O BROOKE ANDERSON 3131 CONNECTICUT AVE NW #2801 WASHINGTON, DC 20008 T Taugead lead Ase3 Jo; jaded peadT ®09&S 31tl1dW31 many asn 1 091 S OAHMbn ku 1 zeaus uown asul aae i clam+ lama Am3 A113AV-O9-008 -1 uolhnilsul,p luawa6Ay3 ap sua5 ®0915 ®A83A`d 1!jege6 al zoslllln wor6janeumm a6lnal el zollnsuponk V , N joled g selhe} sauenbail OrHREE REEDS LLC 2224 VIA SEVILLE RD NW ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87104 -3096 VANDER WALL DEAN ROBERT & BEVERLYJ PO BOX 189 LONE PINE, CA 93545 WEINGLASS LEONARD PO BOX 11509 ASPEN, CO 81612 WITEK ROBERT J & RONA R 225 S MONARCH #G103 ASPEN, CO 81611 WOW LIFT ONE LLC C/O WARSTLER ROBERT T 3225 ELK CANYON CIR SEDALIA, CO 80135 -8573 TOWNE PLACE OF ASPEN CONDO ASSOCINC C/O ASPEN LODGING COMPANY 747 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 VANTONGEREN HAROLD V & LIDIA M 2000 E 12TH AVE BOX 8 DENVER, CO 80206 WHITE JALEH THICKMAN DAVID 152 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 -1737 WOODING MERRITT B PO BOX 339 HOPE, NJ 07844 WUGALTER JOEL 716 BISHOPS LODGE RD SANTE FE, NM 87501 -1127 TYDEN FAMILY FARMS PTNP 1730 IROQUOIS TR HASTINGS, MI 49058 VENTER HENDRIK JOHANNES PO BOX 11979 ASPEN, CO 81612 WICHMANN VICTORIA BOX 4388 ASPEN, CO 81612 WOODSON TATJANA REV TRUST PO BOX 125 TETON VILLAGE, WY 83025 T Tajnleal load Ase3 jo; . jaded paajT Gons uvidW31 oAjeAV asn 1 ®09Ls AH3AVn o 1 iaauc uoiunnsw aac w i .rr siaaas imm Asia AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 0 S IWOi?2 m St • Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: rue" jlAj� r5t 2008 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1, Lonnt t. M *e &.Az, (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, wa(erproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) da s prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the'IJO day of 2009, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. Alfotograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (3 0) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoriing district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. The fooing "Affidavit of Notice" was a knowledged efore me this Si, of _ li.�� 200 , by (�yl� '.1) ! u/ Gj PUBLIC NOTICE TIANL 411 UD MEND ENT, GROWTH gSTAN I WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MENT DUOTq SYSTEM REVIEW, D COM- MERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW My commission expires: Notary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: WHOW, 1131FC8090191 Aspen Planning ands/0 m mm u "o� I GRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN Published In 0� Aspen T;mea Week,y en gene 2g, 7 THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1-M S, y�olarcL ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 7'^l Y I S , 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1, _P C ("V (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 2s_�aay of J 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) J Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. a Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of , 200 by Fin P (� r k WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission ex 7 D 2 1> Q74 Notary Aubfic ATTACHMENTS: COPYOF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL PUBLIC NOTICE RE: '.3: S. MONARCH STREET, INSUBSTANTIAI PUD AMENDMENT, GROWTH MAlviAGFIVIENT QUOTA SYSTEM REVIEW, AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 15, 2008, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, in the Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Eben P. Clark of Klein, Cote & Edwards, LLC, 201 North Mill Street, Aspen, CO, 81611 on behalf of Dancing Bear Land LLC, 210 North Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, CO, 81611 who are the owners of the subject property. The applicants are proposing to enclose two areas that were originally designated for outdoor seating in a building that is currently under construction. The applicant is requesting the following development approvals: Growth Management Quota System allocation for the increase of 386 square feet of net leasable space; Insubstantial PUD Amendment, and Commercial Design Review. The properties are legally described as Lots P, Q, R and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, 81611. For further information, contact Errin Evans at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2745, errine @ci.aspen.co.us. s" Ersoamer, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on June 29st, 2008 City of Aspen Account I ®AArr11 `9 Wq Interested? 970/920�?510. DSiRG A113Atl-O9-OO9-L uolPn� ;sul,p ;uawa6aeg3 ap suas 009LS ®AV3AV lingeB al zasly ;D worArene•MMM a81na; el za;lnsuo v salad g salve; sauanb44 ALYEMENI MOHAMMED & ALICE 3109 OAKMONT DR STATESVILLE, NC 28625 BERHORSTJERRY BERHORST CAROLE 7161 LINDENMERE DR BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 BRAYMAN WALTER W & PATRICIA 844 ROCKWELL LN KANSAS CITY, MO 64112 -2363 ASPEN KABINN LLC C/O NIKE COMM /NINA KAMINER 75 BROAD ST RM 500 NEW YORK, NY 10004 -2415 BLUE LLOYD JR PLEAS ALEXA PO BOX 1569 GRAYTON BEACH, FL 32459 BRIGHT GALEN 205 E DURANT AVE #3D ASPEN, CO 81611 BROWNELL LORRAINE B CALKINS GEORGE W 1030 SECOND ST 105 S CHEROKEE MORGAN CITY, LA 70380 DENVER, CO 80223 -1834 CARRIGAN RICHARD A JR CAUSING JENNIFER M 25526 WILLIAMS RD PO BOX 10343 WARRENVILLE, IL 60555 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHRISPAT ASPEN LLC CHRISTENSEN EUGENE J 1107 5TH AVE PO BOX 10061 NEW YORK, NY 10128 ASPEN, CO 81612 CITY OF ASPEN CLAUSEN FAMILY TRUST NO 1 130 S GALENA ST C/O GUNDY MGMT CO ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 47 MORRIS, IL 60450 CROSBY CHRISTINE ANN DANCING BEAR LAND LLC 1050 E WATERS AVE #15 210 N MILL ST #203 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DONCER JOYCE TRUST ELLIS DIANA L ROQUE TRUSTEE 7641 W 123RD PL 13320 MULHOLLAND DR PALOS HEIGHTS, IL 60463 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 FAULKNER JOHN L FELDMAN SELMA 2433 ROCKINGHAM ST 300 S POINTE DR APT 2403 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 -7329 BENNIE THOMAS E EXHIBIT PO BOX 9884 ASPEN, CO 81612 H BOGIN ROBERT M 4280 S MEADOW BROOK LN EVERGREEN, CO 80439 BRIGHT GALEN 407 S HUNTER ST #3 ASPEN, CO 81611 CALLAHAN PATRICIA 0184 MOUNTAIN LAUREL DR ASPEN, CO 81611 CHAPLIN ARLENE & WAYNE 54 LAGORCE CIR MIAMI BEACH, FL 33141 CHU FAMILY TRUST 2/3 INT LU NANCY CHAO TRUST 1/3 1 N 38 CORMORANT CIR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 COHN PETER L 1601 S CENTRAL AVE GLENDALE, CA 91204 DOLLE NORMA 124 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 EVANS DAVID COURTNEY PO BOX 952 ASPEN, CO 81612 FOX THOMAS H 119 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 T Taan ;ead laad Ase3 �o; waded paadT ®09L5 31tl1dW31 tiantl asD 09L5 i ® ® Md ® . i iaaue uownncw aac i .�-, aanm saai AcP3 A113AV-O9-008-L uol�njisul,p }uawa6aey� ap sua5 @09LS ®A83AV llXege6 al zesimn worArane•mmm apina; el zminsuo "'N Xaled a selpe; sauenbl;l 10 FREIRICH MARK PO BOX 774056 STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO 80477 FUQUA ALVAH D JR & DIANNE L 446 LAKE SHORE DR SUNSET BEACH, NC 28468 GEORGIEFF KATHERINE TRUSTEE OF GLICKMAN EDWIN C THE 2322 LAZY 0 RD KATHERINE GEORGIEFF REVOCABLE SNOWMASS, CO 81654 LIVING TRS #11 TOPPING LN ST LOUIS, MO 63131 GREINER JERRY M GROOS NICHOLAS D GREINER TERESA U 210 N INDUSTRIAL PARK RD 330 BICKLEY RD HASTINGS, MI 49058 GLENSIDE, PA 19038 GUNION JOHN F GUTNER KENNETH H REV TRUST 1004 MARINA CIR PO BOX 11001 DAVIS, CA 95616 ASPEN, CO 81612 HERRON SANDRA HOLLY TREE INVESTMENTS LLC 119 E COOPER AVE APT 19 4823 HOLLY TREE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 -1761 DALLAS, TX 75287 HOSKIN REEDE HOTEL DURANT PO BOX 2478 122 E DURANT BASALT, CO 81621 -2478 ASPEN, CO 81611 ICAHN LIBA IMHOF FAMILY TRUST PO BOX 11137 2409 GREEN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 -9627 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 J &E HANSEN LLC JACOBSON FAMILY TRUST C/O EDWARD HANSEN 2168 SANTA MARGARITA DR 255 SEASPRAY AVE FALLBROOK, CA 92028 PALM BEACH, FL 33480 KAUFMAN STEVEN B TRUST KEBER VINCENT M III C/O VIRGINIA HARLOW 1301 WAZEE #2E 0554 ESCALANTE DENVER, CO 80204 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 -8770 KINGSBURY FAMILY TRUST KULLGREN NANCY A PO BOX 198 205 E DURANT AVE UNIT 2 -C HOLDERNESS, NH 03245 ASPEN, CO 81611 FYRWALD JON ERIK & GUDRUN L 4348 PLUMWOOD DR WEST DES MOINES, IA 50265 GOLDSMITH ADAM D SMITH RONA K PO BOX 9069 ASPEN, CO 81612 GUBSER NICHOLAS J PO BOX 870 ASPEN, CO 81612 HATCHER HUGH S 205 E DURANT AVE APT 2E ASPEN, CO 81611 HORTON KAREN JANE TRUST 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 IAVARONE GIANFRANCO & RITA 341 ORIENTA AVE MAMORONECK, NY 10543 IMREM SUE GORDON TRUSTEE 219 E LAKE SHORE DR #5D CHICAGO, IL 60611 KAPLAN BARBARA 3076 EDGEWOOD RD PEPPER PIKE, OH 44124 KEITH JOHN III 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #203 -230 ASPEN, CO 81611 LACY ROANE M JR PO BOX 367 WACO, TX 76703 -0367 T n Tam;eai laad Ase3 a0} jaded paej 009LS 3MdW31®A+aAV esn ®09L5 ®AH�b ICY% 1 i iaauc unninnan nae — � c�e..e..00' X'ce, A213Atl-O'J-008-L uolpna ;sul,p ;uawa6aey) ap suaS 009LS OAa3Atl;laege6 al zoslun ww•Ajaae-AAM n all!na; el za;lnsuo v e"'1 joled a selpe; sauanb114 ...+/ LARRABEE DONALD C JR LEATHERMAN ROBERT D LEVY HELEN JOAN TRUST 411 LAKEWOOD CIR #A110 PO BOX 11930 421 WARWICK RD COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80910 ASPEN, CO 81612 KENILWORTH, IL 60043 -1145 LIFT ONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC LIFT ONE LLC 72.40% LIMELITE REDEVELOPMENT LLC 131 E DURANT AVE 24 LINDENWOOD LN C/O GENERAL MANAGEMENT ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLETON, CO 80127 1201 GALAPAGO ST #101 DENVER, CO 80204 LOCHHEAD RAYMOND R & EMILIE M LORING PETER & ELIZABETH S MACDONALD KENNETH HUGH REV 200 SHERWOOD RD LORING WOLCOTT & COOLIDGE OFFICE TRUST PASO ROBLES, CA 93446 230 CONGRESS ST 44 W HANNUM BOSTON, MA 02110 SAGINAW, MI 48602 MAGES LAWRENCE M & MARY K 84% MARCUS ANN H MARK KENNETH A 216 LINDEN AVE C/O S MARCUS 200 PANTIGO RD WILMETTE, IL 60091 117 N MONARCH ST #01 EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCCONN ELL THOMAS W & KAY L MCKENZIE BART B & PAIGE PARAVANO MESSNER CHRISTIAN 3814 OAKHILLS 4840 30TH ST NORTH 3111 BEL AIR DR APT 202 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 -2716 LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 MILLER R GREG MOUNTAIN CHALET ENTERPRISES INC MULKEY DAVID A DR PO BOX 4577 333 E DURANT AVE TRUSTEE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 2860 AUGUSTA DR LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 NELSON ARLENE NEWMAN KERRY J & RICKI R ONEAL PROPERTIES LLC 119 E COOPER ST #6 617 PRINCE DR 8100 E CAMELBACK RD #31 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWBURGH, IN 47630 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251 -2773 PASCO PROP LLC PAY ERIC GEOFFREY PHILLIPS B R SMITH PATRICK A 119 E COOPER AVE APT 12 311 S ASPEN ST #1 360 SOUTHFIELD RD ASPEN, CO 81611 -1772 ASPEN, CO 81611 BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009 PIECE OF THE PIE LLC PINES LODGE CONDO ASSOC PINES LODGE DEVELOPMENT LLC PO BOX 2492 152 E DURANT AVE 2353 IRVINE AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 PITNER N KATHRYN POPKIN PHILIP G PRASAD REV TRUST PO BOX 11930 PO BOX 7956 3776 W 3700 N ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 DARLINGTON, ID 83255 T Tajn;eaj laad Ase3 jo; jaded paadT 09 LS 31V1dW31 any asD AN3AV-O9-008-L uol ni;sul,p ;6 zas!;D ®® wo3,6iane mmm allIna; el za;lnsuo�+ V I N salad a selpe} seuanbl;4 �.� PRODINGER IRMA PURVIS ROBERT K & CAROLYN K RINGSBY GRAY PO BOX 1245 PO BOX 3089 PO BOX 1292 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 HAIKU, HI 96708 ROARING FORK PROPERTIES C/O HOWARD A WILL J R 5055 26TH AVE ROCKFORD, IL 61109 RUMSEY DANIEL W 13700 MARINA POINTE DR #512 MARINA DL REY, CA 90292 -9259 SCHUMACHER JUDY M 0115 GLEN EAGLES DR ASPEN, CO 81611 SHEFFER BARBARA & DOUGLAS PO BOX 250 ASPEN, CO 81612 SKY BLUE LLC 27.60% 5743 CORSA AVE # 101 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91362 SOUTH POINT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 205 E DURANT AVE #2F ASPEN, CO 81611 STAPLETON DAVID W 206 E DEAN ST #2A ASPEN, CO 81611 STEINER DONALD R BUCKHEAD GRAND 3338 PEACHTREE RD #3307 ATLANTA, GA 30326 SZYMANSKI WILLIAM R & LYNNE E 2220 E SILVER PALM RD BOCA RATON, FL 33432 ROBLES ENRIQUE ALVAREZ ALVAREZ CRISTINA MONTES URALES 350 LOMAS CHAPULTEPEC MEXICO DF MEXICO, 11000 SCHAPIRO MARC & PATRICIA 1685 TAMARAC DR GOLDEN, CO 80401 SCULL JAMES E PO BOX 2051 ASPEN, CO 81612 SHENNAN MELISSA 822 LANE LORRAINE LAKE FOREST. IL 60045 -1643 SLT ASPEN DEAN STREET LLC C/O EPROPERTY TAX DEPT 206 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85261 -4900 SOUTH POINT- SUMNER CORP 4828 FORT SUMNER DR BETHESDA, MD 20816 STARK RENEE A 205 E DURANT AVE APT 1D ASPEN, CO 81611 -3813 STITT ELIZABETH WILES IRREV TRUST 1450 SILVERKING DR ASPEN, CO 81611 TAROCH HOLDINGS LTD C/O PATRICK D MCALLISTER PC 315 E HYMAN AVE #305 ASPEN, CO 81611 -2909 ROSSI ELAYNE R 700 LITE AVE #710 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHAYER CHARLES M III 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 SHAW ROBERT W 5208 A PERSHING AVE FORT WORTH, TX 76107 SILVERMAN MARC A& MARILYN L 937 DALE RD MEADOWBROOK, PA 19046 SOUTH POINT CONDO LLC 150 N MARKET WICHITA, KS 67202 SPAULDING RICHARD W THOMPSON ELEANOR M PO BOX 278 CONCORD, MA 01742 -0278 STARWOOD VACATION OWNERSHIP C/O JOAN LAND ACCT MGR 9002 SAN MARCO CT ORLANDO, FL 32819 SULLIVAN JOHN B TRUST 1300 E REUSCH RD ELIZABETH, IL 61028 THALBERG KATHERINE C/O BROOKE ANDERSON 3131 CONNECTICUT AVE NW #2801 WASHINGTON, DC 20008 T � �j� Tam;ead laad Ase3 JO; waded paadT o09 LS 31V IdW31 @amV asD ®09L5 ®AkAdl`Y%1 i iaauc uownnsw aae I P"��t9 clana Ioaj Seem AN3AV -09-008 -L uolpnj;sul,p ;uawa6aey3 ap suas ®09L5 OA83AV ;Incle6 al zaslll ;D wortiane•mmm allIna; el za;lnsuop^, V 0'% jalad a salpe; sauenb114 %14/ � '.o THREE REEDS LLC 2224 VIA SEVILLE RD NW ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87104 -3096 VANDER WALL DEAN ROBERT & BEVERLYJ PO BOX 189 LONE PINE, CA 93545 WEINGLASS LEONARD PO BOX 11509 ASPEN, CO 81612 WITEK ROBERT J & RONA R 225 S MONARCH #G103 ASPEN, CO 81611 WOW LIFT ONE LLC C/O WARSTLER ROBERT T 3225 ELK CANYON CIR SEDALIA, CO 80135 -8573 TOWNE PLACE OF ASPEN CONDO ASSOCINC C/O ASPEN LODGING COMPANY 747 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 VANTONGEREN HAROLD V & LIDIA M 2000 E 12TH AVE BOX 8 DENVER, CO 80206 WHITE JALEH THICKMAN DAVID 152 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 -1737 WOODING MERRITT B PO BOX 339 HOPE, NJ 07844 WUGALTER JOEL 716 BISHOPS LODGE RD SANTE FE, NM 87501 -1127 TYDEN FAMILY FARMS PTNP 1730 IROQUOIS TR HASTINGS, MI 49058 VENTER HENDRIK JOHANNES PO BOX 11979 ASPEN, CO 81612 WICHMANN VICTORIA BOX 4388 ASPEN, CO 81612 WOODSON TATJANA REV TRUST PO BOX 125 TETON VILLAGE, WY 83025 T � Taan ;ead laad Ase3 ao; waded paadT @09L5 31V1dW31 �aaV asn ®09LS ®AL13AM1�%� .Q i laauc uoumnsw aac w i , sianal 1aaw Csea e.... Date: March 5, 2008 7Lj THE CITY OF ASFFN Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant, We have received your land use application and reviewed it for completeness. The case number and name assigned to this property is 00013.2008.ASLU (411 S. Monarch). The planner assigned to this case is Errin Evans. Your Land Use Application is incomplete: We found that the application needs additional items to be submitted for it to be deemed complete and for us to begin reviewing it. We need the following additional submission contents for you application: 1. Commercial Design review criteria and standards need to be addressed (section 26.412.050 and 26.412.060. 2. 3. Please submit the aforementioned missing submission items so that we may begin reviewing your application. No review hearings will be scheduled until all of the submission contents listed above have been submitted and are to the satisfaction of the City of Aspen Planner reviewing the land use application. ❑ Your Land Use Application is complete: If there are not missing items listed above, then your application has been deemed complete to begin the land use review process. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429 -2759 if you have any questions. Tha You IJAA fifer P e n, Deputy Director City of Aspen, Community Development Department C: \Documents and Settings \jennifep \Desktop \organized \G Drive \Templates \Completeness Letter Land Use.doc Errin Evans From: Tom Bracewell [tom @aspensan.com] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 3:38 PM To: Errin Evans Subject: Re: Tentative dre meeting Attachments: image003.jpg Hi Errin, I've seen the minor amendment, and would be comfortable with revised comments, without a meeting. Thanks itn - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Errin Evans To: Aaron Reed ; Adam Trzcinski ; Amy Guthrie ; Blake Fitch ; Brian Flynn; Cindy Christensen; Denis Murray ; Ed Van Walraven ; Erich Grueter ; Errin Evans ; Jackie Lothian ; Jannette Whitcomb ; Jason Lasser ; Jennifer Phelan ; Jerry Nye ; Jessica Garrow ; John Hines ; John Krueger ; Kim Peterson ; Larry Doble ; Linda Chi ; Lynn Rumbaugh ; Phil Overeynder ; Randy Ready ; Rich Ryan ; Richard Pryor ; Rick Fout ; Sara Adams ; Shaun Rourke ; Shirley Ritter; Stephen Kanipe ; Tim Ware ; Todd Grange ; Tom Bracewell forward; Travis Coggin; Tricia Aragon ; Trisha Nelson Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:25 AM Subject: Tentative dre meeting We have tentatively scheduled a DRC meeting for an application for the Dancing Bear Lodge — 411 S. Monarch Street. This application was previously approved, however they would like to make an amendment to the approval. They have applied to increase the net leasable space by approximately 386 square feet. They would like to enclose two proposed outdoor seating areas to allow for more indoor seating in their restaurant. As most of you have already reviewed the approved project and this is a relatively minor amendment, we thought we would email first to see if there is interest in a DRC meeting and if it is necessary. The tentative date for the meeting is on March 26, 2008. If we do not get enough response to host a DRC meeting, we will send out the applications and you can send your response to Community Development. We have included a PDF file of the proposed floor plan for your review. Errin Evans Current Planner r Errin Evans From: Brian Flynn Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:04 PM To: Errin Evans Subject: RE: Tentative dre meeting Attachments: New Park and Rec logo.jpg; image003.jpg Errin, Parks has no issues with this review, I do not think a DRC is needed. Brian Flynn Open Space and Special Projects Manager (P)970- 429 -2035 (F)970- 920 -5128 PApSPEN From: Errin Evans Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:25 AM To: Aaron Reed; Adam Trzcinski; Amy Guthrie; Blake Fitch; Brian Flynn; Cindy Christensen; Denis Murray; Ed Van Walraven; Erich Grueter; Errin Evans; Jackie Lothian; Jannette Whitcomb; Jason Lasser; Jennifer Phelan; Jerry Nye; Jessica Garrow; John Hines; John Krueger; Kim Peterson; Larry Doble; Linda Chi; Lynn Rumbaugh; Phil Overeynder; Randy Ready; Rich Ryan; Richard Pryor; Rick Fout; Sara Adams; Shaun Rourke; Shirley Ritter; Stephen Kanipe; Tim Ware; Todd Grange; Tom Bracewell forward; Travis Coggin; Tricia Aragon; Trisha Nelson Subject: Tentative dre meeting We have tentatively scheduled a DRC meeting for an application for the Dancing Bear Lodge —411 S. Monarch Street. This application was previously approved, however they would like to make an amendment to the approval. They have applied to increase the net leasable space by approximately 386 square feet. They would like to enclose two proposed outdoor seating areas to allow for more indoor seating in their restaurant. As most of you have already reviewed the approved project and this is a relatively minor amendment, we thought we would email first to see if there is interest in a DRC meeting and if it is necessary. The tentative date for the meeting is on March 26, 2008. If we do not get enough response to host a DRC meeting, we will send out the applications and you can send your response to Community Development. We have included a PDF file of the proposed floor plan for your review. Errin Evans Current Planner Community Development City of Aspen 130 5 Galena Street Errin Evans From: Ed Van Walraven Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:41 AM To: Errin Evans Subject: RE: Tentative dre meeting Attachments: image001.jpg Errin, Fire sprinkler and fire alarm coverage shall be maintained in the additional area (Additional fire sprinklers and smoke detection may be required) Thank you, Ed Ed Van Walraven Fire Marshal Aspen Fire Protection District 420 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 970 - 925 -2690 Office 970- 920 -4451 Fax From: Errin Evans Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:25 AM To: Aaron Reed; Adam Trzcinski; Amy Guthrie; Blake Fitch; Brian Flynn; Cindy Christensen; Denis Murray; Ed Van Walraven; Erich Grueter; Errin Evans; Jackie Lothian; Jannette Whitcomb; Jason Lasser; Jennifer Phelan; Jerry Nye; Jessica Garrow; John Hines; John Krueger; Kim Peterson; Larry Doble; Linda Chi; Lynn Rumbaugh; Phil Overeynder; Randy Ready; Rich Ryan; Richard Pryor; Rick Fout; Sara Adams; Shaun Rourke; Shirley Ritter; Stephen Kanipe; Tim Ware; Todd Grange; Tom Bracewell forward; Travis Coggin; Tricia Aragon; Trisha Nelson Subject: Tentative dre meeting We have tentatively scheduled a DRC meeting for an application for the Dancing Bear Lodge — 411 S. Monarch Street. This application was previously approved, however they would like to make an amendment to the approval. They have applied to increase the net leasable space by approximately 386 square feet. They would like to enclose two proposed outdoor seating areas to allow for more indoor seating in their restaurant. As most of you have already reviewed the approved project and this is a relatively minor amendment, we thought we would email first to see if there is interest in a DRC meeting and if it is necessary. The tentative date for the meeting is on March 26, 2008. If we do not get enough response to host a DRC meeting, we will send out the applications and you can send your response to Community Development. We have included a PDF file of the proposed floor plan for your review. Errin Evans Current Planner Community Development NOTICE OF APPROVAL For An Insubstantial Amendment to the Dancing Bear Planned Unit Development, An Amendment to Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2003 Parcel ID No. 273182 -19 -002 APPLICANT: Dancing Bear Lodge, Stryker Brown Architects REPRESENTATIVE: Tom Gilchrist, David Brown SUBJECT OF Dancing Bear Lodge PUD, Ordinance AMENDMENT: No. 29, Series of 2003 SUMMARY: On behalf of the Dancing Bear Lodge and Stryker Brown Architects, Tom Gilchrist, has applied for an Insubstantial Amendment to the Dancing Bear PUD, Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2003. The Applicant is requesting a PUD Amendment to enclose staircase 2 from the 3`d floor landing to the roof in order to meet International Building Code (IBC) requirements 1018.1 and 1019.1 - 1019.8. Staircase 2 is located along the alley (the north building elevation). STAFF EVALUATION: In order to amend a specific provision of the ordinance that approved the PUD originally, a PUD Amendment must be approved. Staff supports the proposed Amendment because it makes a technical correction to the approval. The IBC requires at least one staircase be enclosed in this manner. Enclosing this staircase provides the least amount of visual impact because it is located along the alley elevation, rather than along one of the street elevations. The proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the character of the development and the original approvals, does not increase the coverage of structures on the land, does not impact the trip or parking generation and does not reduce the amount of parking provided or right -of -way widths, does not impact and open space, and does not change the density of the project. Staff finds that the proposed amendment meets the criteria for an insubstantial amendment pursuant to section 26.445.100 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. DECISION: The Community Development Director finds the Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment to be consistent with the review criteria (Exhibit B) and 0 thereby, APPROVES the amendment. The approved amendment to the Dancing Bear PUD, allows for a change to Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2003. APPROVED BY: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Date ACCEPTANCE: I, as a person being or representing the applicant, do hereby agree to the conditions of this approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of my knowledge. Tom Gilchrist, Stryker Brown Architects Date Attachments: Exhibit A 1 — A6 — Amended Plans Approved by this Amendment Exhibit B — Review Criteria to"'N. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILIIIIIIIIIIIII 496444 1 :oea R 58.00 D 0.00 ORDINANCE N0. 29 (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE DANCING BEAR LODGE PRESERVATION MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION INCLUDING REZONING, SUBDIVISION, TIMESHARE, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION (GMQS) FOR LODGE PRESERVATION AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 411 S. MONARCH STREET, LOTS P, Q, R, AND S, BLOCK 77, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735- 182 -19 -002 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from MSE Aspen Holdings, Inc, owner, represented by Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, requesting approval of a Lodge Preservation (LP) Minor Planned Unit Development including Rezoning, Subdivision, Timeshare, Mountain View Plane, and Growth Management Quota System Exemptions (GMQS) for Lodge Preservation on the property described as Lots P, Q, R, and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 11,957 square feet, and is located in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L1TR) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.304.060(8), Combined Reviews, the Community Development Director in consultation with the applicant has concluded that a combined review of the land use requests associated with this application would reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense, and clarity; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, Map and Text Amendments; Section 26.435, Mountain View Plane; Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; Section 26.470, Growth Management Quota System; Section 26.480, Subdivision; and, Section 26.590, Timeshare, the City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the land use requests made by the applicant during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the Minor PUD and its associated land use requests, finding that the applicable review standards have been met; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 15, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted three to three (3 -3) on adoption of Resolution IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPIIIIINIIIIIIIIIIdIIIILIIIIIIIIIINI 98444 8 No. 6, Series of 2003, effectively recommending that City Council deny the Dancing Bear Minor PUD and its associated land use requests; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 23, 2003, City Council conducted and continued the public hearing on the Dancing Bear PUD to July 28, 2003; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 28, 2003, City Council conducted and continued the public hearing on the Dancing Bear PUD to August 11, 2003; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance fruthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Lots P, Q, R, and S of Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen, is hereby rezoned to L/TR (Lodge/Tourist Residential) with Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlays. Section 2• Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, City Council hereby approves the Dancing Bear Timeshare Lodge Minor PUD, which includes applications for Minor PUD, Subdivision, Timeshare, Mountain View Plane, and Growth Management Quota. System Exemptions (GMQS) for Lodge Preservation and Affordable Housing for the development of a timeshare lodge consisting of twenty -seven (27) lodging bedrooms and two (2) affordable housing units (consisting of two 2- bedroom units) as was represented on the plans presented to City Council at the August 11, 2003 meeting, which included a centered fourth floor gazebo of approximately 1,580 square feet, subject to the following conditions: IIIhnIIIIIiIIIIIIII 498441 (IIIIIII III IIIIIII III VIIIIIII IIII 06/08/2004 10:098 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 58.00 0 0.00 A PUD and Subdivision Improvements Agreement shall be recorded 1 within 1-80 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the Community Development Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements, and the location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping (including all plantings, species, numbers, and locations), parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. C. A drawing(s) representing the project's architectural character. 3. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall cause and pay for recordation of a PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans, as specified above, with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 4. The following dimensional requirements of the PUD are approved and shall be printed on the Final Illustrative Plan: OILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO 1 498441 Papa: 4 of it 08/08/2004 10:008 .00 D 0.00 5. The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final recorded Ordinance. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off - site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. e. A detailed ventilation plan of the parking garage ventilation system prepared by an engineer that specializes in the design of ventilation and heating systems. f. A fugitive dust control plan which includes proposed construction fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads, construction speed limits, and other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line. g. A detailed kitchen plan for approval by the City Environmental Health Department. Col iIIIIII VIII iII VIII IIIIIII ITYIIIIIII III VIII IIII llll000/08/2904 5 of ole:09A 'h. A study performed by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer demonstrating how the required excavation of the site may be performed without damaging adjacent structures and/or streets. If the applicant utilizes soil pins to stabilize excavation cuts, the applicant shall be required to provide a financial assurance in an amount to be determined by the Community Development Engineer. The City Engineering Department strongly prefers that the applicants use soil hardening techniques rather than soil pins to stabilize the excavation cuts. i. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed. Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on -site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2 -year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to such agreement. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. 8. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. If new sewer lines are required, then the existing service must be excavated in the alley and disconnected at the main sewer line. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed to ACSD lines. All improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. 9. The Applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Monday thru Saturday. .,� 10. The Applicant shall agree that there will be no construction material or dumpsters stored on the public rights -of -way unless a temporary © IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 084 ®;;0: 111111 59A SILVIA DAVIS PIMIN COUNTY 00 R 55.00 D 0.00 encroachment license is granted by the City Engineer. In addition, the Applicant shall submit a full set of construction management plans as part of the building permit application, and the management plans shall include a noise, dust control, and construction traffic and construction parking management plan which addresses, at a minimum, the following issues: a. Defining the construction debris hauling routes and associated impacts on local streets; and b. Construction parking mitigation, except for essential trade trucks, no other personal trucks are to be parked in the area around the site. The city encourages that site workers be shuttled in from the airport parking area. 11. The Applicant shall complete (prior to any of the remodel work, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc.,) the Building Department's asbestos checklist, and if necessary, a person licensed by the State to do asbestos inspections must conduct an inspection. The Building Department cannot sign any building permits until they get this report. If there is no asbestos, the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove it. 12. The Applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. - A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 13. All exterior lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code requirements set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, as may be amended from time to time. 14. The Applicant shall install an adequate fire alarm system throughout the structure as determined by the Fire Marshal. The Applicant shall also install a fire sprinkler system and fire extinguishers that meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal. In addition, the water service connection to the sprinklers must provide an adequate flow of water to eliminate the need for a fire pump. The Applicant shall also install standpipes within the stairwells. 15. The Applicant shall submit financial assurance in an amount and form acceptable to the City Engineer and City Water Department Director for excavation in the public right -of -way. The Applicant shall also schedule the abandonment of the existing water tap prior to requesting a new water tap. 16. The Applicant shall provide the Water Department with a detailed plan for relocating the fire hydrant that demonstrates that the water mains will be C CO 96/08/2084 7 of IS:OeA �[LVIA DAVIS PITKIN CO Y CO R 50.00 shut down during the relocation of the hydrant. This plan shall be approved by Water Department prior to relocation of the hydrant. 17. The Applicant shall install an oil and grease separator in the restaurant/bar that meets the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's regulations. The applicant shall also install an oil and sand separator for the indoor parking facilities. 18. All design, installation, and maintenance of the pools and spas must comply with the State of Colorado's "Swimming Pool and Mineral Bath Regulations." 19. The Applicant shall obtain a Colorado Retail Food Establishment License prior to serving guests food that has been prepared on -site. The Applicant shall also obtain a liquor license prior to serving alcoholic beverages. 20. A bear -proof dumpster shall be located on -site meeting the standards of the City of Aspen Wildlife Ordinance. 21. The Applicant shall mitigate for PM -10 as proposed in the application by 1) providing a fleet of five (5) bicycles for use by guests and employees, by 2) providing a shuttle to and from the airport on demand of guests, 3) by providing free bus passes to lodge employees, and by 4) providing a fleet of at least two (2) hybrid vehicles for use by guests and employees. 22. All landscaping in the public right -of -way shall meet the requirements set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 21.20, Trees and Landscaping on Public Right -of -Way. Any landscaping in the public right -of -way shall be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall also obtain a revocable encroachment license from the City Engineering Department prior to installation of any landscaping or improvements in the public right -of -way. 23. The Applicant shall install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any trees to be saved. a. The City Forester or his/her designee must inspect this fence before any construction activities commence. b. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment, construction backfill, foot or vehicular traffic shall be allowed within the fenced drip line. 24. Each owner of an estate shall have an undivided interest in the common recreational areas within the facility. t^1 INI II 498441 i 10IIIIVIII IIIIII IIII IIIIIII �I IIIIIIIIIII III lilt IN 1111 00 0008 /20 ®0 0.9 25. The Applicant shall adequately mitigate for employee generation by providing affordable housing mitigation for at least 2.35 FTEs in the form of constructing two (2) deed restricted units (two 2- bedroom units) on -site, which will provide mitigation for 4.5 FTEs. The required employee housing mitigation shall be completely satisfied in the manner specified herein prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the proposed development. 26. The Applicant shall install two (2) ADA accessible sidewalk ramps. One ramp shall be constructed from the sidewalk onto Monarch Street and the other ramp shall be constructed from the sidewalk onto Durant Avenue. The applicant shall install sidewalk, curb, and gutter that meet the City Engineer's required specifications along Monarch Street and Durant Avenue prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. A minimum radius of twenty-five (25) feet from the flowline of the comer shall be maintained at Durant Avenue and Monarch Street. If the applicant cannot provide 'a radius of twenty-five (25) feet from the flowline of the comer because they wish to maintain the existing Pine tree, then the applicant shall provide the largest radius possible without damaging the tree. The applicant shall also reconstruct the alley driveway pan at the east end of the alley. 27. The Applicant shall not install a char broiler on the rooftop patio. 28. The Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician to determine if the existing transformer has sufficient capacity for the Dancing Bear Development. If a new transformer is required, the applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation. The applicant shall provide an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the new transformer. 29. The Applicant shall sign a shared sewer service line agreement prior to building permit issuance. 30. The Applicant shall sign two (2) of the surface parking spaces that are accessed off the alley as thirty (30) minute parking for use by guests for the purpose of checking in. 31. The Applicant shall provide priority to the occupant(s) of the affordable housing units, for the use of four (4) of the on -site parking spaces. In the event that the occupant(s) of the affordable housing units do not own cars or desire use of the parking spaces, the parking spaces shall remain available for the general use of the lodge guests. r10�% A"1 r'1 �' � 498441 098 I ��I COUNTY � CO R 56. 00 6 %98 /0 0.00 0: 32. The Applicant shall pay the applicable fee in -lieu of school land dedication as determined by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer for the Affordable Housing Units prior to building permit issuance. 33. The affordable housing units shall be deed restricted at the Category 2 rental rate, but since the units are for the use of the lodge, income and asset restrictions shall be waived. Further, the Applicant shall meet with the Housing Office Staff prior to the completion of the project to establish mutually acceptable lease terms for employees whose units are attached to the business. 34. As volunteered, the Applicant shall convey an undivided fractional interest (one -tenth of one percent) in the ownership of the deed restricted employee housing units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for the purposes of complying with the Colorado Supreme Court Decision regarding rent control legislation. To satisfy the rent control issue, the Applicant may submit an alternative option acceptable to the City Attorney. 35.. The Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and City of Aspen from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership in the deed restricted affordable housing units. 36. All unsold timeshare units that are not used by the Applicant for exchange, marketing or promotional purposes shall be made available for short-term rent until purchased. This condition shall be included in the PUD and Subdivision Agreements to be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 37. Nothing in the timeshare documents shall prohibit short-term rental or occupancy of the units. It is the intent of this condition that the non -deed restricted units shall be available for short-term rental purposes when not occupied by the purchaser or its guests or utilized for exchange programs. 38. The final PUD plans shall contain a parking ramp width of at least twenty - one (21) feet. 39. The Applicant shall submit all timeshare documents and disclosure statements to the City Attorney for review prior to their recordation at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 40, The City of Aspen Finance Department shall conduct an annual audit of the sales tax revenues that the City collects from the Dancing Bear Lodge over its first five (5) years of operation, to determine if the projected IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIhIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIII Page: 984 10:09A :�6ILVIA 6pVi8'01WIN "0Ul TV 00- _. R 33.00 D.,0.00 revenues are accurate. , The Applicant shall cooperate with the Finance Department in its annual audit efforts. 41. Any conversion to the use of the restaurant area, shall require approval. of a PUD amendment. 42. , The Applicant shall install a non - reflective coating or use non- reflective glass on the glass gazebo to reduce outward glare as much as possible. 43. The Applicant shall install opaque window coverings in the glass gazebo. 44. The Applicant shall pay the applicable Park Development Impact Fees to be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer for the creation of new lodging and residential bedrooms prior to building permit issuance. Section 3• This Ordinance shall not effect any 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• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 23rd day of June, 2003, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, and continued to July 28, 2003. Section 6: A continued public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 28's day of July, 2003, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, and continued to August 11, 2003. Section 7: A continued public hearing on the ordinance was held on the l ls' day of August, 2003, in the City Council Clambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of May, 2003. Helen Kalin anderud, or V Attest: IIIIIII� DAVIS IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 084431 TKIN COUNTY co R ,� 2004 1O,00A 0 0.00 Kathryn S. , City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote of three to two (3 -2), this l ld' day of August, 2003. Attest: w Helen Xalin*K1 Mayor Kathryn S. K , City Clerk Approved as to form: Jolin P. Worcester, City Attorney r - -, I IIIIIII �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 0984 02 10:13A 6ILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO Rho .00 D 0.00 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) & SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT FOR THE DANCING BEAR LODGE PROJECT THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of , 200. between MSE ASPEN HOLDINGS, LTD, a Colorado Limited Partnership, (Michael S. Egan, President, MSE Aspen Holdings, Inc., as General Partner) (the "Owners ") and THE CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation (the "City'). RECITALS: WHEREAS, the Owners own that certain real property (the "Property") known as the Dancing Bear Lodge and formerly known as the Aspen Manor Lodge located at 411 South Monarch Street (Parcel Identification Number 2735- 182 -19 -002) in the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, legally described as: Lots P, Q, R, and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Property is being redeveloped by the Owners as follows, where said redevelopment is hereinafter referred to as the "Project ": • The twenty-three (23) existing, outdated rooms will be replaced with nine (9) three - bedroom lodging units, where each lodging unit includes a one - bedroom lock -off, providing a total of eighteen (18) units. It will also include two (2) two- bedroom employee housing units on the ground floor. In total, the redeveloped structure will include three subgrade levels, three stories above grade, and a roof -top gazebo, as follows: • The three sub -grade levels accommodate a floor of guest and service facilities (such as, but not limited to, a computer/library room, a theater, television and game rooms, restrooms, an office, a housekeeping staging area, and various storage facilities), a floor of parking, and a floor of storage with a conference room; • The ground level includes one (1) three - bedroom undone- bedroom lock -off unit, and two (2) two - bedroom employee dwelling units, as well as a lobby with a front desk check -in area, an office and operations area, and a lounge/bar -type facility; • The second and third floors will each include four (4) three - bedroom units, where each of these four (4) units includes a one- bedroom lock -off unit; and, The centered fourth floor gazebo structure of approximately 1,580 square feet to house J IIIIIIIIIIII�NIIIIIIIIIII�II�ILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 498442 019:t3A SILVIA mechanical equipment and guest facilities such as, but not limited to, restrooms and an exercise room. WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2003 ( "Ordinance "), the City granted Rezoning to Lodge - Tourist Residential with Lodge Preservation and Planned Unit Development overlays (L- TR/LP/PUD), Minor Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Timeshare, Mountain View Plane, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for Lodge Preservation and Affordable Housing, approval for the Project; and, WHEREAS, the City and the Owners wish to enter into a PUD and Subdivision Improvements Agreement for the Project; and, WHEREAS, Owners have submitted to the City for approval, execution and recordation, a Final PUD Plan and Final Plat for the Project (collectively, the "Plat ") and the City agrees to approve, execute and record the Plat at Owners' expense on the agreement of the Owners to the matters described herein, subject to the provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen (the "Code "), the Ordinance, and other applicable rules and regulations; and, WHEREAS, the Owners are willing to enter into such agreement with the City and to provide assurances to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and the approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat for recordation by the City, it is agreed as follows: 1. Description of Project. Refer to the second "Whereas" statement. PUD Dimensional Requirements. As set forth in Condition 4, Section 2 of the Ordinance, the following dimensional requirements were approved by the City as part of the Project, are shown on the Final PUD Plan, and shall be printed on all final building permit plan sets: a. Minimum Lot Size: 6,000 square feet. b. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit: No requirement. C. Maximum Allowable Density: One lodge or residential bedroom per 380 square feet of lot area. d. Minimum Lot Width: 60 feet. e. Minimum Front Yard (East Durant): 8 feet for the main structure, and 0 (zero) feet for small architectural wall shown on Final PUD Plan. f. Minimum Side Yard: 5 feet for the main structure, 3 feet for architectural overhangs and columns, and 0 (zero) feet for stairs, planter boxes, and walkway defining walls. g. Minimum Rear Yard: 1 foot. h. Maximum Site Coverage: No requirement. i. Maximum Height: 46 feet and 6 inches from existing grade to the top of the fourth floor elevator shaft. j. Minimum Distance Between Buildings: No requirement. IIII 3 of IIIIIII VIII IInI IIIIIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII, 6984/2004 e It SILVIR DRV [� 'dITKrN k. Minimum Percent Open Space: 9 percent. 1. Trash Access Area: 35 square feet, plus loading area. m. Allowable External Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 2.98:1. n. Minimum Off - Street Parking Spaces: 0.67 spaces per bedroom (21 spaces for 31 bedrooms, including the four employee housing bedrooms). Acceptance of the Plat. Upon execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the City agrees to approve and execute the Plat for the Project submitted herewith, and which conforms to the Final PUD Plan and Plat requirements of the Code and the Ordinance.. The City agrees to accept such Plat for recording in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon Owners' payment of the recordation fee. If the approved Final PUD Plans change subsequent to this approval, a complete set of revised plans shall be provided to the Engineering and Community Development Departments for review and evaluation. 4. Develonrrlent Requirements. The following development requirements will be satisfied by Owners pursuant to the Ordinance. a. Employee Housing. The Project is required to adequately mitigate for employee generation by providing deed restricted employee housing for at least 2.35 full-time equivalent employees (FTEs). The Project includes two (2) two- bedroom deed restricted employee housing units, limited to occupancy by employees of the Dancing Bear Lodge. The units need not meet the minimum net livable square footage requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines (the Guidelines) in effect at the time of building permit issuance, but must be deed restricted at the Category 2 rental rate as described in the Guidelines then in effect; however, since the units are to be used only by employees of the lodge itself, income and asset restrictions are waived. Owners shall complete and record the deed restrictions prior to applying for building permits to construct such units. Further, the Owners shall meet with the Housing Office staff prior to the completion of the Project to establish mutually acceptable lease terms for employees whose units are attached to the business. The two (2) employee units provide housing credit for 4.5 FTEs, which is 2.15 FTEs more than required. In an effort to be consistent with Section 38 -12 -301, C.R.S., and the Colorado Supreme Court decision on the Town of Telluride v. Lot Thirty -Four Venture L.L.C. (Case No. 98 -5C -547, decided June 5, 2000), Owners desire to grant to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) an undivided one -tenth of one percent (0.1 %) ownership interest in the above - described employee housing units of the Project. With the APCHA consent to accepting an interest in the property, the Owners agree to indemnify and hold harmless for any claims, liability, fees, or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the affordable housing units. Conveyance of the hereinabove described ownership interest from Owners to the APCHA shall take place prior to or concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the units and after said units have been rendered capable of separate conveyance by way of condominium map or the similar (as described in paragraph 5, below). The APCHA shall not be entitled to the payment of monies upon sale © 'NI IHp' 4 of It (IIIIII VIII IIIIII IIII IIIIIII IIII VIII III VIII III 16I 00�98D 04 10:13A SILVIA 0 or rental at any time of any residential units in the Project, nor shall the APCHA be entitled to derive any economic benefit by virtue of its undivided interest in the Project. Owner reserves the right to submit an alternative option, subject to review and acceptance by the City Attorney, to satisfy the rent control issue. b. Wastewater and Surface Drainage. The site development will meet the runoff design standards of the Aspen Municipal Code at Section 26.580.020(3)(6). Full soils reports, drainage plans, and erosion and sediment control plans for both during and after construction, will be submitted for review by the Engineering Department as part of the building permit application. The drainage and erosion control plan shall be prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, and said plan shall demonstrate maintenance of sediment and debris on -site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is necessary, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A two -year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. Foundation drainage systems must be separate from site storm drainage systems. Rain and snow melt runoff must be detained and routed on -site. These facilities must be shown on the drainage plans and submitted for approval as part of the application for building permit. The drainage and erosion control plans shall prevent mud from getting tracked into the streets and shall demonstrate that roof drainage will not be discharged onto the sidewalk or into drain chases through the sidewalk. There shall be no clear water connections such as roof drains, foundation drains, or storm water connections to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) sewage lines. C. Building Permit Plan Requirements. In addition to such requirements enumerated elsewhere herein and otherwise required by the City of Aspen Building Department, the following information shall be submitted as part of the building permit application: I . A copy of the Ordinance; construction dust and noise mitigation plan; 2. A list of all conditions of approval associated with the Project printed on the cover page of the building permit plans set; a completed tap permit for service with the ACSD; 3. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off -site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees; 4. A detailed ventilation plan of the parking garage ventilation system prepared by an engineer that specializes in the design of ventilation and heating systems; 5. A fugitive dust control plan which includes proposed construction fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads, construction speed limits, and other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line; 6. A detailed kitchen plan for approval by the City Environmental Health Department; and, 7. A study performed by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer demonstrating how the it IIIIIIIIIIII�f lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIII er8 200,4 10:13A SILVIA DAVIS - P1TK1N'COLNTY CO - R 50.00 0 0.00 required excavation of the site may be performed without damaging adjacent structures and/or streets. If the applicant utilizes soil pins to stabilize excavation cuts, the applicant shall be required to provide a financial assurance in an amount to be determined by the Community Development Engineer. The City Engineering Department strongly prefers that the applicants use soil hardening techniques rather than soil pins to stabilize the excavation cuts. d. Building Permit Issuance Requirements. In addition to such requirements enumerated elsewhere herein and otherwise required by the City of Aspen Building Department, the following shall be provided prior to issuance of any building permits: 1. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. 2. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to such agreement 3. Owners shall sign a shared sewer service line agreement with the ACSD. C. Utility Connections. Owners shall comply with ACSD rules and regulations; if new sewer lines are required, then existing services must be excavated in the alley and disconnected at the main sewer line. Owners shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Owners shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician to determine if the existing transformer has sufficient capacity for the Project; if a new transformer is required, Owners shall provide for a new transformer, its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation, and an easement shall be provided to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the new transformer. In general, all utility meters and service connection points will be accessible to service personnel in the completed project and will not be obstructed by garbage or recycling containers, other structures or vegetation. Any necessary and new utility easements, required for surface utilities such as a pedestal or other above - ground equipment, shall be shown on the plan set submitted for building permits. The Owners shall install and replace utility service lines and appurtenances, as required, to the standards of the utility provider. The costs of any necessary upgrades to existing utility lines, systems, and/or facilities attributable to the Project will be home by the Owners. The Owners will use good faith efforts to not disrupt utility service to adjacent properties during construction. f. Fire Protection. Owners shall install an adequate fire alarm system throughout the structure to the extent required by the Fire Marshal. Owners shall also install a fire sprinkler system and fire extinguishers that meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal. Standpipes shall be installed within the stairwells. In addition, the water service connection to the sprinklers must provide an adequate flow of water to eliminate the need for a fire pump. g. Construction Management. Mud shall not be tracked onto City streets during demolitions. uu IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIILe 6984020io:iaa A washed rock or other style mud rack shall be installed during construction as a requirement of the City of Aspen Streets Department. Construction materials shall not be stored in or on the public rights -of -way unless a temporary encroachment license is granted by the City Engineer. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and between the hours of 7: 00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on all other days. All City noise ordinances shall be abided by. A full set of construction management plans will be submitted by the Owners to the City as part of the building permit application and said management plan will include a noise, dust control, and construction traffic and construction parking management plans addressing at least the following: (a) definition of construction debris hauling routes and anticipated impacts on local streets; and, (b) construction parking mitigation where, except for essential trade trucks, no personal trucks are to be parked on public streets around the site, and shuttling in of personnel from the airport parking area is encouraged. h. Future Improvement District(s). Owners agree to join any future improvement district(s) formed for the purpose of constructing public improvements which benefit the property under a fair share assessment formula. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any part of the Project, Owners agree to sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement and pay any applicable recording fees associated therewith. Lighting. Any and all outdoor lighting shall comply with the applicable portions of Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the Aspen Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. Owners shall install anon- reflective coating or use non - reflective glass on the fourth floor glass gazebo to reduce outward glaze as much as possible, and opaque window coverings shall be installed inside the glass gazebo. j. Work In Rights- Of -Way. Owners shall obtain a revocable encroachment license from the City Engineering Department prior to commencing any landscaping or improvements in the public right -of -way. With regard to excavation, water taps, landscaping, sidewalk, and roadway improvements in public rights -of -way, the following shall also be required: 1. Owners shall submit financial assurance in an amount and form acceptable to the City Engineer and City Water Department Director for excavation in the public right -of -way. Owners shall also schedule the abandonment of the existing water tap prior to requesting -a new water tap. 2. All landscaping in the public right -of -way shall meet the requirements set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 21.20, Trees and Landscaping on Public Right -of -Way. Any landscaping in the public right -of -way shall be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. 3. Owners shall install two (2) ADA accessible sidewalk ramps. One ramp shall be constructed from the sidewalk onto Monarch Street and the other ramp shall be constructed from the sidewalk onto Durant Avenue. Owners shall install sidewalk, curb, and gutter that meet the City Engineer's required specifications along Monarch Street and Durant Avenue prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. A minimum radius of twenty -five (25) feet from the flowline of the comer shall be maintained at Durant Avenue and Monarch Street. If Owners cannot provide a radius of twenty -five (25) feet from the flowline of the corer because they wish to maintain the existing Pine tree, then Owners shall provide the largest radius possible without damaging the tree. NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIilllll page: 8 eWiaa SILVIA OAV16 PITKIN COUNTY CO R 66.0E 4. Owners shall reconsTr—=T e a ey driveway pan at the east end of the alley. k. Trees, Protection, Removal Permits, and Planting Plans. In the event required and prior to building permit application, a tree removal permit must be obtained from the Parks Department for any tree(s) that is/are to be removed or relocated. Owners shall install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any trees to be saved, and with regard to such tree saving fences: (a) The City Forester or his/her designee must inspect this fence before any construction activities commence; and (b) No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment, construction backfill, foot or vehicular traffic shall be allowed within the fenced drip line. Parking and PM10 Mitigation. Owners shall mitigate for PM10 by 1) providing a fleet of five (5) bicycles for use by guests and employees, by 2) providing a shuttle to and from the airport on demand of guests, 3) by providing free bus passes to lodge employees, and by 4) providing a fleet of at least two (2) hybrid vehicles for use by guests and employees. Satisfaction of these requirements shall be sufficient PMI 0 mitigation to satisfy all associated requirements of the Environmental Health Department. Two (2) of the surface parking spaces that are accessed off the alley shall be signed as thirty (30) minute parking for use by guests for the purpose of checking in. Priority to the occupant(s) of the affordable housing units shall be provided for use of four (4) of the on- site parking spaces; in the event that the occupant(s) of the affordable housing units do not own cars or desire use of the parking spaces, the parking spaces shall remain available for the general use of the Project's other occupants or guests. The ramp providing access to the subgrade parking garage shall have a width of at least twenty -one (2 1) feet. m. Water and Sewer. In addition to all other water and sewer related requirement enumerated herein, the following shall be required. Owners shall provide the Water Department with a detailed plan for relocating the fire hydrant that demonstrates that the water mains will be shut down during the relocation of the hydrant; this plan shall be approved by the Water Department prior to relocation of the hydrant. Owners shall install an oil and grease separator in the restaurant/bar that meets the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's regulations. The applicant shall also install an oil and sand separator for the indoor parking facilities. n. Asbestos. Owners shall notify the State prior to remodel, expansion or demolition of any buildings, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc., and a licensed asbestos inspector must conduct an inspection. If there is no asbestos, the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, a state licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove it. Owners shall report these findings to the Environmental Health Department and Building Department prior to the issuance of demolition and building permits. C IIU''IIIIIIIhIII III lilt 111111111111 eiea/20010:13R SIVI DAVIS II PITKIN COUNTY c0 R 30.00 0 0.90 J o. Pools and Ste. All design, installation, and maintenance of the pools and spas must comply with the State of Colorado's "Swimming Pool and Mineral Bath Regulations." p. Food and Alcohol Service. Owners shall obtain a Colorado Retail Food Establishment License prior to serving guests food that has been prepared on -site. Owners shall also obtain a liquor license prior to serving alcoholic beverages. Installation of a char broiler on the rooftop patio shall be prohibited. Any conversion to the use of the restaurant area shall require approval of a PUD amendment. q. Fees. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all applicable tap fees, impact fees and building permit fees shall be paid. Cash -in -lieu of school land dedication shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance, the amount of said fees shall be determined by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer, and fees shall be assessed only for the affordable housing units being built. Park development impact fees are due and payable to the City of Aspen at the time of building permit issuance, and said payments shall be made on a proportional basis to the net number of bedrooms (lodging and residential) being constructed. Twenty -three (23) lodging bedrooms exist on the Property for purposes of calculating the net number of new bedrooms being developed in the Project. The park development impact fees due shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer. Both the cash -in -lieu of school land dedication and the park development impact fees shall be assessed based on the adopted standards/rates in effect at the time of payment. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or the Park Development Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to such agreement. r. Timeshare. Owners shall submit all timeshare documents and disclosure statements to the City Attorney for review prior to their recordation at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. Each owner of an estate shall have an undivided interest in the common recreational areas within the facility. All unsold timeshare units that are not used by Owners for exchange, marketing or promotional purposes shall be made available for short-term rent until purchased. Nothing in the timeshare documents shall prohibit short-term rental or occupancy of the units; it is the intent of this condition that the non -deed restricted units shall be available for short-term rental purposes when not occupied by the purchaser or its guests or utilized for exchange programs. It ' IIIIII VIII III I II I IIIIII III IIIIII II VIII IIII IIII 00/00 200 10 :13A SILVIA DNVIB PITKIN COUNTY 00 - R 00.00 D 0.00 S. Sales Tax Revenue Audits. The City of Aspen Finance Department shall conduct an annual audit of the sales tax revenues that the City collects from the Project over its first five (5) years of operation, to determine if the projected revenues are accurate. Owners shall cooperate with the Finance Department in its annual audit efforts. 5. Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act CC( IOA). As soon as construction of the Project allows, Owners will likely need to submit the Project to a plan for condominiumization created pursuant to Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) in order to facilitate the conveyance of fractional shares and an ownership interest in the employee housing units to the APCHA. The City agrees to process for approval and for recordation a condominium map prepared in accordance with the Code and CCIOA. As the Owners have provided employee housing pursuant to the Code, the Project is exempt from paying the Affordable Housing Impact fee. 6. Recordation. Pursuant to Section 27.480.070(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code, once fully executed, this Agreement and the Final Plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the Owners to record the plat within one - hundred eighty (180) days following approval by City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration and approval of the plat by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will be required before its acceptance and recording, unless an extension or waiver is granted by for a showing of good cause. The one - hundred eighty (180) day recordation requirement contained herein shall not apply to the recording of condominium maps, or declarations or any other documents required to be recorded to accomplish a condominiumization in the City of Aspen. 7. Financial Security for Public Improvements in the R.O.W. In order to secure the performance of the construction and installation of improvements in the public R.O.W. including landscaping, the Owner shall provide a letter of credit, cash or other guarantees in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project. The amount of the required financial security shall be 125% of the estimated cost of the improvements in the R.O.W. The guarantee documents shall give the City the unconditional right, upon clear and unequivocal default by the Owners in its obligations to complete the public improvements, to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such public improvements, or to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such public improvements. If the improvements have not been completed to the satisfaction of the City within one year, the City may require the Owner to adjust the amount of the financial security for inflation. As portions of the civil site improvements in the R.O.W. are completed, the City shall inspect them, and upon approval and acceptance, shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated costs for that portion of the improvements, except that ten percent of the estimated costs of the improvements shall be withheld for the benefit of the City until (i) all of the improvements have been inspected and accepted by the City, (ii) a two -year maintenance 1111111 VIIII�III IIIIIII�II IIII ICIIII IIIIIIIII III III496442 0f 103138 bond has been provided by the Contractor, and (iii) as- builts provided (if required). As portions of the landscaping improvements in the R.O.W. are completed, the City shall inspect them, and upon approval and acceptance, shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated costs for that portion of the improvements, except for thirty-five percent (35 %) of the estimated costs of the improvements. Of this thirty-five percent, ten percent (10 %) shall be released by the City after (i) all of the landscaping improvements have been inspected and accepted by the City, and (ii) as- builts provided (if required). The remaining twenty - five percent (25 %) of the financial security shall be retained by the City until the landscaping improvements have been maintained in a satisfactory condition for two (2) years. In the event that any existing municipal improvements are damaged during Project construction, on the request of the City Engineer, a bond or other suitable security for the repair of the improvements shall be provided by the Owner to the City. 8. Notices. Notices to the parties shall be sent by United States certified mail to the addresses set forth below or to any other address which the parties may substitute in writing. To the Owners: MSE Aspen Holdings, Inc. c/o Michael S. Egan, President 110 SE 6th Street, 29th Floor Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 With Copy To: Herbert S. Klein, Esq. 201 N. Mill Street, Suite 203 Aspen, CO 81611 To City of Aspen: City Manger 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 With Copy To: City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 9. 13indin Effect. The provisions of this Agreement shall run with and constitute a burden on the land on which the Project is located and shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the Owners' and the City's successors, personal representatives and assigns. 10. Amendment. The Agreement may be altered or amended only by written instrument executed by the parties. ,t y' I 44844 INIIIIII IINIIIII1111111IIN1��II1NI�IN�iNN��eep ee�mt�aR 11. Severability. If any of the provisions of this Agreement are determined to be invalid, it shall not affect the remaining provisions hereof. ATTEST: Sri • - APPROVED AS TO FORM: ohri orcester, City Attorney OWNERS: STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) THE CITY OF ASPLN,,A munS 2ajcorporation L / men§% Helen Klanderud, Mayor MSE ASPEN HOLDINGS, INC. By: Ai'llvIlh 1 9/1'7 Eg res5 t The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of�, 200_�—by Helen Klanderud, Mayor, and Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: STATE OF FLORIDA ) )ss. COUNTY OF BROWARD ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 7' day of 44y 200� by Michael S. Egan, as President of MSE Aspen Holdings, Inc. Witness my hand and official seal. 4xt' My commission expires: Adj. gf,ao0b MARYBETFI HONE' 20419aw9mveh N�r PubBc ' simu a FWW No Publ' *CMr*81 nE*W Aug 4, 2008 eaz\D Bear Agreement Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 Councilwoman Richard moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2003, with the provision that the neighbors be consulted at the time of the soils survey with the engineer and that the fire marshal look at fire and safety access during any demolition and excavation time as well as the final development plan and that a building permit will not be issued for this unless the Residences application has been withdrawn Peterson asked what consulting with the neighbors on the soils survey means. Councilwoman Richards said the neighbors would like to give background and history when the soils study is being looked at. Vann said the applicants are required to submit a soils evaluation to be reviewed by city staff. Vann said the condition states the applicants will comply.with the recommendation of the soils analysis. Julie Ann Woods, community development department, said if the neighbors are not "consulted ", where does that leave staff. Peterson said when the soils study is submitted, they will give the Falenders a copy. Peterson said he is not comfortable with the language "consulted ". Councilwoman Richards withdrew her motion. Councilman Semrau moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2003, on second reading with the condition that prior to the issuance of a building permit or demolition permit, the application for the Residences at the Little Nell will be withdrawn and that the Falenders will be provided with a copy of the soils study and invited to comment; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote: Richards, yes; Torre, yes; Paulson, no; Semrau, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #29, SERIES OF 2003 — Dancing Bear PUD James Lindt, community development department, told Council this is a lodge preservation PUD to redevelop a site at 411 South Monarch street. Council is the final reviewing body of all land use requests for this site. Lindt showed Council where the site is, just west of Wagner park. The site is 12,000 square feet and is zoned LTR. There is currently a one -story lodge building with 23 bedrooms. This building has been vacant for the last 5 years. Lindt said the proposal is to demolish the existing lodge and replace it with an 11 -unit time share lodge of 28 bedrooms. Each unit will have lock off capabilities, 15 Reeular Meetine Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 Lindt reviewed each floor of the proposal. The first floor has a lobby and check in area access from South Monarch street; a lounge/bar with patio seating; one 1400 square foot, 2 bedroom lodge unit; 2 affordable housing units of 2 bedrooms. The second floor contains 4 lodge units, two 1400 square feet 2 bedroom units; two 2800 square feet 3 bedroom units. The third, floor contains 3 2800 square foot 3 bedroom units. The fourth floor has 3 three bedroom units and a recessed patio. The fifth floor has a glass gazebo, which would have a hot tub and exercise area. Lindt said the applicant proposes 3 below grade levels. The first level has a garage access accessed from the alley, as well as a games and recreation area, and a storage area. There are 24 parking spaces proposed on site; 5 spaces at grade on the applicant's property. The second floor below grade contains the majority of the garage. The third floor below grade contains more storage for the owner's personal goods, mechanical area and conference room. Lindt said the timeshare will be 8 shares per unit, 58 totals estates. The FAR is 3.25:1 and a height of 57 feet to the midpoint of the gazebo. Lindt told Council staff feels this is an appropriate use for the site. In the past this has been used as a lodge. This project will bring vitality to a very important corner in town. The applicant has proposed a good deal of their affordable housing mitigation on site. The applicant has proposed greater than .7/lodge bedroom of parking spaces, which is required by code. Lindt noted one concern is the height, which is proposed at 57 feet as measured by the land use code. Other lodges in that area are the St. Regis, which is 50 to 60 feet, the Mountain Chalet is low 50's. Three P &Z members felt the height was too extreme for the 28 feet as allowed in the LTR zone. Lindt told Council the upper floors are recessed to create a wedding cake effect, which helps lessen the mass. The building has been stepped down to the west towards the townhomes. Lindt said staff feels the massing is appropriate with the exception of the turret. Lindt told Council the applicant proposed to use two spaces on Monarch as loading zones. Staff does not agree a lodge of 11 units needs a loading zone and added a condition that two alley spaces be signed as check -in parking. The third issue is the financial impact analysis to compare the proposed timeshare lodge with the tax revenues that would have been gained through lodge use. Lindt said the applicant's financial impact analysis shows there 16 Regular Meeting Asoen City Council June 23 2003 would not be a tax revenue loss through this fractional fee change. The city's finance director, Paul Menter, commented the projected nightly rental rates are too high and the analysis should be redone with a lower rate. Menter requested a condition that the city be able to do an audit after the lodge is operating. Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, reiterated this site has been sitting vacant for several years and has been years since it has contributed to Aspen's bed base. Haas said a boarded up building is sending an antithetical message to tourists regarding the economy and the vitality of lodges on the fringe of the commercial core., Haas told Council most potential purchasers of this property wanted to build residential townhomes. This owner is interested in developing something that will contribute to the vitality and economic sustainability of the town. The applicant proposes two above grade employee housing units. This development should raise occupancy levels and should attract new visitors to Aspen. Haas noted there are trash compactors and recycling facilities access off the alley. There will be a decrease of 1 lodge unit from the Aspen Manor; however, the bedrooms will increase from 23 to 28. There will be an increase of leasable commercial space on the property including a sidewalk patio cafe on the corner: Haas told Council the applicants propose to house 4.5 employees and the remaining fraction of employee will be mitigated by cash -in -lieu. The management and operation of the lodge will be done with an existing lodge or with a management company. Haas said a strong architectural statement is important on this corner, right across from a large park. The perceived mass of the structure is broken up by different forms and modules, changes in exterior building materials, balconies, different window forms and shapes, and stepping the building back. Haas said they have tried for a classic wedding cake style building, the structure steps down in height to the west and the southwest corner of the lodge is only 25 feet above grade. The west side of the lodge is 3 stories as is the northwest and northeast corners of the building. The midsection of the building is 4 stories. The 5th story gazebo sits in the center of the building. The building height has been lowered and the mass reduced through P &Z review. Haas told Council the height at the corner of Monarch and Durant is less than 32 feet without the turret. 17 Regular Meeting Asuen City Council June 23, 2003 Haas said the height of the structure varies depending from where it is measured. The fluctuations are a function of the topography of the site. The highest measured height on a public right -of -way is at the northwest'comer along the alley and it is 39'9"; the southeast corner 31'6" exclusive of the turret. The height is the gazebo is mitigated by using glass, by the stepping back of the surrounding levels and the fact it is setback 27 feet from Durant Avenue. This should not shadow streets or surrounding properties. The Wheeler Opera House view plane of Aspen mountain would not be compromised by this development. The overall height of Dancing Bear is lower than that of the St. Regis. The Mountain Chalet addition was approved at 52 feet to the midpoint of a pitched roof and allows 5 stories in that building. Haas said given the site's location and proximity to downtown and the transportation center, there should belittle need for cars. There are 24 on- site parking spaces. The applicant commits to encouraging employees and guests to use alternative transportation. A fleet of bicycles will be kept on site for guests and employees. 'There will be provision for airport shuttle by the applicant or by contract with another lodge who does airport shuttle. The applicant has committed to keeping a small fleet of hybrid vehicles for use by guests and employees. Haas said they hope to obtain LEEDS certification, which is a national green building program, and to come as close to possible of the gold level. Haas summarized this is will replace an eyesore, will add hot beds, and will revitalize the Durant/Monarch intersection. The applicants hope to set a precedent for green building; they plan of housing 4.5 PTEs on site. There will be over $1 million in direct tax generation in the first 5 years of operation. The project provides community facilities, is self sufficient for parking and storage and the project furthers the AACP goals with respect to small lodges, affordable housing, economic sustainability, growth and the environment. David Brown, architect, went over the materials and the architecture of the proposed building. Brown told Council they went through the guidelines in the fractional timeshare ordinance and have tried to incorporate everything the ordinances envisions. Mayor Klanderad opened the public hearing. E Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 Cliff Weiss said this building is out of scale for the neighborhood. Weiss said he does not feel this size building will contribute to the community. Roger Haneman, P &Z member, said this project will bring more benefits to the community than the one Council just approved. Haneman said these applicants made a great effort to meet the requests of P &Z. Dale Paas, Limelite Lodge, said he is concerned about the economic viability of the base of Aspen Mountain; however, he is very concerned about the economic sustainability of the Limelite Lodge. Paas said a massive building of this height and bulk will negatively affect the ability of the Limelite to rent rooms. Paas said this building does not blend with the neighborhood. Paas requested Council only approve 28. foot high building as allowed by the code. Stan Hajenga, manager Mountain Chalet, presented a letter from the owners of the Snow Queen Lodge stating they are against the proposed height, which goes against the principles of planning in this area. Hajenga applauded that someone is trying to develop this comer. Hajenga said the city needs to look at a system that allows a building to fall into disrepair for 5 years. Hajenga said the proposed height will affect many neighbors and many businesses. Hajenga said when the Mountain Chalet addition went through the process, they had to meet the view plane requirements. This building does not meet the view plane requirements. Hajenga said he would like to see this corner redeveloped; however, this proposal is beyond the scale and height called for. Debbie Falender said she reviewed the PUD and other land use code ordinances. The PUD ordinances say height, mass, parking, and density should respect the underlying zoning. The underlying zoning here is 1:1 and the FAR for this proposed project is 3.25:1. The PUD ordinance also states that the property shall be clustered to preserve significant open space. Ms. Falender noted that does not mean a building should be built right up to the borders of the property. Ms. Falender said this is too big for town. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards said she appreciates all the work that has. been done; however, she cannot approve this plan. Councilwoman Richards noted there is discussion in the infill about creating more view planes and 19 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 one of Shadow Mountain and this will block the view of Shadow Mountain. The building is taller than the surrounding pine trees. Councilwoman Richards agreed she would like to see redevelopment on this lot; however, this is overreaching. Councilwoman Richards said only 9% open space may work for a one story building but it does not work for a 5 story building. Councilwoman Richards noted part of a PUD process is to look at a greater public benefit. This proposal does not add any extra affordable housing out of 36,000 square feet. Councilwoman Richards said this site is on the north side of Durant and has transitioned to a different neighborhood from the base of the mountain. Councilwoman Richards noted this building will be higher than the Elk's Club building. Councilwoman Richards said this is zoned LTR and one could construct 3 residential townhomes on this site, which would not contribute to the community either. Mayor Klanderud said she, too, has problems with the height, especially as it would block the view of Shadow Mountain. Mayor Klanderud said the turret makes the building interesting. Mayor Klandemd stated she would consider some height variance; however, this is much too high. Mayor Klanderud said she would prefer to see all affordable housing built rather than get cash -in -lieu for housing. Mayor Klanderud said she is concerned there are only 2 parking spaces for affordable housing. Mayor Klanderad agreed it is great something is being planned for this site. It is a critical block in Aspen. Brown said some of the benefits to the community are that this project will provide hot beds and will bring guests to Aspen with money to spend. Councilman Paulson agreed the structure is took tall. Councilman Paulson said he likes the gazebo. Councilman Paulson said he would like to see the building shrunk. Councilman Paulson asked about the trees on site. Brown said they have met with city staff, who have identified 2 or 3 significant trees on Durant street that should remain. The applicants will cooperate with the parks to give them what they ask for. Haas told Council the large conifers are not appropriate for pedestrian traffic as they grow all the way to the ground. The parks department is recommending trees that are more easily walked under. Councilman Paulson asked what will keep a person from buying 6 or 12 months of one unit. City Manager Steve Barwick said that is covered in the city's timeshare ordinance, which he will have to Council at their next 20 l Reeular Meetine Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 consideration of this application. Barwick said the city cannot guarantee how a building will be occupied but can guarantee that one person may not purchase all the weeks. Councilman 3emrau pointed out the infill ordinance would only allow 30 feet plus an additional 8 feet with special review and a historic TDR. Councilman Semrau said agreed this is a great project in a great location but it is too big; the height and mass are out of scale for the site. Under the PUD process, the applicant has the responsibility of proving a project is deserving of an exception. Councilman Torre asked what percentage of the total square footage is actual lodge space and what is amenities, parking, storage. Brown said it is 50% net leaseable under the LTR definition of net leasable. Councilman Torre said there seems to be a lot of amenity space built in and there may be a way to lessen that, make the units smaller, and make the project smaller. All the amenities will make guests stay on property rather than go out in town and spend money. Brown said the intent of the amenities like the game room and movie theatre is to give families things to do. Brown said without the amenities, tds is not a competitive project and would be under serious distress. Brown said there is not a square inch that could be removed without impacting the project. Mayor Klanderud noted when the Obermeyer project first came to Council, there was an outcry about the height. The design team came back with a project at the height requirement, which won broad support. Brown pointed out applicants are not allowed to talk to Council until the end of the process. It would be better to have a more collaborative process. Brown asked Council what would be the right height, the right mix, the right project. Councilman Semrau said the right use is family type lodging and the amenities are great; however, the mass, scale and height are out of character. Councilman Semrau said he feels 38 feet would be appropriate for the neighborhood. Mayor Klanderud agreed she could approve 38 feet. Mayor Klanderud said she would also like all employees housed on site. Mayor Klanderud said she likes the commitment to green development. Councilman Semrau moved to continue Ordinance #29, Series of 2003, to July 28; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. 21 0 IOIN Regular Meetine Amen City Council June 23, 2003 Councilwoman Richards moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 11 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #55, SERIES OF 2003 — Obermeyer Temporary Use Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council this temporary use request is for a real estate office to be located on the Obermeyer property. Bendon said staff does not see any issues with this request. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards moved to approve Resolution #55, Series of 2003; seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #56. SERIES OF 2003 - Mascotte Annexation John Worcester, city attorney, told Council this property is located at the base of Smuggler Mountain along Park Circle. The owner, Alain Degrave, owns lots 2 and 5 of the Aspen election subdivision, which are already in'the city. City Clerk Kathryn Koch reported the posting and publication are in order. Worcester said there is 1 /6`x' contiguity with the city and a community of interests exists. The area is capable of being integrated within the city. The property has not been subdivided into separate parcels. 100% of the property owners have consented to annexation. There are no other annexations pending. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Semrau moved to adopt Resolution #56, Series of 2003; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Councilman Paulson said he would like a neighborhood map for second reading to make sure where this is located in reference to any possible master plan for Smuggler Mountain. All in favor with the exception of Councilman Paulson, motion carried. 22 IIN Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 activities, and delete reference to conversion of lodge units, and construction management plan in #9; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote; Richards, yes; Torre, yes; Semrau, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #5. SERIES OF 2003 — Code Amendment Infill Councilman Semrau moved to continue Ordinance #5, Series of 2003, to August 25;seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. 1 11 ORDINANCE #29, SERIES OF 2003 — Dancing Bear PUD James Lindt, community development department, reminded Council at the last public hearing, they stated the proposed project was too large and too tall. The applicant will present a revised design. David Brown, representing the applicant, showed Council the current design and told them they have taken off one floor. The first two stories are of stone, stepping back onto a shingled darker floor and above that is a greenhouse, gazebo and roof. The setback is 5 feet rather than 2 feet. Brown told Council the corner facing Monarch and Durant is 31 feet to the P floor and 20'6" at the 2nd floor. At the alley for the main part of the building is 38 feet. The gazebo adds another 8 to 10 feet, which makes the building 44 feet at the midpoint of the glass shed. The top of the highest elevator shaft is 46 feet. The building elevations at the street are 34 to 31 to 34 feet. Brown showed the first project as reviewed by P &Z, the recommendation from P &Z and the current iteration. The building is greatly reduced. The project is now 9 three- bedroom suites with lock offs for 18 keys. The building as is has 23 bedrooms; this will be an increase of 3 free market bedrooms. The lower levels have not changed since the last presentation. The 2 two- bedroom employee units are the same as before and are now twice the required mitigation. All the suites range from 1700 to 2200 square feet, averaging 2,000 square feet. The bar and restaurant is smaller than before. The second floor contains 4 suites and 4 lock offs. The 3.d floor has been stepped back so each unit has its own outdoor deck. The roof has solar collectors, gardens, hot tubs and gazebo. The height of the gazebo varies 10 Reeular Meeduff Aspen Citv Council _____Iu_IL283 2003 from 43 to 45 at the highest point. Brown showed elevations from different points around the project. Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, noted the gazebo will be set back 17 feet from the Durant avenue fagade and 13 feet from Monarch street. Haas said the building is within the 38 -foot height requested by Council except for the gazebo, which is transparent and sits in the middle of the building. Haas said this feature is necessary to set this project apart from other time -share projects. Haas said the gazebo does not add to the perceived height of the building. Haas said the height measure is not as important as the qualitative measurements. The gazebo placed at the comer of Monarch and Durant would fit within the height limits but it would not be a good design. Haas reminded Council the recently approved Hyatt is 46 feet with a ground elevation higher than this site. The Mountain Chalet was approved with a 52 -foot height limit. Haas stated the applicants will make all efforts to achieve LEEDS certification and the gazebo will provide a perfect place for photovoltaic cells and capture of energy: The glass stairwell on Monarch is another location for passive solar gain for reuse. This corner needs revitalization. The project plans to add to the streetscape with the restaurant. The applicant plans to provide a hybrid vehicle for use by residents as well as bicycles. The applicant is providing 115% housing for employees when only 60% is required. Haas said they feel this will be a fiscal benefit to the city. This is a self - sufficient development for parking, affordable housing, economic sustainability and providing amenities on site. Lindt told Council staff feels this proposal meets community goals in bringing vitality to this location. The use is appropriate; this site has been tourist accommodations. The applicant has met their housing requirements. Lindt said this building is lower than other PUDs in the surrounding area. At the last meeting, Council indicated 38 feet would be appropriate on this site. Staff does not recommend asking for removal of the gazebo as it is set back far enough that it would not be a dominant feature of the building. The gazebo will be constructed out of translucent materials. Council brought up the restaurant space at the last meeting and whether it will remain that use in the future. There is a condition in the ordinance to require a PUD amendment if the owners want to convert this space from a restaurant. Lindt reminded Council at the previous meeting they indicated one parking space /affordable unit was too few. The amended ordinance 11 Regular Meeting Asuen City Council July 28 2003 requires two parking spaces per two - bedroom unit. The applicant has requested leasing parking spaces in -the public right -of -way for loading. Staff does not feel a 9 -unit lodge would require loading spaces. The city engineer is opposed to leasing spaces in the public right -of -way. Paul Menter, finance director, pointed out not all tax information is available because the Aspen Manor has not been operating for the past 5 years. Menter said the applicant's fiscal analysis meets the code requirements. Menter told Council the condition on whether a fee is owed levers on the historical occupancy rate of the hotel. The original occupancy rate was estimated at 61 %; the revised application is 51 % as attested by the previous owner. The difference is whether a fee is owed or not. Menter concluded no fee is owed. Brown agreed there appears to be no fiscal impact to the applicant and this should be a cash generator for the community. City Manager Steve Barwick suggested for the future, Council consider a minimum occupancy rate for fiscal analysis amendment to this code section. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Susan O'Neal asked about the row of evergreens on Durant. Haas said the one on the corner and one other will be preserved; the parks department has asked the other trees to be removed and replaced with more appropriate street streets. Kathy Petner, 210 East Cooper, commended the applicants for their design, for stepping the building back, for the green development, for the extra affordable housing. Ms. Petner said she is concerned about the 46- %2 feet and the precedent this will set for future developments in this area. Ms. Petner asked if the gazebo will be used at night and will be lit. Brown said it will be glass and there will be window coverings in order to make this a green project. It will be lit and will be used at night. The gazebo will be used as an exercise room, mechanical equipment and lounge. Dale Paas, Limelight Lodge, said he is very concerned about keeping the scale of the neighborhood. Paas pointed out every time this project has comeback for city review, it has been abetter project. Toni Kronberg said she is concerned about the height. Visitors like the view of the mountain. People do not want taller buildings. Ms. Kronberg said this is a special site as it allows views of Shadow Mountain from the malls and from Wagner Park. 12 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 28 2003 Mayor Klanderud entered into the record letters from Carol Saunders - White, Jim Scull, and one from Andrea Clark all concerned with the height of the project as well as light from the gazebo at night. Haas said condition #21 requires a PM10 mitigation plan to be reviewed by environmental health. Haas stated the measures they have already committed to the in the application are more than adequate and should be accepted as the PM10 mitigation plan. These measures area fleet of bicycles, hydroelectric vehicles, airport shuttle, employee bus passes, and marketing the location. These are all representations of the application. Lindt told Council environmental health staff feels the applicant has gone above and beyondPM10 mitigation. Lindt suggested the condition be amended that the applicant meets the representations of their application. Mayor Klanderud requested these representations be listed in the condition. The applicant, agreed. Haas brought up condition #31, the 4 parking spaces for affordable housing, and requested only 2 spaces be required. Haas said the applicants feel they are being penalized for providing more housing than necessary. Haas noted the memorandum states that cash -in -lieu of school dedication is not attributable to the time -share units but is for the affordable housing units. Herb Klein, representing the applicant, said they do not have a problem with the city finance department conducting an annual audit, but does have a problem that if the city finds there is a shortfall, that they be obligated to pay some impact fee as determined by Council. Klein stated there is no provision in the code for this requirement. There are no standards for this requirement and this should have some study and legislation. Menter said what staff is most interested in is collection information. Barwick suggested adding language that this condition would only apply if the city adopts code amendment within the next year. Mayor Klanderud stated she does not have a problem deleting conditions #40. Councilmembers agreed. Klein requested a change in condition #41 about a "substantial" change to the restaurant; let the community development department decide whether this is a major or minor PUD amendment. Council agreed. Mayor Klanderud said when Council has required fewer on site parking spaces because employees will not use their cars has not worked. Councilwoman Richards agreed. Councilman Semrau said in this 13 Regular Meeting • Aspen City Council July 28 2003 neighborhood, it would be a great service to have 4 parking spaces. Council agreed to require the applicant provide 4 parking spaces for the affordable housing. Councilwoman Richards said the city should not lease any spaces in the right -of -way on Monarch to this project. Councilwoman Richards pointed out this project is only providing 9% open space. Councilwoman Richards said she is concerned about reflections off the gazebo. Councilwoman Richards said she cannot accept the 4`h floor. Where the gazebo is placed does not meet what the Council intended when they said 38 feet at the highest. Councilwoman Richards said she does like the changes in massing and in material. Councilwoman Richards stated she sees a separation . between the north and south side of Durant and this structure would be setting a precedent for the south side. Councilman Torre said he is concerned that the on -site amenities will keep the guests on site rather than getting out into the community. Councilman Torre said the gazebo raises the heights beyond what Council envisioned. Councilman Torre said the project could have a hot tub and rooftop garden without the gazebo structure. Councilman Torre said he feels the applicants have worked hard on this. iteration. Councilman Semrau agreed this is an improvement and an interesting design. Councilman Semrau agreed about not leasing parking in the public right -of -way. Councilman Semrau does not support a 4" floor but does support an architectural element that makes this an extraordinary building. Eliminating the gazebo would make it a more boring building. Mayor Klanderud said she, too, is concerned about the gazebo and whether it is appropriate in this location. The light and reflection are major concerns. Mayor Klanderud questioned the excavation of 3 floors below grade. Mayor Klanderud asked if this would be in the proposed Shadow Mountain view plane. Lindt said this would probably be located within the view plane; however, it has not been drafted. Mayor Klanderud said she would rather see the hybrid vehicles eliminated. Brown said the gazebo is located away from the northwest comer because of concerns of the neighbor. The building is 38 feet at this corner and is 31 feet on the street side. Brown said the applicants feel the gazebo will make this space very special and could be used by the community for special events 14 Regrular Meeting Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 and fund raisers. Brown said the sunlight reflection will be brief. The gazebo could be wrapped in fabric to cut down on this reflection or use non- reflective glass. Councilman Semrau suggested the size of the gazebo be reduced to 1500 square feet square feet. Councilwoman Richards stated the underlying height allowed in this zone district is 28 feet and going up to 38 feet is a significant variation. Going up another 8 feet is too much; the gazebo makes it appear as a 4`s floor. Councilwoman Richards said she would not disapprove of uses on the roof but without the structure. Mayor Klanderud said this is a creative design with a good way to hide the mechanical equipment; however, she is concerned about the height. Councilman Semrau moved to continue Ordinance #29, Series of 2003, to August 11; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE 0321 SERIES OF 2003 -South Aspen Street PUD ORDINANCE #33, SERIES OF 2003 — South Aspen Alley Vacation Councilman Semrau recused himself based on owning land within 300 feet of this application. James Lindt, community development department, told Council this final PUD review is for an application from Aspen Land Fund II to construct 14 free market and 17 affordable housing units on 3 parcels of land near the intersection of South Aspen and Juan streets. Sunny Vann, representing Aspen Land Fund II, reminded Council Savanah Limited Partnership received the original conceptual approval for this piece of property in 2001. Vann said he submitted a final application in 2002. The property has been for sale and the applicants asked staff to hold the final review until final disposition of the property. Vann told Council Aspen Land Fund II acquired this property December 2002, notified the community development department and asked them to complete the final application. Vann told Council this application is identical to the conceptual application except for minor changes made in response to neighborhood concerns. Councilwoman Richards asked about the reference to the applicants wanting to build a hotel. Vann said Aspen Land Fund II purchased the property to build tourist accommodations at the base of the mountain. The applicants 15 Errin Evans From: Chris Bendon Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 10:07 AM To: Dwayne Romero; J.E. DeVilbiss; Jack Johnson; Mick Ireland; Steve Skadron Cc: Steve Barwick; John Worcester; Jim True; Jennifer Phelan; Errin Evans Subject: Dancing Bear City Council: Last week we received a few questions about the Dancing Bear development and their compliance with approvals. 1 met with the attorney for the Dancing Bear and the questions regarding the general public's ability to rent units on a short-term basis and the representations made in advertising materials. We reviewed the approvals, covenants, and the MLS listing. I also reviewed their website. The covenants specify a system for prioritizing ownership interests each year. After a particular unit's time interval is passed -up by the sequence of owner priorities, then the unit is available to all owners, after that the unit is rentable by the HOA and the HOA is obligated to make the unit available to the general public. According to the attorney, the units will be available by walking -up to the counter and phoning in and will be available thru SAS or a similar agency. The MLS listing did, at one point, indicate that the units were NOT short- termable. They corrected this and we reviewed the current MLS which now indicated that the units ARE short- termable. I did look at their website and didn't see anything that indicates really anything about short-term rentals. We did talk about the City's ability to audit performance at any point in the future and I believe they know that we'll probably check -in on them after they get up and running. My conversation with them confirmed earlier discussions between the Dancing Bear folks and Jennifer Phelan in our office and Jim True from the attorney's office. I believe they are in compliance with their approvals and are acting in good faith. And, I don't feel there is reason to prevent them from pursuing their amendment request with the P &Z (an interior change to the restaurant). Cheers, Chris Bendon, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 1 970.920.5090 www.aspenpitkin.com n From: Eben Clark [epc @kcelaw.net] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 3:20 PM To: 'Jennifer Phelan' Cc: 'Tom DiVenere' Subject: RE: Dancing Bear Clarification Attachments: DB Declaration Sections.pdf Hi Jennifer: Page 1 of 4 Tom has asked that I respond to your email below and on this issue generally. I have discussed this in the past with Joyce Algiers when she was with the City, and we met and reviewed the documents as well. I suggest that you and I get together so we can walk through the documents, and I can show you how Dancing Bear ( "1313") will satisfy all of the requirements of its approvals. In short, the Association and management of DB will control the rentals of all units, and those units will be made available to the public through the Association. To accomplish this, the Declarations for the Project and Association make all units subject to short-term rental by the Association and management, and forbid the individual owners from renting their unit themselves. I have attached hereto the pertinent provisions of the DB Declarations and have highlighted the key language. These provisions are identical to those initially submitted for City review, and similar provisions will be included in the rules and regulations. This system will allow the Association to track all available units, make those available for short term reservation or walk -in customers, and will promote orderly management of the space available. For example, it will concentrate the info on available units in one place and avoid the situation where an owner's outside rental and an "open market" rental conflict. In the short, it will most efficiently accomplish the goals of the City (short term availability and a hotel feel). The listing you are looking at shows the unit as not available for rental by the owner, because the individual buyers are not permitted to rent their units themselves. Again, only the Association and /or management has the reserved right to rent unoccupied units on a short-term basis on the open market. Unfortunately, there is no way to make this distinction in the standard MLS listing, because the MLS form is basically a "check the box" form. However, DB, as the seller, needs to make that crystal clear from the outset, so buyers do not later complain about the internal governing rules and those imposed by the City. I hope this helps to clarify DB's position on this. Again, I think it may be best for you and I to meet to discuss this. When Joyce and I met, I believe she got comfortable with this system. So, I think you will feel the same way. Please let me know when you are available to meet. Thanks, Klein, Cote & Edwards, LLC Ibex P. Glade. - Eben P. Clark 201 N. Mill St., Suite 203 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tel: 970.925.8700 Fax: 970.925.3977 email: eocaKCElaw.net Visit our website at www.kcelaw.net CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message may be attorney - privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify file: //C: \Documents and Settings \errine \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \Content.0... 6/12/2008 Page 3 of 4 .r Subject: Re: Dancing Bear Clarification Jennifer. Thanks for your email. Unfortunately I did not receive the attachment to forward on to my marketing folks. Could you resend this with the attachment so we can understand fully what you have referenced. Thanks for your assistance. - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Jennifer Phelan To: Tom DiVenere Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:17 PM Subject: Dancing Bear Clarification Dear Tom: Thank you for your response to my email that you sent last week with regard to the Dancing Bear. Please note that we understand the concept of fractional ownership and the specific approvals that were granted to this project. Our difficulty with this matter does not involve a lack of understanding of the project. It involves your marketing efforts. I have attached hereto for your review the listing document that initially raised our concern. From your email it is clear that you expect to have a management company handle the rental function of the units for the owners and that makes sense. What we don't understand is the marketing techniques being used. For instance, on the second page of the attached PDF under the column referred to as "Rentals ", your project states "No ", while all but one of the others states "Yes". I assume that none of the other projects allow an individual owner to manage their unit, yet they clearly imply that rentals are available. The city staff believes this marketing seems, at least, confusing. We were not trying to suggest that you were attempting to intentionally mislead anyone; but, perhaps you can understand why we believe that there may be a problem with this marketing technique. We look forward to reviewing the timeshare documents required pursuant to paragraph 39, of Section 2, of Ordinance 29, when you get to that point. It is my understanding that those documents will address the rental requirements of the project. In the meantime, I would request that you provide us with an explanation of your marketing efforts and the representations made in the attached listing documents. Best Regards, Jennifer Jevwtifee Phetaav, Deputy Planning Director file: //C:\Documents and Settings \errine \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \Content.0... 6/12/2008 C C ARTICLE 11 1 ECHANH a' LIENS Section 11.,. Mcglanics' Liens, Subsequent to recording of this Declaration and the filing of the Map in the Records, no labor performed or nurterials furnished for use and incorporated in any Unit with the consent of or at the request of the Owner of the Owne es agent, contractor or subcontractor, shall be the basis for the filing of lien against a Unit of any other Owner not expressly oansenting to orraluesting the sere, or against any interest in tits Common Ekanews; except as to Use undivided interest therein appurtenant to the Unit of tho Owner for whom such labor shall have been parrnrned nr such materials shall have been hffdsbmL Etch Owner shall indemnify and °hold harmless each of the otter Owners and the Associatiost from and against any liability or loss arising from the claim of -arty mechanics' Bon or for labor performed or for materials furnished in work on such Owner's Unit, against the Unit of another Owner or against the Common Elements, or any part thereof, $won 11;2 Faf by the ' 'on. At its own in,dative or upon the written mpast of any Owner If tbe`� determines that ` action by dke'Associatim is proper), the Association shall enforce the indemnity provided by the provisions of this ARTICLE t, by collecting from the Owner of the Unit on which the labor was performed or materials furnished the amount necessary to dischaW by bond or adwrW= any such ' loco, to pay all costs and reasonable attorneye fees incidental to the lien, and to obtain a mlease of such Tian. if the Owner of the Unit on which the labor was performed or materials furnisher, refuses or fails to Wermsify within five (5) dayys after the Association shall have given notice to such Owner of tie total amount of the claim, then the failum to so indemnify shall be a default by such Owner. under the provisions of'dds ton 11.2, and such amount -to belodomoMW shall automatically become a Default Assessment datertamed and lead against such Unit, and enfarcesble by the Association pursuant to this Declaration. ARTICLE 1.2 USE'RESTRICTIONS Section 12.1. US of, Units Except for uses reserved to Declarant in ARTICLE 14 entitled "Special Doeiararu Rights and Additional Reserved Rights' ; all R+esideatud Units shall be umd fa dwelling purposes only and shall otherwise be used only in accordance with an Apolicable Laws: in by Applicable Laws and the Section 12.2. Use of CommElements. Except as may be permitted in the I rni#ed Common Elements pursuant to the Condominium Documents. there shall be no obstmetiotl of the Common lleme:W , nor trail anything be kept or stored on any part of the Common Elements by any Owner without the prior written approval of the Association. Nothing shall be altered on, constructed "in, or removed from the Common Elements by any Owner witbout the MWE$r.#6338282 ve 23 C member of the Associtatioa and shall remain a a fez dt period of his ownprship..Aa Owner of a Fractp ^ hili at sha11 be cw*d to a vote, the sire of .. ` vc = #le tow'. upon each owneei uewv. W Iat r sa tenarA4u-commoo in the Residence. Yoeiag by prosy shall be permitted. The Owners of Fhaettanal Interests Mall constitute a separate Class of owners and Members in the Association for purposes of voting on all isam the administration and maagStAlcorof the Residence Club. Section 21.T. Fiq y antl in to the and duties of the way of enutneratian sad w"adx»+t t' Association providat for in the Declaration, the Association shall also hsva the "Inwing specific powers and duties with respect to Riesideuces: (a) coordinate tie plats of Owners of Fractiong kderests for moving ruche personal eff%ft into and out of the Residouces with a view toward whadiding such moves so that there will be a minumms of iaconveeianoe to Other Owns. (b), cause each Residcwx, the Amenities and any Limited Common Elements appurtenant solely to the Residences to be maintained in a hest class manner and cmiltion• The Association SW datermine.do color sobome, decor and famishing ofasch Residence as well as arc proper time for r ehubishmen4 redecorating and mplacernent tbaroof; (c) acquire and loll title to all Residence Furnishings, The Assaiation shall. on behalf of all owner of Fractional Interests, hold title in its name to all Residence Furnishings and no Qwrlor sltsil;have any nghk, title or claim thereto and the Association, r#all bane dw tigUt tbiicalSKitYu' 9RuEnra fsxa#lgruposes� (d) maintain property insurance for covered causes of loss to the Residences, Rwmleauce Furnishings, the Amenities and Any Limited Common Bkments WFKWnant sorely to the Residence, in an anotmCof insurance not Ieu than the fail WKMW ' MW cep cost of the insured Ims applicable deductibles at the time the insurattca IS and at each renewal date and containing the mWimd .provisions set forth is Section 16.2. (e) bill each Owner of a Fractional Interest for the expense of occupancy of a Residence during said Owners' Residence Wcckso which the Association dosermhm are the individual expenses . of the particular owner Including, but ant limited to long- distance said other eatraordinay W46one charges, charges for other products and services available through the Residence Chub, extrencd'uraty repaim or char rs for AamW to the Residencr.. its fbrnihnn. furnish nom, tgipipmprd, futtptes, WHauces and carpeting txe�d by an Owner of Fractional Interest or his other charges rendered by the Managing Agent on behalf of the particular Owner. and property and irrg service is addition m the standard maintenance and 'bcx hog wyke`provided for each Residence Week and included within the Residence Assessment provided for in this Article. (1) collect the Residence Assessmal provided for in this Article_ o AWM aeo em a 45 restrictions on use and occupancy if an Owner 15 not quxent OR violation -. of the provisions- of this Article; and (b) (h) enter into contracts, leases. license agreements and other like agroctraft with respect to the operatino. management, maintenance and benefits reined to the Residence Club. (i) enforce the remedies for non- payment of the Residence Asnwsatnatt set forth in this Article or in the Reservation Procedures. section 1$ - To addition tv " foh Expeaws eatablishal #ty tthe'Association to meet the Common ctP ik'V iifaet,'the Association shall also establish a separate Residence Assessment which will be assessed against Residue to cover the Assessment for Common Expenses for the Residence and the additional ousts of operating the Residue pun maatt to this Article. The Residence Assessment for each Fractional UMMOt Welt include but is sot limited to, the following: (a) the allocated share of the liability for the Assessment for Common Expenses attributable to each Fractional Interest; (b) maintenance, and regularly scheduled cleaning and maid,, serv3oe and upkeep of rho Residence the Arrountes and any Limited Common Elements apputestant solely to the Rreidences (c)` repair and rephicemout of the Residence Furnishings; (d) any additional premium for property or liability insurance occasioned by operation of the Residence Club (e) teal and personal property taxes, if any, assessed against the Residences or the Fractional Interests; (p management flees assessed by the Managing Agent to cover the, c usts of the. Club that airs in to the foes setby Vii' , Agent for . management of the Pipjoct; (g) _ a teservo for ref arbisJmtent and/or replacement of Residence Furnishings of personal property within the Amenities and of personal property within other ` Limited Common Elements appurtenant solely to the Residences; and (h) any other expenses incurred to the annual operation of the Project atumtsbia to operation of the Residenoes as part of the Residence Club not otherwise within the definition of Common Expenses provided for in the t)ecl ration. The Residence Assessment shall be assessed and prorated among the Owrmta of Fractional interests on the basis of the Owner's Fractional Interest. The Residence Assessment OWNUT tA99a2az ua 46 but mot hmitad to. the right to PPIPPM in SAY 'vote or dotatt6w(m provtdod Icie tfa inn Documents- Except as to a transfer to a Trust Mortgagee by foreclosure or deed in ii f0mlosure, no transfer of a FmefioW.bterest shaft be permitted unless. and until the pus transfew is current as Wall to dose to the 'Cot and is otherwise not in d under any other :provision of the bictsratioa. Any pulporINIUNVOInIt of a Tractional it while an owner is delinquent or is is default on any otb" obligation shau bo uult and void. All of the remedies grantmt by the CxmdEamhdum Documents,13pacifiCSIly includiat flea sl remedies provided for in this Article, are cumulative. and the . of oft right or rmt do Association shalt not itmpair the 's right to e, "do any ,other remedy. A�6d. chats not he limited to the set foft, herda and may Invoke any of may patsue m.._ r...�.,.. t,.. et.. eeriv.t.d;ew M t.ntial: ie env ere ar [nt�eia�aaces aeon oho thetein, m serve any notice or to institutes any WdOu Of $ SW M he constm waiver or relinquishment of any suchpvoybion, option or right. sp&= to fulfitt owaoc to eesctvations, all cot (the "Use Right Ease pmject. Each Deed* this Use Right Raseme , „ , ffIc V by dlNitr (i) A preiava" reservation, Lion system for holidays, such as New Year's Day. Martin Luther King Ste Day, Presidents Weekend. Baster. Memorial Day, Independence Day, tabor Day, Veterans' Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas or other holiday period which allocatgs the oppMunity to resatva the sortie popular holidays among the owners of, Faxtional lntemsts; OMWEer Ida ve 49 (nit) A procedure for determining priority of wswvadon by lot, drawing, rotation or otherwise on an annual or rotating basis; (iii) Restrictions on use and occupancy of a Residence Week if an (honer is not current on Aasessmcnts or is otherwise in violation of the :provisions Of the CondOrnittiurn Documents; (lv) Penalties, including forfeitures of reservation tights for the Residence Year, for untimely cancellations or reservations; (vii) Such other conditions, restrictions and limitations as the Association. shad deem necessary under the circumstances to assum a manageable, and (air system (c) Error by Association. In the event an error by the Association or Managing Agent deprives the rightful Owner or Occupant of the use and occupancy of a Residence or a comparable Residence during a Residence Week to which the Owner or Occupant has a confirmed reservation, the Association shall provide such Owner or Occupant a comparable Residence or pay the cost of alternate lodging for the rightful Owner anti #heir guests; fix so uuwy 24-how days or parts thereof as such rightful Owner or occupant and their guests have been deprived of the use and occupancy of a Residence. Tate on thereof shall be included in the Residence Assessment, unless chargeable to the Managing Agent pursuant to its ,contract for services. ARTICLE 22 MISCELLANEOUS Secdoo22,1. The provisions of the Act and the provisions of the Condominium Documents may be enforced by any Person subject to this Deciarat nn though proteetings at law ar, in equity against any Person subject to this Declaration that has violated or is violating or atte topting to violate such provisions. all as more specifically set forth in the Act Section 22.2. Ali I nacres, demands, or other cormumucations required or permitted to be givea letnunder shall be in writing, and any and all such items shall be deemed to have bean dttiy;*&cred upon personal delivery; upon actual reoeipt, in the case of notices forwarded by oerti1W a mil, return receipt rid, postage prepaid; as of 12.-00 Noon on the immediately following business day ate deposit with Federal Ebquvss or a similar overnight courier service; or as of the third business hour (a business hour being one of the boars from 8.OD a.m. to 5:00 p.m, on business days) after transmitting by telecopier, facsimile, or electronic mail. a avr st- 48338=x6 49 ALL FIELDS DETAIL No LNtAgeM PanteN S Roes- (970)6184m NUS I1Mar COtdnat Under BEDROOMS HATNS Three Three Type Fnclional Owner HALFBATHS One Address 4118 Monarch Sheet No Unlmown CINY Aspen GARAGE Ad Aid Stale $1611 pRE.FABRICATED HOMER No ZIP Owner DS Capital Holdings. LI-C Data Date Area O1CC4)eMM Con Dancing Boaz PUO SubAAcn SubA.oe Chas RESIDENTIAL PUD County pot Aces Asking Pike $709.000 0 No HL SOFT ga eft"t For Sale Yes Furnished (YMIP) gX Include Yes TOD Year Yarcol GENERAL No LNtAgeM PanteN S Roes- (970)6184m Resltot.¢om (YM) Dancing gear Reeky. LLC -Cell (970) ComPsnaSon -T8 3% Listing Office 1 cormunpolary PARKING AREA CCSRS Financials yes LIMIT FACES 61 6.1000 yarlabN (Int) No Comer • Be SUBSTRUCTURE Lk"d Service (YIN) No Fm Fee (YIN) NO yes Listing Daft Unit Electric 1 MLS Elhm Metal Owner DS Capital Holdings. LI-C Data Date 12131/2008 Handmap Acoess Dancing Boaz PUO SubAAcn SubA.oe ft Zoning PUD County pot Aces 0.00 LotSOFT skortTennable (YM) 0 No HL SOFT yes Under Consbace" (YIN) Yes Furnished (YMIP) 2W SCWUIO# TOD Year Yarcol Yes TERMS OFFERED BW and NW corners of DUrant arel s PeRblp T� TOD Diroedons Monmdt Street$ OR Market Data Sm3Qw Update Date 81142007 8n420O7 States Data BNB Holsbwvab Input Date 7282007 Price Dole 02812007 final Price 8799.000 Associated DoeumsdCount COOLING -- -- cano en J,Avm v rnuw . Room ..•�. �••�� Gas No Comer Lot SME Mon Than One DOCUMENTS ON FILE SIGN cormunpolary PARKING AREA CCSRS Financials yes LIMIT FACES 1t M RUCTMWEXTERIOR Stain Assigned POSSESSION HOA FEES INCLUDES oft SUBSTRUCTURE DOD Cabin Contingency Fad Sam East Finished Basement ROOF EXTRAS Cable TV Unit Electric West Metal Elevator Grounds Maintenance SHOWING INSTRUCTIONS CONDITION Handmap Acoess Unit Heat Call LNicg Office MAN! LEVEL New HEATING Hot Tubl3pe Landsompbtg Insurance ManagemeM - 3 Bedrooms Forced Air . Lawn Sprinklers Sower Living Roan Radiant PailolDack - Snow Rernoval Didng Room ELECTRIC 3acurky System Trash Removal Kitchen Yes TERMS OFFERED Water 3+ Be9ta OAS Cash HO A AMENITIES 12 asom Natural Gas New Loan C ormenoe Fact ft LaudryArdlty Roan WATER AGENCY Club Moans city E- Wiralve Agecy Front Deck COOLING Ex*Wve Right N SON on-Sits Managemerd Control ACC MINERAL RIGHTS PetaAllowed wrker SANITATION NO Looker Sid - Storage Sewer BudShullle Service FINANCIAL Tales kto in HOA Tax Year Transfer Tax (YIN) Yes- HOA Fen(VPof) TOD Spacial AssassmeM no Earned$ 10% „4%k . . Seems like everyone wants to own a piece of Aspen these days and fractional ownership is making it easier to buy a piece of Aspen. This immensely popular real estate concept allows one to own a significant share of a multi - million dollar home or stunning condominium at a fraction of the cost of full ownership. Fractional owners often enjoy a myriad of amenities such as spas, concierge services, fine restaurants, private club membership, and daily maid service. Enjoy your. deeded interest of these wonderful fractional ownership condominiums. Below is a brief overview of the projects available in the Aspen area. Please contact us at 9701920 -2006 for more detailed information. "ecis Units /Memberships Share Size Weeks Rentals Amenities Reciprocal Pete Arrangements Allowed Bedrooms.&Sq. Ft Allowed Allowed Use Dancing Bear 19/152 1 /81h 6weeks; No -3 hot tubs None Yes 3 bedroom units 2 summer 2 winter, - rooftop deck ranging In size from additional weeks on a owners lounge 1,750 to 2,200 sq. R space available basis recreation moms +additional days media mom - fitness mom massage mom Hyatt 50 /1000. 1 /20th l fixed week Yes heated outdoor pool 11 other Hyatt No Grand Aspen 1, 2,3 and 4 + 10 floating days hot tubs Vacation Clubs bedroom units fitness dub over 200 resorts ranging in size from worldwide 912 to 3450 sq. ft Innsbruck 17/204 1 /12th 4 weeks; 3 prime Yes heated resistance pool Club Inbawsst Yes 1 and 2 bedroom units + 1 shoulder week hot tub Royal Resorts ranging "n from +space available exercise room InnSeason Resorts 800 to 1,185 sq. ft. and more The 26/208 1 /8th 4weeks minimum; Yes heated outdoor pod None Yea Residences at 3 and 4 bedrooms 2 winter, 2 summa, hot tub The Little Nell ranging in Size from 2onaf st -come/ fibres center - 2,750 -3,700 sq. ft (list served basis +space available The 73/876 1 /12th 4weeks; Yes pod Bachelor Gulch Yes Rltz- Carlton 2 and 3 bedroom unit •• 3 in prime summer hot tub Jupiter Club ranging in a!" from and winter fitness room San Frandsro 1,340 to 3,700 sq. ft spa treatment some South Beach St Thomas Roaring Fork 48 /288 1 /6thto 60 days peryear Yes got( None Yes Club 3 bedroom cabins a whole including tends courts (2,400 sq. ft.) share 4prime weeks fitness center 12 suites 2 summa, 2 winter, 2 treatment rooms + as available outdoor pod St. Regis 25 /275 1 /11th 28 days, some with Yes heated outdoor pool 750Sterwood dogs Residence 2 and 3 bedroom units fixed weeks available hot tubs hotels and resorts only Club ranging in size from Remede spa in 80 countries 1,700 to 2,200 sq. ft. The Timbers 28 /224 1 /8th 4weeks; No heated outdoor pool Esperanza Yes Club 3 bedroom units 2 winter, 2 summer hot tubs Cabo San Lucas 2,000 sq. ft +as available health club The Rocks Scottsdale The 51/357 1 /7th 4weeks, Yes 4pools Sandestin, owner's Residences at 2, 3, 4, and 5 bedrooms and 2 winter, 2 summer hot tubs Mt T)emblant pets Snowmass 1,400 to 3,400 sq. ft 1 /8th +as available 19,001) sq. R - Lake Thhoe only Club athletic club Whistler massage rooms A TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: YA• MEMORANDUM Planning and Zoning Commission Errin Evans, Current Planner/ Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director June 10, 2008 June 17, 2008 RE: 411 S. Monarch Street — Planned Unit Development Amendment, Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Quota System Review APPLICANT /OWNER: Dancing Bear Land, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Eben P. Clark, Klein, Cote and Edwards, LLC LOCATION: Civic Address - 401 S. Monarch Street; Legal Description — Lots P, Q, R and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen; Parcel Identification Number — 2735- 182 -19 -002 CURRENT ZONING & USE Located in the Lodge zone district with a PUD overlay containing a timeshare lodge development currently under construction. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to enclose two outdoor seating areas. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the request to enclose the two outdoor seating areas. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests of the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the PUD Amendment, Commercial Design Review and the Growth Photo of the subject property Revised 6/12/2008 Page 1 of 11 411 S. Monarch Street PUD Amendment Application 0012.2008.ASLU A 411 S. Monarch Street Figure 1: Vicinity Map BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes to enclose two outdoor seating areas on a previously approved project, the Dancing Bear Lodge, that is now currently under construction at 411 S. Monarch Street (See Application - Exhibit B). The change is minor in nature; however, three different approvals are required. The required approvals include a PUD amendment, Growth Management Quota System review and Commercial Design Review. The Dancing Bear Lodge received approval by Council on August 11, 2003 by Ordinance No. 29 of Series 2003. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission to enclose two outdoor seating areas on the Dancing Bear Lodge: • Growth Management Review for Expansion or New Commercial Development for an increase in commercial net leasable area of 386 square feet pursuant to Land Use Code Revised 6/12/2008 Page 2 of 11 Section 26.470.080 (1). (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authori , who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). • PUD Insubstantial Amendment pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.100 A. This application qualifies for an insubstantial amendment which can be handled administratively; however, this review is being combined with the land use reviews. This review may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. • Commercial Design Review for a change to the original design that received final approval. As pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.412.080 (A), "An insubstantial amendment to a Commercial Design Review approval granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission may be granted by the Community Development Director if.• a. The change is in conformance with the Design Standards, Section 26412.060, the change represents a minimal effect on the aesthetics of the proposed development, or the change is consistent with representations made during the original review concerning the potential changes, of the development proposal considered appropriate by the decision making body; and b. The change requires no other land use action requiring review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. " Since this application requires other land use actions that are under the purview of the Planning and Zoning Commission it does not qualify for an insubstantial amendment, which is handled administratively; however, under Code Section 26.412.040, the Community Development Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly. Due to the scope of the request, the application will be reviewed as a Final Design application. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW: Enclosing the two proposed outdoor seating areas will result in an increase of 386 square feet of net leasable commercial space. When the increase in net leasable area is greater than 250 square feet, the application cannot meet the qualifications for administrative review. This application falls under the requirements of Code Section 26.470.080 — Major Planning and Zoning Commission Applications (1) Expansion or New Commercial Development. If approved, this application will require employee generation mitigation pursuant to Code Section 26.470.100, Growth Management Quota System Calculations. The increase of 386 square feet of net leasable space means that 0.95 employees will be generated as a result. Every 1,000 square feet of new Net Leasable Area commercial space in the Lodge zone district generates 4.1 employees. The mitigation calculation, using 2008 fees, is as follows: 386 square feet / 1,000 square feet = 0.386 0.386 *4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet = 1.58 employees Revised 6/12/2008 Page 3 of 11 r- 1.58 * 60% as per Section 26.470.050 (B) (5) = 0.95 employees Since this is less than one employee generated, the applicant is permitted to make a cash -in -lieu payment. 0.95 employees * $130,213 (Category 4 fee) = $123,702.35 The Planning and Zoning Commission, based on a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has the authority to permit cash -in -lieu payment for mitigation of less than one employee. This is the third option listed on the recommendation that was submitted. (See Exhibit B). Staff finds that Option 3 is the only one that the City has the ability to request as per the Code requirements. The applicant has provided more units than were required for the original approval. The two additional units above the requirements are provided on site. The approval of this application will result in deductions from the Annual Development Allotments and Development Ceiling Levels for 2008 for commercial development. There have been no allocations granted yet for 2008, as a result, there are 33,300 net leasable square feet available. This application meets the review criteria for general requirements for Growth Management Review. Please refer to Exhibit A for staff findings of the review criteria. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT REVIEW: The proposed amendment to the Planned Unit Development is found to be consistent with the approved final development plan by staff. This qualifies the proposed project for approval, approval with conditions or denial by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. The change proposed by the applicant is relatively minor. During the application process when the Dancing Bear PUD was created, concerns were focused on the massing and height of the building. The minutes from those meetings are included as Exhibit C. The proposed enclosure will be consistent with the original approvals. A Floor Area Ratio of 2.98:1 was approved in the final development approval. Currently the project has a F.A.R. of 2.28:1 and the proposed project will result in an F.A.R. of 2.32:1, well below what was approved. COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW: As part of the land use review, the Applicant is requesting Commercial Design Review approval for the proposed changes to the structure. The application must meet Section 26.412.060 of the Land Use Code regarding Commercial Design Standards. The area proposed to be enclosed is currently under an overhang and not open to the sky. These areas are not considered open space by definition of the City's Land Use Code. Utility, delivery and trash services will not be impacted by the proposed amendment to the structure. These items have been approved in the original PUD and meet the standards. The application must also comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. The project is located in the Commercial Character Area. The Commercial Character Area has some design objectives and guidelines that the proposed amendments to the building must meet. The previously approved Planned Unit Revised 6/12/2008 Page 4 of 11 Development will still meet these objectives after the proposed amendment is added to the structure. Changing the proximity of the seating area to the sidewalk may encourage a more defined street wall and more defined edge towards the street. This may be a better use of the space by bringing the customer activity into sight of the streetscape rather than recessed under the overhanging part of the building away from street activity. There is space remaining to accommodate outdoor seating in the summer months on the south side of the building. The proposed enclosed seating will bring the activity closer to the sidewalk in the winter months. The same building materials will be used as are used throughout the rest of the project. Large windows will be the dominant new feature. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority requested that the applicant update the fee calculation to reflect the new 2008 fees. RECOMMENDATION: While reviewing the proposal, staff believes that the application is generally minor in nature. It is consistent with the final development approval of the Dancing Bear PUD. It does not substantially change the exterior of the building, the same materials will be used and outdoor seating will still be available for restaurant patrons. Community Development Department staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the Growth Management Review, Planned Unit Development Amendment, and Commercial Design Review requests. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If the Planning and Zoning Commission chooses to approve the proposed amendments that they may use this motion "I move to approve Resolution No. , Series of 2008, approving with conditions, the Growth Management Review, the Planned Unit Development amendment and the Commercial Design Review to enclose two outdoor seating areas at 411 South Monarch on the Dancing Bear Lodge (Lots P, Q, R and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen)." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Staff Findings Exhibit B — Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Referral Exhibit C — Meeting Minutes from Aspen City Council (June 23, 2003 and July 28, 2003) Exhibit D - Application Revised 6/12/2008 Page 5 of 11 C EXHIBIT A 26.470.050 General Requirements for the Growth Manaliement Ouota System All development applications, for Growth Management Review shall comply with the following standards. The review body shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development. There are sufficient allotments to allocate to the proposal. There have not been any allocations of Commercial net leasable square footage. Each year there are 33,300 net leasable square feet available. This proposed development is requesting an allotment of 386 square feet. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. The AACP states that the intent of the Economic Sustainability theme is to "Maintain a healthy, vibrant and diversified year -round economy that supports the Aspen area community. " Increasing the amount of seating that is available in all four seasons will help contribute to a year -round economy. There will still be outside seating available after the enclosure is complete. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. The proposed portions of seating to be enclosed are currently covered areas. The building footprint will not be altered. The proposed project meets all the dimensional requirements Lodge zone district requirements. The additional net leasable space will require an amendment to the total stated in the approved ordinance for the Planned Unit Development. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design approval, and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval as applicable. The proposed project is consistent with the Conceptual Design approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval. The main concerns for the original development were building height and mass. It was also noted that it would be optimal to increase the open space on this property. The seating that is proposed to be enclosed is not considered open space because it is a currently covered area. Conceptual Historic Commission approval does not apply to this project. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this chapter, 60% of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The applicant has opted to pay cash -in -lieu to mitigate the employees generated because the employee generated is a fractional employee. The original development provided more employee housing than was required at the time of the first approvals. The housing Revised 6/12/2008 Page 6 of 11 department has requested that the applicant update the calculation to use the new 2008 fees. The increase of 386 square feet of net leasable space means that 0.95 employees will be generated as a result. The project proposes 386 square feet of new Net Leasable Area Commercial space. Every], 000 square feet of new Net Leasable Area commercial space in the Lodge zone district generates 4.1 employees. The mitigation calculation is as follows: 386 square feet / 1, 000 square feet = 0.386 0.386 *4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet = 1.58 employees 1.58 * 60% as per Section 26.470.050 (B) (5) = 0.95 employees Since this is less than one employee generated, the applicant is permitted to make a cash - in -lieu payment. 0.95 employees * $130,213 (Category 4 fee) = $123,702.35 Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 6. Affordable housing Net Livable Area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least 30% of the additional free - market residential Net Livable Area, for which the finished floor level is at or above Natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This is not applicable as a cash -in -lieu payment is proposed. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. This project will only place minimal additional demands on the public infrastructure. The proposed area to be enclosed was intended for outdoor seating. If approved, the seating will be interior to the building. Stafffinds this criterion met. Revised 6/12/2008 Page 7 of 11 C EXHIBIT A (Continued) Planned Unit Development Amendment Review 26. 445.100 PUD Insubstantial Amendments An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order for a final development plan may be authorized by the Community Development Director. The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment: (staffftndings are in italics) 1. A change in the use or character of the development. The proposed amendment is enclosing an area that was previously designated for outdoor seating. The use will not change; the seating will become interior to the restaurant. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 2. An increase by greater than three percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. The site coverage that was approved in the final development plan will not be altered. The area to be enclosed is located under an overhang. The buildingfootprint will not change. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. There are no additional impacts predicted to existing infrastructure. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. A reduction by greater than three percent of the approved open space. The area to be enclosed does not meet the definition of open space because it is located under an overhang. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 5. A reduction by greater than one percent of the off - street parking and loading spaces. The off-street parking and loading will not change from the original approval. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or right -of -way for streets and easements. The pavement widths and right -of -ways will not be affected. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 7. An increase of greater than two percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. This is not a commercial building. This does not apply. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 8. An increase in greater than one percent in the approved residential density of the development. There are no residential units in this development. The units are timeshare lodge rooms. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Revised 6/12/2008 Page 8 of 11 C, 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting a variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. The proposed amendment is a minimal change from the approved site plan. The applicant predicts that pedestrians will have increased interactions with the patrons on site for a longer portion of the year as a result of the enclosure. Indoor patrons will be more visible from the street because they will be in closer proximity and they will still have interactions with the remaining outdoor seating area The pedestrian circulation will still have an interactive relationship with restaurant patrons in the remaining outdoor seating areas and the indoor seating areas will be more visible because they will no longer be located under the overhang. There will still be outside seating available after the enclosure is complete. Stafffrnds this criterion to be met. Revised 6/12/2008 Page 9 of 11 C EXHIBIT A (Continued) 26.412.060 Commercial Review Design Guidelines As part of the land use review, the Applicant is requesting Commercial Design Review approval for the proposed changes to the structure. The application must meet Section 26.412.060 of the Land Use Code regarding Commercial Design Standards. The Commercial Design Standards include: 1. Public Amenity Space. Creative, well designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting, and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to the public right -of -way or private property within commercial areas. Staff Finding — The area proposed to be enclosed is currently under an overhang and not open to the sky. These areas are not considered open space by definition of the City's Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision Staff Finding — Utility, delivery and trash services will not be impacted by the proposed amendment to the structure. These items have been approved in the original PUD and meet the standards. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. The application must also comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. The project is located in the Commercial Character Area. The Commercial Character Area has some design objectives and guidelines that the proposed amendments to the building must meet, including: Design Objectives. These are key design objectives for the Commercial Area. The City must find that any new work will help to meet them: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. 2. Maintaining a retail orientation. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. 4. Encourage a well defined street wall. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition with the street edge. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Staff Finding — The previously approved Planned Unit Development will still meet these objectives after the proposed amendment is added to the structure. Changing the proximity of the seating area to the sidewalk may encourage a more defined street wall Revised 6/12/2008 Page 10 of 11 and more defined edge towards the street. This may be a better use of the space by bringing the customer activity into sight of the streetscape rather than recessed under the overhanging part of the building away from street activity. There is space remaining to accommodate outdoor seating in the summer months. The proposed enclosed seating will bring the activity closer to the sidewalk in the winter months. The same building materials will be used as are used throughout the rest of the project. Large windows will be the dominant new feature. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 1. Street and Alley System. The street and alley configuration will not be affected by this proposed amendment. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Parking. The parking will not be affected by this proposed amendment. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. Public Amenity Space. The proposed amendment will not alter the approved open space. The outdoor seating areas to be enclosed are not considered to be open space because they are located under overhangs. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 4. Building Placement The building footprint will not be altered by the proposed amendment. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 5. Building Height, Mass and Scale The building height, mass and scale were an issue during the original approval process. The proposed amendment does not alter height, mass or scale in this case. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. Final Review Design Guidelines 1. Building Design and Articulation The building design and articulation will not be significantly altered as a result of the proposed amendment. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 2. Architectural Materials The proposed amendment will incorporate the same building materials as the rest of the approved project. Large windows will be the dominant feature in the enclosed area. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 3. Paving and Landscaping The paving and landscaping will not be altered from the final approved development plan. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. Revised 6/12/2008 Page 11 of 11 Cel RESOLUTION No. (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM REVIEW, INSUBSTANTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT, AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENCLOSING TWO OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS OF THE DANCING BEAR LODGE LOCATED AT 411 SOUTH MONARCH STREET, LEGALLY KNOWN AS LOTS P, Q, R AND S, BLOCK 77, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Parcel Identification Number 2737- 182 -19 -002 WHEREAS, Eben P. Clark of Klein, Cot6 and Edwards, LLC located at 201 North Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, Colorado on behalf of Dancing Bear Lodge, 210 North Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado, submitted a request for Growth Management Quota System Review, an Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment and Commercial Design Review dated February 15, 2008 to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, the request is to receive approval for Growth Management Quota System Review allotments, an Insubstantial Planned Unit Development amendment, and Commercial Design Review to enclose 386 square feet of outdoor seating to indoor seating, therefore increasing the net leasable commercial area; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the application for Growth Management Quota System Review pursuant to Code section 26.470.080 (Major Planning and Zoning Commission Applications), an Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment pursuant to Code section 26.445.100 (A) (PUD Insubstantial Amendments), and Commercial Design Review pursuant to Code section 26.412.040 (Review Procedures) under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on June 17`d, 2008; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the request; and, NL WHEREAS, a change order to the Building Permit application will be required; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO IN REGULAR MEETING ASSEMBLED, THAT: Section 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A request for the annexation petition and zoning application was initiated by: Eben P. Clark of Klein, Cote and Edwards, LLC located at 201 North Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, Colorado on behalf of Dancing Bear Lodge, 210 North Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado. 2. Notice of the proposed Growth Management Quota System Review, Planned Unit Development amendment, and Commercial Design Review has been provided to surrounding property owners in accordance with Section 26- 304- 060(E)(3) of the Aspen Municipal Code. Evidence of such notice is on file with the City Clerk. Section 2• Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the Growth Management Quota System Review for new commercial development under Major Planning and Zoning Commission Applications, Insubstantial Planned Unit Development amendment, and Commercial Design Review application request for the said lot. The applicant shall meet all of the conditions of Ordinance No. 29. of Series 2003; however the applicant has approval to develop 386 square feet of net leasable area by enclosing some outdoor seating as shown in Exhibit A. Section 3• This Resolution shall not affect any 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 conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. APPROVED AS TO FORM Jim True, Assistant City Attorney INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on the 17th day of June 2008. LR Erspamer, Chairperson I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting Deputy City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk List of Exhibits Exhibit A — Approved Exterior Elevations and permitted area to be enclosed. [ � �.. �\ � / / } $� rn � § / \ / } $� � § / 2 \aQ \�) \ % }� u-A -y$ » \ \9 0T: /\ / \\ 3/\ ƒ / em f ee «� ~ 2 JTi /\ EXHIBIT 3/ :A Cl D = N O O m m m 20 m z n a O o° ti N m s 0 m D m 0 m X /� OOD� z Lo Z-1 a�DD _ 7-- W �' LO ZO�1 tJIIJ x �o�c „ DDp = N Dm� m� =n�1 D, m =D rncnr D SJ O DyJD J> mmDp z m m-14 � nao \ A) \ \2/ { \\/ 2p /m §' /$ a kA 9 / N C� D r m w Cv m7C p X D D m n p z m� p m m m D D � � � D O D c � Z p m � D � m m D m z r � m D O z tm N m 7� m Cl X -4 D M )> =C) w m z m D m m D D j1 Jc D D X Z T m co cr O p m m D i z m P m D O Z � / R»\ 6$\§ / §2/ / { \/ 2 =/ƒ § \j/ \ ®f z \ MEMORANDUM TO: Errin Evans, Community Development FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing DATE: March 27, 2008 RE: DANCING BEAR LODGE PUD AMENDMENT (411 S. MONARCH STREET) Parcel ID No. 2737-182-19-002 ISSUE: The applicant is requesting an amendment that would increase the restaurant/ commercial space in the project by 386 square feet. BACKGROUND: The property is located at 411 South Monarch Street. The addition of 386 square feet would allow for approximately 30 additional diners in the restaurant throughout the off- season and winter months. This increase of square footage would result in less than a single - employee being generated; therefore, the applicant is requesting to satisfy the affordable housing mitigation through a cash -in -lieu payment. According to Section 26.470.050.B.5, 60% of the employees generated are required to be mitigated. The requirement for an additional 386 square feet of net leasable space is 386 _ 1,000 X 4.1 employees generated per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space X 60% = .95. As this is a fraction of an employee, the applicant has the option to mitigate via a cash -in -lieu payment. The Housing Board has prioritized the options that can be utilized for mitigation purposes. They are as follows: 1. On -Site Housing — That the location of a deed restricted property used for construction or redevelopment of a property for mitigation purposes be either next to or attached to the development. 2. Off -Site Housing — That the location of a deed restricted property used for construction or redevelopment of a property for mitigation purposes be at a separate location approved by the Housing Office. 3. Cash -in -Lieu or Land -in -Lieu — That the applicant for a development may, under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements, satisfy the mitigation requirement by payment of an affordable housing dedication fee or a donation of land. The preference of cash or land shall be determined on a case -by -case basis. Due to the priority, the Housing Office would prefer a studio unit be provided for this additional square footage request. 0, ,N -�s MEMORANDUM TO: Errin Evans, Community Development FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing DATE: March 27, 2008 RE: DANCING BEAR LODGE PUD AMENDMENT (411 S. MONARCH STREET) Parcel ID No. 2737 - 182 -19 -002 ISSUE. The applicant is requesting an amendment that would increase the restaurant/ commercial space in the project by 386 square feet. BACKGROUND: The property is located at 411 South Monarch Street. The addition of 386 square feet would allow for approximately 30 additional diners in the restaurant throughout the off- season and winter months. This increase of square footage would result in less than a single - employee being generated; therefore, the applicant is requesting to satisfy the affordable housing mitigation through a cash -in -lieu payment. According to Section 26.470.050.B.5, 60% of the employees generated are required to be mitigated. The requirement for an additional 386 square feet of net leasable space is 386 - 1,000 X 4.1 employees generated per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space X 60% = .95. As this is a fraction of an employee, the applicant has the option to mitigate via a cash -in -lieu payment. The Housing Board has prioritized the options that can be utilized for mitigation purposes. They are as follows: 1. On -Site Housing — That the location of a deed restricted property used for construction or redevelopment of a property for mitigation purposes be either next to or attached to the development. 2. Off -Site Housing — That the location of a deed restricted property used for construction or redevelopment of a property for mitigation purposes be at a separate location approved by the Housing Office. 3. Cash -in -Lieu or Land -in -Lieu — That the applicant for a development may, under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements, satisfy the mitigation requirement by payment of an affordable housing dedication fee or a donation of land. The preference of cash or land shall be determined on a case -by -case basis. Due to the priority, the Housing Office would prefer a studio unit be provided for this additional square footage request. Section 26.470.050.B.5 allows for the payment -in -lieu fee to be calculated using the Category 4 fee. Under the Category 4 stated fee, the amount owed for adding 30 additional diners in the restaurant would be $127,702.35 ($130,213 [as specified in the 2008 Guidelines] X .95). The applicant has used the 2007 payment -in -lieu fee for Category 4. In most instances, a person who works in the restaurant business falls under the Category 1 or Category 2 income level. Staff would recommend approval of the payment -in -lieu fee versus providing a unit if a more reasonable fee was used. Staff would recommend that the average of Category 1 and Category 2 be utilized in calculating the fee ($264,228 + $221,072 - 2 = $242,650); therefore, a fee of $230,517.50 would be required to mitigate for this request. This payment more readily reflects the cost to construct a studio unit to house an employee. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of using the payment -in -lieu fee if the average of the 2008 Category 1 and Category 2 fees are utilized. Otherwise, staff would prefer that the mitigation be provided by expanding the on -site units to three - bedroom units or by providing an approved off -site studio unit. ,��IB1T G Regular Meetine Amen City Council June 23, 2003 Councilwoman Richard moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2003, with the provision that the neighbors be consulted at the time of the soils survey with the engineer and that the fire marshal look at fire and safety access during any demolition and excavation time as well as the final development plan and that a building permit will not be issued for this unless the Residences application has been withdrawn Peterson asked what consulting with the neighbors on the soils survey means. Councilwoman Richards said the neighbors would like to give background and history when the soils study is being looked at. Vann said the applicants are required to submit a soils evaluation to be reviewed by city staff. Vann said the condition states the applicants will comply.with the recommendation of the soils analysis. Julie Ann Woods, community development department, said if the neighbors are not "consulted ", where does that leave staff. Peterson said when the soils study is submitted, they will give the Falenders a copy. Peterson said he is not comfortable with the language "consulted ". Councilwoman Richards withdrew her motion. Councilman Semrau moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2003, on second reading with the condition that prior to the issuance of a building permit or demolition permit, the application for the Residences at the Little Nell will be withdrawn and that the Falenders will be provided with a copy of the soils study and invited to comment; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote: Richards, yes; Torre, yes; Paulson, no; Semrau, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #29, SERIES OF 2003 — Dancing Bear PUD James Lindt, community development department, told Council this is a lodge preservation PUD to redevelop a site at 411 South Monarch street. Council is the final reviewing body of all land use requests for this site. Lindt showed Council where the site is, just west of Wagner park. The site is 12,000 square feet and is zoned LTR. There is currently a one -story lodge building with 23 bedrooms. This building has been vacant for the last 5 years. Lindt said the proposal is to demolish the existing lodge and replace it with an 11 -unit time share lodge of 28 bedrooms. Each unit will have lock off capabilities, 15 Re War Meeting As en Ci Council June 23 2003 Lindt reviewed each floor of the proposal. The first floor has a lobby and check in area.access from South Monarch street; a lounge/bar with patio seating; one 1400 square foot, 2 bedroom lodge unit; 2 affordable housing units of 2 bedrooms. The second floor contains 4 lodge units, two 1400 square feet 2 bedroom units; two 2800 square feet 3 bedroom units. The third floor-contains 3 2800 square foot 3 bedroom units. The fourth floor has 3 three bedroom units and a recessed patio. The fifth floor has a glass gazebo, which would have a hot tub and exercise area. Lindt said the applicant proposes 3 below grade levels. The first level has a garage access accessed from the alley, as well as a games and recreation area, and a storage area. There are 24 parking spaces proposed on site; 5 spaces at grade on the applicant's property. The second floor below grade contains the majority of the garage. The third floor below grade contains more storage for the owner's personal goods, mechanical area and conference room. Lindt said the timeshare will be 8 shares per unit, 58 totals estates. The FAR is 3.25:1 and a height of 57 feet to the midpoint of the gazebo. Lindt.told Council staff feels this is an appropriate use for the site. In the past this has been used as a lodge. This project will bring vitality to a very important corner in town. The applicant has proposed a good deal of their affordable housing mitigation on site. The applicant has proposed greater than .7/lodge bedroom of parking spaces, which is required,by code. Lindt noted one concern is the height, which is proposed at 57 feet as measured by the land use code. Other lodges in that area are the St. Regis, which is 50 to 60 feet, the Mountain Chalet is low 50's. Three P &Z members felt the height was too extreme for the 28 feet as allowed in the LTR zone. Lindt told Council the upper floors are recessed to create a wedding cake effect, which helps lessen the mass. The building has been stepped down to the .west towards the townhomes. Lindt said staff feels the massing is appropriate with the exception of the turret. Lindt told Council the applicant proposed to use two spaces on Monarch as loading zones. Staff does not agree a lodge of 11 units needs a loading zone and added a condition that two alley spaces be signed as check -in parking. The third issue is the financial impact analysis to compare the proposed timeshare lodge with the tax revenues that would have been gained through lodge use. Lindt said the applicant's financial impact analysis shows there 16 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 would not be a tax revenue loss through this fractional fee change. The city's finance director, Paul Menter, commented the projected nightly rental rates are too high and the analysis should be redone with a lower rate. Menter requested a condition that the city be able to do an audit after the lodge is operating. Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, reiterated this site has been sitting vacant for several years and has been years since it has contributed to Aspen's bed base. Haas said a boarded up building is sending an antithetical message to tourists regarding the economy and the vitality of lodges on the fringe of the commercial core., Haas told Council most potential purchasers of this property wanted to build residential townhomes. This owner is interested in developing something that will contribute to the vitality and economic sustainability of the town. The applicant proposes two above grade employee housing units. This development should raise occupancy levels and should attract new visitors to Aspen. Haas noted there are trash compactors and recycling facilities access off the alley. There will be a decrease of 1 lodge unit from the Aspen Manor; however; the bedrooms will increase from 23 to 28. There will be an increase of leasable commercial space on the property including a sidewalk patio cafe on the corner:_ Haas told Council the applicants propose to house 4.5 employees and the.remaining fraction of employee will be mitigated by cash -in -lieu. The management and operation of the lodge will be done with an existing lodge or with a management company. Haas said a strong architectural statement is important on this corner, right across from a large park. The perceived mass of the structure is broken up by different forms and modules, changes in exterior building materials, balconies, different window forms and shapes, and stepping the building back. Haas said they have tried for a classic wedding cake style building, the structure steps down in height to the west and the southwest corner of the lodge is only 25 feet above grade. The west side of the lodge is 3 stories as is the northwest and northeast corners of the building. The midsection of the building is 4 stories. The 5t` story gazebo sits in the center of the building. The building height has been lowered and the mass reduced through P &Z review. Haas told Council the height at the corner of Monarch and Durant is less than 32 feet without the turret. 17 Reeular_Meetine Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 Haas said the height of the structure varies depending from where it is measured. The fluctuations are a function of the topography of the site. The highest measured height on a public right -of -way is at the northwest'comer along the alley and it is 39'9 "; the southeast corner 31'6" exclusive of the turret. The height is the gazebo is mitigated by using glass, by the stepping back of the surrounding levels and the fact it is setback 27 feet from Durant Avenue. This should not shadow streets or surrounding properties. The Wheeler Opera House view plane of Aspen mountain would not be compromised by this development. The overall height of Dancing Bear is lower than that of the St. Regis. The Mountain Chalet addition was approved at 52 feet to the midpoint of a pitched roof and allows 5 stories in that building. Haas said given the site's location and proximity to downtown and the transportation center, there should belittle need for cars. There are 24 on- site parking spaces. The applicant commits to encouraging employees and guests to use alternative transportation. A fleet of bicycles will be kept on site for guests and employees. There will be provision for airport shuttle by the applicant or by contract with another lodge who does airport shuttle. The applicant has committed to keeping a small fleet of hybrid vehicles for use by guests and employees. Haas said they hope to obtain LEEDS certification, which is a national green building program, and to come as close to possible of the gold level. Haas summarized this is will replace an eyesore, will add hot beds, and will revitalize the Durant/Monarch intersection. The applicants hope to set a precedent for green building; they plan of housing 4.5 FTEs on site. There will be over $1 million in direct tax generation in the first 5 years of operation. The project provides community facilities, is self sufficient for parking and storage and the project furthers the AACP goals with respect to small lodges, affordable housing, economic sustainability, growth and the environment. David Brown, architect, went over the materials and the architecture of the proposed building. Brown told Council they went through the guidelines in the fractional timeshare ordinance and have tried to incorporate everything the ordinances envisions. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. M! Reeular Meeting Aspen City Council June 23, 2003 Cliff Weiss said this building is out of scale for the neighborhood. Weiss said he does not feel this size building will contribute to the community. Roger Haneman, P &Z member, said this project will bring more benefits to the community than the one Council just approved. Haneman said these applicants made a great effort to meet the requests of P &Z. Dale Paas, Limelite Lodge, said he is concerned about the economic viability of the base of Aspen Mountain; however, he is very concerned about the economic sustainability of the Limelite Lodge. Paas said a massive building of this height and bulk will negatively affect the ability of the Limelite to rent rooms. Paas_ said this building does not blend with the neighborhood. Paas requested Council only approve 28 foot high building as allowed by the code. Stan Hajenga, manager Mountain Chalet, presented a letter from the owners of the Snow Queen Lodge stating they are against the proposed height, which goes against the principles of planning in this area. Hajenga applauded that someone is trying to develop this corner. Hajenga said the city needs to look at a system that allows a building to fall into disrepair for 5 years. Hajenga said the proposed height will affect many neighbors and many businesses. Hajenga said when the Mountain Chalet addition went through the process, they had to meet the view plane requirements. This building does not meet the view plane requirements. Hajenga said he would like to see this corner redeveloped; however, this proposal is beyond the scale and height called for. Debbie Falender said she reviewed the PUD and other land use code ordinances. The PUD ordinances say height, mass, parking, and density should respect the underlying zoning. The underlying zoning here is 1:1 and the FAR for this proposed project is 3.25:1. The PUD ordinance also states that the property shall be clustered to preserve significant open space. Ms. Falender noted that does not mean a building should be built right up to the borders of the property. Ms. Falender said this is too big for town. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards said she appreciates all the work that has, been done; however, she cannot approve this plan. Councilwoman Richards noted there is discussion in the infill about creating more view planes and 19 Regular Meetina Aspen City Council June 23 2003 one of Shadow Mountain and this will block the view of Shadow Mountain. The building is taller than the surrounding pine trees. Councilwoman Richards agreed she would like to see redevelopment on this lot; however, this is overreaching. Councilwoman Richards said only 9% open space may work for a one story building but it does not work for a 5 story building. Councilwoman Richards noted part of a PUD process is to look at a greater public benefit. This proposal does not add any extra affordable housing out of 36,000 square feet. Councilwoman Richards said this site is on the north side of Durant and has transitioned to a different neighborhood from the base of the mountain. Councilwoman Richards noted this building will be higher than the Elk's Club building. Councilwoman Richards said this is zoned LTR and one could construct 3 residential townhomes on this site, which would not contribute to the community either. Mayor Klanderud said she, too, has problems with the height, especially as it would block the view of Shadow Mountain. Mayor Klanderud said the turret makes the building interesting. Mayor Klanderud stated she would consider some height variance; however, this is much too high. Mayor Klanderud said she would prefer to see all affordable housing built rather than get cash -in -lieu for housing. Mayor Klanderud said she is concerned there are only 2 parking spaces for affordable housing. Mayor Klanderud agreed it is great something is being planned for this site. It is a critical block in Aspen. Brown said some of the benefits to the community are that this project will provide hot beds and will bring guests to Aspen with�money to spend. Councilman Paulson agreed the structure is took tall. Councilman Paulson said he likes the gazebo. Councilman Paulson said he would like to see the building shrunk. Councilman Paulson asked about the trees on site. Brown said they have met with city staff, who have identified 2 or 3 significant trees on Durant street that should remain. The applicants will cooperate with the parks to give them what they ask for. Haas told Council the large conifers are not appropriate for pedestrian traffic as they grow all the way to the ground. The parks department is recommending trees that are more easily walked under. Councilman Paulson asked what will keep a person from buying 6 or 12 months of one unit. City Manager Steve Barwick said that is covered in the city's timeshare ordinance, which he will have to Council at their next 20 A Roular Meetine Amen City Council June 23, 2003 consideration of this application. Barwick said the city cannot guarantee how a building will be occupied but can guarantee that one person may not purchase all the weeks. Councilman Lemrau pointed out the infill ordinance would only allow 30 feet plus an additional 8 feet with special review and a historic TDR. Councilman Semrau said agreed this is a great project in a great location but it is too big; the height and mass are out of scale for the site. Under the PUD process, the applicant has the responsibility of proving a project is deserving of an exception. Councilman Torre asked what percentage of the total square footage is actual lodge space and what is amenities, parking, storage. Brown said it is 50% net leaseable under the LTR definition of net leasable. Councilman Torre said there seems to be a lot of amenity space built in and there may be a way to lessen that, make the units smaller, and make the project smaller. All the amenities will make guests stay on property rather than go out in town and spend money. Brown said the intent of the amenities like the game room and movie theatre is to give families things to do. Brown said without the amenities, this is not a competitive project and would be under serious distress. Brown said there is not a square inch that could be removed without impacting the project. Mayor Klanderud noted when the Obermeyer project first came to Council, there was an outcry about the height. The design team came back with a project at the height requirement, which won broad support. Brown pointed out applicants are not allowed to talk to Council until the end of the process. It would be better to have a more collaborative process. Brown asked Council what would be the right height, the right mix, the right project. Councilman Semrau said the right use is family type lodging and the amenities are greaT. however, the mass, scale and height are out of character. Councilman Semrau said he feels 38 feet would be appropriate for the neighborhood. Mayor Klanderud agreed she could approve 38 feet. Mayor Klanderud said she would also like all employees housed on site. Mayor Klanderud said she likes the commitment to green development. Councilman Semrau moved to continue Ordinance #29, Series of 2003, to July 28; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. 21 R tar Meeting As en Ci Council June 23 2003 Councilwoman Richards moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 11 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #55 SERIES OF 2003 — Obermeyer Temporary Use Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council this temporary use request is for a real estate office to be located on the Obermeyer property. Bendon said staff does not see any issues with this request. Mayor Manderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards moved to approve Resolution #55, Series of 2003; seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #56, SERIES OF 2003 - Mascotte Annexation John Worcester, city attorney, told Council this property is located at the base of Smuggler Mountain along Park Circle.. The owner, Alain Degrave, owns lots 2 and 5 of the Aspen election subdivision, which are already in the city. City Clerk Kathryn Koch reported the posting and publication are in order. Worcester said there is 1 /6tb contiguity with the city and a community of interests exists. The area is capable of being integrated within the city. The property has not been subdivided into separate parcels. 100% of the property owners have consented to annexation. There are no other annexations pending. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Semrau moved to adopt Resolution #56, Series of 2003; seconded by Councilwoman Richards, Councilman Paulson said he would like a neighborhood map for second reading to make sure where this is located in reference to any possible master plan for Smuggler Mountain. All in favor with the exception of Councilman Paulson, motion carried. 22 Regular Meetine Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 activities, and delete reference to conversion of lodge units, and construction management plan in #9; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote: Richards, yes; Torre, yes; Semrau, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 2003 — Code Amendment Infill Councilman Semrau moved to continue Ordinance #5, Series of 2003, to August 25;seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. LOrINANCE #29. SERIES OF 2003 — Dancing Bear PUD James Lindt, community development department, reminded Council at the last public hearing, they stated the proposed project was too large and too tall. The applicant will present a revised design. David Brown, representing the applicant, showed Council the current design and told them they have taken off one floor. The first two stories are of stone, stepping back onto a shingled darker floor and above that is a greenhouse, gazebo and roof. The setback is 5 feet rather than 2 feet. Brown told Council the corner facing Monarch and Durant is 31 feet to the 3rd floor and 20'6" at the 2nd floor. At the alley for the main part of the building is 38 feet. The gazebo adds another 8 to 10 feet, which makes the building 44 feet at the midpoint of the glass shed. The top of the highest elevator shaft is 46 feet. The building elevations at the street are 34 to 31 to 34 feet. Brown showed the first project as reviewed by P &Z, the recommendation from P &Z and the current iteration. The building is greatly reduced. The project is now 9 three- bedroom suites with lock offs for 18 keys. The building as is has 23 bedrooms; this will be an increase of 3 free market bedrooms. The lower levels have not changed since the last presentation. The 2 two- bedroom employee units are the same as before and are now twice the required mitigation. All the suites range from 1700 to 2200 square feet, averaging 2,000 square feet. The bar and restaurant is smaller than before. The second floor contains 4 suites and 4 lock offs. The 3.d floor has been stepped back so each unit has its own outdoor deck. The roof has solar collectors, gardens, hot tubs and gazebo. The height of the gazebo varies 10 Re¢ular Meetine Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 from 43 to 45 at the highest point. Brown showed elevations from different points around the project. Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, noted the gazebo will be set back 17 feet from the Durant avenue fagade and 13 feet from Monarch street. Haas said the building is within the 38 -foot height requested by Council except for the gazebo, which is transparent and sits in the middle of the building. Haas said this feature is necessary to set this project apart from other time -share projects. Haas said the gazebo does not add to the perceived height of the building. Haas said the height measure is not as important as the qualitative measurements. The gazebo placed at the corner of Monarch and Durant would fit within the height limits but it would not be a good design. Haas reminded Council the recently approved Hyatt is 46 feet with a ground elevation higher than this site. The Mountain Chalet was approved with a 52 -foot height limit. Haas stated the applicants will make all efforts to achieve LEEDS certification and the gazebo will provide a perfect place for photovoltaic cells and capture of energy. The glass stairwell on Monarch is another location for passive solar gain for reuse. This corner needs revitalization. The project plans to add to the streetscape with the restaurant. The applicant plans to provide a hybrid vehicle for use by residents as well as bicycles. The applicant is providing 115% housing for employees when only 60% is required. Haas said they feel this will be a fiscal benefit to the city. This is a self - sufficient development for parking, affordable housing, economic sustainability and providing amenities on site. Lindt told Council staff feels this proposal meets community goals in bringing vitality to this location. The use, is appropriate; this site has been tourist accommodations. The applicant has met their housing requirements. Lindt said this building is lower than other PUDs in the surrounding area. At the last meeting, Council indicated 38 feet would be appropriate on this site. Staff does not recommend asking for removal of the gazebo as it is set back far enough that it would not be a dominant feature of the building. The gazebo will be constructed out of translucent materials. Council brought up the restaurant space at the last meeting and whether it will remain that use in the future. There is a condition in the ordinance to require a PUD amendment if the owners want to convert this space from a restaurant. Lindt reminded Council at the previous meeting they indicated one parking space/affordable unit was too few. The amended ordinance 11 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 requires two parking spaces per two - bedroom unit. The applicant has requested leasing parking spaces in the public right -of -way for loading. Staff does not feel a 9 -unit lodge would require loading spaces. The city engineer is opposed to leasing spaces in the public right -of -way. Paul Menter, finance director, pointed out not all tax information is available because the Aspen Manor has not been operating for the past 5 years. Menter said the applicant's fiscal analysis meets the code requirements. Menter told Council the condition on whether a fee is owed levers on the historical occupancy rate of the hotel. The original occupancy rate was estimated at 61 %; the revised application is 51 % as attested by the previous owner. The difference is whether a fee is owed or not. Menter concluded no fee is owed. Brown agreed there appears to be no fiscal impact to the applicant and this should be a cash generator for the community. City Manager Steve Barwick suggested for the future, Council consider a minimum occupancy rate for fiscal analysis amendment to this code section. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Susan O'Neal asked about the row of evergreens on Durant. Haas said the one on the corner and one other will be preserved; the parks department has asked the other trees to be removed and replaced with more appropriate street streets. Kathy Petner, 210 East Cooper, commended the applicants for their design, for stepping the building back, for the green development, for. the extra affordable housing. Ms. Petner said she is concerned about the 46- feet and the precedent this will set for future developments in this area. Ms. Petner asked if the gazebo will be used at night and will be lit. Brown said it will be glass and there will be window coverings in order to make this a green project. It will be lit and will be used at night. The gazebo will be used as an exercise room, mechanical equipment and lounge. Dale Paas, Limelight Lodge, said he is very concerned about keeping the scale of the neighborhood. Paas pointed out every time this project has comeback for city review, it has been abetter project. Toni Kronberg said she is concerned about the height. Visitors like the view of the mountain. People do not want taller buildings. Ms. Kronberg said this is a special site as it allows views of Shadow Mountain from the malls and from Wagner Park. 12 Regular Meetine Amen City Council July 28, 2003 Mayor Klanderud entered into the record letters from Carol Saunders - White, Jim Scull, and one from Andrea Clark all concerned with the height of the project as well as light from the gazebo at night. Haas said condition #21 requires a PM10 mitigation plan to be reviewed by environmental health. Haas stated the measures they have already committed to the in the application are more than adequate and should be accepted as the PM10 mitigation plan. These measures are a fleet of bicycles, hydroelectric vehicles, airport shuttle, employee bus passes, and marketing the location. These are all representations of the application. Lindt told Council environmental health staff feels the applicant has gone above and beyondPM10 mitigation. Lindt suggested the condition be amended that the applicant meets the representations of their application. Mayor Klanderud requested these representations be listed in the condition. The applicant agreed. Haas brought up condition #31, the 4 parking spaces for affordable housing, and requested only 2 spaces be required. Haas said the applicants feel they are being penalized for providing more housing than necessary. Haas noted the memorandum states that cash -in -lieu of school dedication is not attributable to the time -share units but is for the affordable housing units. Herb Klein, representing the applicant, said they do not have a problem with the city finance department conducting an annual audit, but does have a problem that if the city finds there is a shortfall, that they be obligated to pay some impact fee as determined by Council. Klein stated there is no provision in the code for this requirement. There are no standards for this requirement and this should have some study and legislation. Menter said what staff is most interested in is collection information. Barwick suggested adding language that this condition would only apply if the city adopts code amendment within the next year. Mayor Klanderud stated she does not have a problem deleting conditions #40. Councilmembers agreed. Klein requested a change in condition #41 about a "substantial' change to the restaurant; let the community development department decide whether this is a major or minor PUD amendment. Council agreed. Mayor Klanderud said when Council has required fewer on site parking spaces because employees will not use their cars has not worked. Councilwoman Richards agreed. Councilman Semrau said in this 13 Regular Meetina Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 neighborhood, it would be a great service to have 4 parking spaces. Council agreed to require the applicant provide 4 parking spaces for the affordable housing. Councilwoman Richards said the city should not lease any spaces in the right -of -way on Monarch to this project. Councilwoman Richards pointed out this project is only providing 9% open space. Councilwoman Richards said she is concerned about reflections off the gazebo. Councilwoman Richards said she cannot accept the 4th floor. Where the gazebo is placed does not meet what the Council intended when they said 38 feet at the highest. Councilwoman Richards said she does like the changes in massing and in material. Councilwoman Richards stated she sees a separation between the north and south side of Durant and this structure would be setting a precedent for the south side. Councilman Torre said he is concerned that the on -site amenities will keep the guests on site rather than getting out into the community. Councilman Torre said the gazebo raises the heights beyond what Council envisioned. Councilman Tone said the project could have a hot tub and rooftop garden without the gazebo structure. Councilman Tone said he feels the applicants have worked hard on this iteration. Councilman Semrau agreed this is an improvement and an interesting design. Councilman Semrau agreed about not leasing parking in the public right -of -way. Councilman Semrau does not support a 4th floor but does support an architectural element that makes this an extraordinary building. Eliminating the gazebo would make it a more boring building. Mayor Klanderud said she, too, is concerned about the gazebo and whether it is appropriate in this location. The light and reflection are major concerns. Mayor Klanderud questioned the excavation of 3 floors below grade. Mayor Klanderud asked if this would be in the proposed Shadow Mountain view plane. Lindt said this would probably be located within the view plane; however, it has not been drafted. Mayor Klanderud said she would rather see the hybrid vehicles eliminated. Brown said the gazebo is located away from the northwest comer because of concerns of the neighbor. The building is 38 feet at this comer and is 31 feet on the street side. Brown said the applicants feel the gazebo will make this space very special and could be used by the community for special events 14 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 28, 2003 and fund raisers. Brown said the sunlight reflection will be brief. The gazebo could be wrapped in fabric to cut down on this reflection or use non- reflective glass. Councilman Semrau suggested the size of the gazebo be reduced to 1500 square feet square feet. Councilwoman Richards stated the underlying height allowed in this zone district is 28 feet and going up to 38 feet is a significant variation. Going up another 8 feet is too much; the gazebo makes it appear as a 4`h floor. Councilwoman Richards said she would not disapprove of uses on the roof but without the structure. Mayor Klanderud said this is a creative design with a good way to hide the mechanical equipment; however, she is concerned about the height. Councilman Semrau moved to continue Ordinance #29, Series of 2003, to August 11; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #32, SERIES OF 2003 — South Aspen Street PUD ORDINANCE #33. SERIES OF 2003 — South Aspen Alley Vacation Councilman Semrau recused himself based on owning land within 300 feet of this application. James Lindt, community development department, told Council this final PUD review is for an application from Aspen Land Fund II to construct 14 free market and 17 affordable housing units on 3 parcels of land near the intersection of South Aspen and Juan streets. Sunny Vann, representing Aspen Land Fund II, reminded Council Savanah Limited Partnership received the original conceptual approval for this piece of property in 2001. Vann said he submitted a final application in 2002. The property has been for sale and the applicants asked staff to hold the final review until final disposition of the property. Vann told Council Aspen Land Fund II acquired this property December 2002, notified the community development department and asked them to complete the final application. Vann told Council this application is identical to the conceptual application except for minor changes made in response to neighborhood concerns. Councilwoman Richards asked about the reference to the applicants wanting to build a hotel. Vann said Aspen Land Fund II purchased the property to build tourist accommodations at the base of the mountain. The applicants 15 KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC HERBERT S. KLEIN hAQkcelaw net LANCE R. COTE, PC' Ircfdkcelaw net JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, 111, PC a Fdkcelaw.ne t EBEN P. CLARK eocGMcelaw net COREY T. ZURBUCH a4dkcelaw, net MADHU B. KRISHNAMURTI mbkQkcelaw.net DAVID C. UHLIG dca(dkcelaw.net MATTHEW M. LOWRY m ninakcelaw net nlw admitted in C lifornie ATTORNEYS AT LAW February 15, 2008 City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Jennifer Phelan Assistant Community Development Director Planner 130 S. Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 201 NORTH MR.L STREET, STE, 203 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE: (970) 925 -8700 FACSIMILE: (970) 925 -3977 RE: Application for Minor PUD Amendment and GMQS Allocation for 411 S. Monarch Street, Aspen ( "the Project ") To the Members of the Commission: This letter is the application and written description for the applications above and a written explanation of how the proposal complies with the City of Aspen Land Use Code. I. Introduction: The applicant is Dancing Bear Land, LLC, 210 N. Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 ( "Applicant "). Our firm, Klein, Cote & Edwards, LLC, 201 N. Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, Colorado 81611 is authorized to act on Applicant's behalf with regard to the Project. Please address all correspondence regarding this application to our firm and to my attention. The subject property is located at 411 S. Monarch Street, Aspen. The parcel is identified as parcel number 273718219002, and the legal description of the property is: THE DANCING BEAR LODGE ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PUD PLAN AND PLAT RECORDED JUNE 8, 2004 IN PLAT BOOK 69 AT PAGE 80 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 498443, IN THE RECORDS OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; City of Aspen, Planning SZoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 2 of 13 also known as: Lots P, Q, R and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado ( "Property "). This firm certifies that Applicant is the owner of the Property and is entitled to submit this development application. An accurate copy of Schedule B -2, the current exceptions to title to the Property, is attached as Exhibit C hereto. A vicinity map is attached as Exhibit D. A table of contents listing all of the exhibits hereto follows this letter. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Project was originally approved by the Aspen City Council in 2003 in Ordinance No. 29 Series of 2003, and the Dancing Bear Lodge Final PUD Plan and Plat is recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County at Plat Book 69 Page 80, Reception No. 498443. II. Present Application: Applicant is requesting an amendment of the approved PUD plan to enclose restaurant space as illustrated in the architectural drawings attached as Exhibit G. The areas to be enclosed are a portion of the area contemplated to be exterior seating and dining in the Final PUD plan as approved. As currently approved, the areas in question are under an overhang on the building and are open to the street. These areas were originally approved as dining areas and the requested amendment will not change that use. However, in their present configuration, the areas will only be useable as dining space in the summer months. The proposed amendment would increase the restaurant/commercial space in the Project by 386 square feet and would allow for approximately 30 additional diners in the restaurant throughout the off -season and winter months. Construction and design will be consistent with that used in the rest of the building. The building is steel frame and brick face construction. The amendment will simply allow the recessed walls to be moved to the edge of the sidewalk, flush to the current facade. The fapade of the enclosed seating area will include large windows allowing sunlight into the restaurant and permitting pedestrians to see the interior space and activity. This configuration will bring the active dining area to the edge of the sidewalk in the off -season and winter months. The proposed amendment is consistent with and an enhancement to the final development plan. The amendment will promote a lively street corner, increase the year -round use of the entire area and help to insure the economic viability of the restaurateur in the space. Experience in Aspen has shown that restaurants with only small year -round seating areas have a short economic life and high operator turn over. This is largely because it is difficult for smaller establishments to keep up with the high cost of rent through the off -season and winter months. By allowing the seating areas to be enclosed, the Commission can provide a more viable space for a continuing business and increase activity on the corner in the off -season and winter months. The goal of the City for this high profile corner has been for a vibrant and active location that C City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 3 of 13 draws pedestrians from Wagner Park and the Central Core and provides a bridge from the downtown walking zoning to the Lift One area. The requested amendment will help achieve this goal, support a local operator and insure continuity in the restaurant space. Based on the foregoing, Applicant requests: A. Insubstantial Amendment to approved PUD permitting the enclosure of the space; and B. Growth Management Quota System Allocation for the increased commercial square footage. The requested Amendments comply with the specific provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code and all other requirements as set forth below. Applicant will address each requested approval separately below. III. PUD Amendment: Section 26.445.100 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code ( "Code "), titled "Amendment of PUD Development Order" governs the grant of any amendment to any approved development order for a final development plan. Staff has determined that this Application would otherwise be processed administratively as an Insubstantial Amendment. However because of the other approvals that are required, the current request is being processed for review by the Commission under Section 26.445.100.B. Therefore, this application may be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Commission at a public hearing pursuant to Code Subsection 26.445.030.0 Step 3. Subsection 26.445.030.0 Step 3 sets out the process and possible actions on an application and incorporates the criteria in Code Section 26.445.050, titled "Review standards: conceptual, final, consolidated and minor PUD ". Section 26.445.050 states a development application shall comply with the following standards and requirements and requires the applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures. The present Application requests only a minor change to one corner of the previously approved structure and will not alter the height, mass or site coverage as previously approved. The proposal will simply move walls that were to be at the back of the already overhung area to the edge of the sidewalk and flush with the building's currently approved fagade. Therefore, the amendment will have a minor effect on the overall appearance of the building. Because of this, the requested amendment will not alter the vast majority of the previously approved PUD criteria. Therefore, where a criterion will not be altered, or otherwise does not apply to this amendment, Applicant will indicate that the criteria are inapplicable or unchanged. Section 26.445.050.A. General requirements. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: The proposal is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan ( "AACP ") as follows: City of Aspen, Planning an Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 4 of 13 The goals of the AACP include Economic Sustainability and Maintaining Community Character and Design. The stated economic intent of the AACP is to maintain a healthy, vibrant and diversified year -round economy that supports the Aspen area community and enhances the' wealth generation capacity of the local economy while minimizing the rate at which cash flows through the local economy. See AACP p. 31. Further, the AACP seeks to promote a healthy and diverse economic base that supports both the local economy and the tourist industry. Finally, the AACP is also intended to maintain and create places and opportunities for social interaction and lifestyle diversity. See AACP p. 10. The proposed amendment supports each of these goals. By granting the requested amendment, the Commission will be supporting a healthy and diversified year -round economy by expanding a locally owned and locally serving, year -round use that is located on an important comer adjacent the Commercial Core. This economic use will also better serve the City's locals and visitors by providing increased interior dining space in the winter ski season. Further, by increasing the size, the requested amendment will increase the vitality of the restaurant and create a year -round place and opportunity for interaction. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Response: The proposed amendment will not change the approved use of the previously approved space, and will expand an amenity for the local residents and visitors living or staying in the area south and west of Wagner Park. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Response: The Project as approved is bound on two sides by new development, on a third by a modern condominium complex and the fourth by Wagner Park. The proposed amendment will not significantly change the approved uses and appearance of the Project, and there will be no adverse affect on future development in the area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Response: This Application is submitted simultaneously with Applicant's request for GMQS allotments. Therefore, while sufficient allotments are currently available, they have not yet been allocated to this Application as of the date of the Application. Section 26.445.050.B. Establishment of dimensional requirements requires proposed dimensional requirements to comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate 4.r City of Aspen, Planning an Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 5 of 13 and compatible with influences on the property. Response: The proposed amendment will not change the height, mass, scale and site coverage of the Project. Therefore, the amendment will not change the overall dimensional appearance of the Project. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Response: See above. 3. The appropriate number of off -street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any nonresidential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the City. Response: The Project is currently approved with a minimum of 21 parking spaces. However, the Project is being construction with 23. In addition, the Project sits adjacent to the Rubey Park transportation center and the commercial core, allowing for excellent pedestrian and alternative transportation access. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Response: Inapplicable. The Project is located directly adjacent to the Central Core, adequate infrastructure was found to exist for the Project and this amendment will not substantially alter the required infrastructure. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Response: In applicable. See above. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. City of Aspen, Planning an Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 6 of 13 Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not increase the allowable density. But see AACP discussion above. Section 26.445.050 C., Site design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the natural or the previously approved man-made features of the site. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved structure as it may affect open spaces and vistas, if any. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the orientation of the structure to public streets. The Project was previously approved for zero set back to the City side walks, and this existing attribute contributes to the urban context of the site. Applicant will still construct those sidewalks as stated in the approved PUD. The proposed amendment will provide visual interest and engagement of pedestrians by moving the restaurant activities out to the edge of the sidewalk where passing pedestrians will be able to see diners, activities and events in the restaurant space. This will contribute to drawing pedestrians to the area from the Central Core and Wagner Park. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Response: The proposed amendment will improve handicap access to the previously approved structure by expanding the entry area on the corner of Monarch and Durant. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved site drainage. City of Aspen, Planning an Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 7 of 13 7. For nonresidential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved space between buildings. Section 26.445.050.D. Landscape plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the City, with surrounding parcels and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved landscape plan. Section 26.445.050.E. Architectural character. 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved architectural appearance of the building. Applicant will use the same windows, finishes and surfaces on the relocated walls as were approved for the recessed walls. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less- intensive mechanical systems. Response: The proposed amendment will greatly increase passive solar and natural heating of the building by placing large windows flush with the southern fagade of the building thereby taking advantage of the property's solar access. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously design with regard to storage and shedding of snow, ice and water. Section 26.445.050.F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both Public Safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. Response: The proposed amendment will not significantly alter the previously approved lighting plan. All lighting proposed will be designed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands and will be appropriate manner to the approved plans and use. J City of Aspen, Planning an Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 8 of 13 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up- lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Response: The proposed amendment will not significantly alter the previously approved exterior lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards and consistent with the previously approved Final PUD Plan. Section 26.445.050.G. Common park, open space or recreation area. Response: Inapplicable. The previously approved Final PUD Plan did not include a common park, open space or recreation area. Section 26.445.050.H. Utilities and public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved utilities and public facilities associated with the Project. Section 26.445.050.I. Access and circulation. (Only standards 1 & 2 apply to minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way or other area dedicated to public or private use. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter previously approved access plan. The Project abuts public streets on both Monarch Street and Durant Avenue. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter previously approved access and parking arrangements. Section 26.445.050.J. Phasing of development plan. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not affect the previously approved phasing. City of Aspen, Planning anoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 9 of 13 IV. Growth ManaaementReview: Code Section 26.470.080, "Major Planning and Zoning Commission Applications" requires that the expansion of the commercial portion of a mixed -use building shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The general information required for a GMQS application is covered above and in the Exhibits attached hereto, except for the following: 1. A description of the project and the number and type of the requested growth management allotments. Response: The proposed amendment is fully described above. Applicant is requesting an allotment sufficient to allow the proposed 386 square foot amendment. 2. As applicable, a recommended Community Objective Score according to the scoring criteria applicable to the type of development as outlined in Section 26.470.120 and a brief explanation supporting the recommended score. Response: As a threshold matter, the Community Development Director must score the Community Objective Scoring Criteria set out in 26.470.120 Community Objective Scoring Criteria. Applications are then reviewed according to the applicable score. The established scoring criteria are largely inapplicable to the proposed amendment because the modification is minimal and does not change the overall Project's LEED. However, the Project is approved as Lodge Preservation PUD and should be considered for the 15 points available under that creation. Applicant addresses each scoring criteria as follows: A. Community Objectives Scoring Criterion #1— Workforce Housing Points for the Number of Employees Housed - One (1) point shall be assigned for each one (1) percent by which a proposal exceeds the minimum affordable housing requirements of this Chapter, as applicable to the particular type of development, with actual housing units on -site or off -site. Points for the Size of Affordable Housing Units - One (1) point shall be assigned for each one (1) percent by which a proposed affordable housing unit exceed the minimum square footage requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. In no case shall cash -in -lieu be used to obtain points for this criterion. Response: Increasing commercial square footage by 386 results in less than a single employee generated. Therefore, pursuant to Code, the Applicant proposed to mitigate this fraction through a cash -in -lieu payment. City of Aspen, Planning an�;oning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 10 of 13 B. Community Objective Scoring Criterion #2 — Energy Conservation Points for LEED Certified projects. LEED Bronze level projects = 10 points. LEED Silver level projects = 20 points. LEED Gold level projects = 30 points. LEED Platinum level projects = 50 points. Response: The additional square footage in the proposed amendment will have a separate LEED certification. However, as modified, the south facing windows on the restaurant will no longer be shaded by the overhanging building. Therefore, the proposed amendment will increase passive solar in that area. C. Community Objective Scoring Criterion #3 — Small Lodges Points for Lodge Preservation Projects. Fifteen (15) points shall be assigned to lodging projects located in the Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone District. For projects in the LP District that do not have a lodging component, no points shall be assigned. Points for Small Lodging Units. Fifteen (15) points shall be assigned for lodging projects with lodge units that average 400 square feet or less. For lodging projects that provide lodging units averaging greater than 400 square feet, no points shall be assigned. Response: The commercial square footage proposed does not add any lodge unit. Therefore, no points are available for this criterion. 3. General requirements, Section 26.470.050.B. All development applications for growth management review must comply with the General requirements, Section 26.470.050.B. Applicant meets each criterion as stated below. 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Section 26.470.030.D. Response: Sufficient growth management allotments are available, as none have been awarded so far for the 2008 allotment period. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: See response above. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. City of Aspen, Planning an Zoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 11 of 13 Response: The Project is located in the Lodge Zone District and has been approved as a Lodge Preservation PUD. The proposed amendment is consistent with approved use for the location and all requirements of the PUD and zone district. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Response: The proposed amendment is consistent with both the Conceptual and Final Lodge Preservation PUD approval previously granted. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60 %) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable Housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Response: According to pre - application conferences with Staff, the proposed amendment would result in an additional 0.95 employees. As this is a fraction of an employee, Applicant proposes to mitigate this employee creation with a cash -in -lieu payment pursuant to the Code. Staff has indicated that payment will be $120,099 (0.95 x $126,420 (Category 4) = $120,099). 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30 %) of the additional free - market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment includes no additional free - market residential net livable area. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. Response: The proposed amendment would add approximately 30 additional seats to a restaurant space that was required and approved under the previously PUD approvals. This represents a minimal additional demand on water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. City of Aspen, Planning an�oning Commission ` r February 15, 2008 Page 12 of 13 V. Conclusion: Based on the foregoing, Applicant meets each of the stated requirements for the requested approvals and amendments. Beyond the listed requirements, the grant of the requested approvals will promote the goals of the AACP and support the locally owned and locally serving business that will occupy the restaurant space already approved for the Project. All of this will result in the promotion of the local year -round economy, diverse activity in the downtown area, and will benefit the City's vital character and energy. Thank you for considering this application. If there is farther information that you require, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC By: Eben P. Clark PUD Amendment Applicatin Ltr 02- 14- 08.doc City of Aspen, Planning angoning Commission February 15, 2008 Page 13 of 13 Table of Contents: Exhibit A - Completed Land Use Application Exhibit B - Signed Fee Agreement Exhibit C - Schedule of Exceptions to Title Exhibit D - Vicinity Map Exhibit E - Pre - application Conference Summary Exhibit F - Approved Final PUD Plan and Plat, including: Floor Area Calculations; Site Survey; Site Plan; Landscape Plan; and Floor Plans. Exhibit G - Existing and Proposed Floor Plan detail for requested modifications Exhibit H - List of adjacent owners within 300 feet for public hearing EXHIBIT A ATTACHMENT 2 —LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: VA- ,.�[intG Rear LooJ, LL-c Location: '[1 43-, l, Co (Indicate street address, lot &number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID #(REQUIRED) (ioo2 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: E (JeN -P- C[, lL • Cofe & L` dpi t4+�S I LLB Address: 201 rJ. N-,V S +.t &jj2gj+ Co $(6(( Phone #: 'lea - c[ 2 S - $ -too PROJECT: Name: -D -�ecv- (�_, CQ - gc u Address: y(( S. erbe� , ylsfxnl Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATTON: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual historic Devt. ❑ Special Review ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition ❑ GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation ❑ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use Other. ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment Avw jk&a"'f EXISTING CONDMONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous etc.) �a(.YL"Gd( La �G Yie tGrJ'A•�•1 �li� approvals, � 7U'A.aNe.l ..ao�.4r ��7 l 1 CeNSI'f4.UCq' Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $CIO Pre- Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements - Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 85" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. EXHIBIT B 143 4:[81T•1„I, D12I keg I]=L74w•]1,5142ki§TX7c1AMI=1:k➢ Aereement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and 'Bear L—AN 4C 1-- LC— (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: has submitted to CITY an THE 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $11416 which is for _ hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $235.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN By: Chris Bendon Community Development Director APPLICANTS (1 (7Ar4CIM;iI�JP.cr (.l4nro1�' L -(.G Date: pz 4. U8 Bill To Mailing Address and Telephone Number: 201 U. lt,U S{ , t Sine Z03 qsx�. Go 81611 �' EXHIBIT ALTA COMMITMENT Schedule B -2 (Exceptions) Our Order No. Q62001350 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, fast appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes and assessments not yet due or payable and special assessments not yet certified to the Treasurer's office. 7. Any unpaid taxes or assessments against said land. 8. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any. 9. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED DECEMBER 24, 1887 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 564 AND JULY 19, 1889 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 571, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS: THAT NO TITLE SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR OR COPPER OR TO ANY VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS. 10. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MULTIPURPOSE EASEMENT AGREEMENT ELECTRIC AND COMMUNICATION UTILITIES RECORDED JUNE 15, 1976 IN BOOK 313 AT PAGE 246. 11. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SHOWN IN THE SURVEY RECORDED JUNE 9, 1997 IN PLAT BOOK 44 AT PAGE 11 AND FINAL PUD PLAN AND PLAT FOR DANCING BEAR LODGE RECORDED JUNE 8, 2004 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 498443. 12. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE# 29 (SERIES 2003) APPROVING THE DANCING BEAR LODGE PRESERVATION PUD APPLICATION RECORDED JUNE 08, 2004 AT RECEPTION NO. 498441. 13. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF PUD AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS ALTA COMMITMENT Schedule B -2 (Exceptions) Our Order No. Q62001350 The policy or policies to be issued wiB contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: AGREEMENT RECORDED JUNE 08, 2004 AT RECEPTION NO. 498442. 14. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF INDEMNIFICATION AND TEMPORARY EXCAVATION AND SHORING SYSTEM EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 30, 2006 AT RECEPTION NO. 530449. 15. CONDOMINIUM DECLARATIONS, WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER CLAUSE, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED , UNDER RECEPTION NO. 16. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SHOWN ON CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR DANCING BEAR RESIDENCES RECORDED UNDER RECEPTION NO. 17. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 30, 2006 AT RECEPTION NO. 530449. 18. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ENCROACHMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT RECORDED JUNE 11, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 538776. 19. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF NOTICE OF APPROVAL RECORDED AUGUST 28, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 541427. 20. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF LOAN AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 543334. I., EXHIBIT 1' E - CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Jennifer Phelan, 429 -2754 DATE: 1/31/08 PROJECT: 411 S. Monarch (Dancing Bear) REPRESENTATIVE: Eben Clark of Klein, Cotes, and Edwards OWNER: City of Aspen TYPE OF APPLICATION: PUD Amendment and associated land use applications DESCRIPTION: In 2003, Ordinance No. 29 granted approval of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Dancing Bear Lodge. Part of the site speck development plan approved a certain amount of ground floor net leasable area proposed for commercial (restaurant) use. The site plan included two covered areas as well as an uncovered patio for outdoor seating. The Applicant is requesting to enclose the two covered areas and increase the approved net leasable area by 386 sq. ft. for year round seating. The Applicant will need to be reviewed for growth management approval for the additional net leasable area being proposed and amend the existing PUD and commercial design approvals as part of the application. As stated in the land use code an insubstantial amendment for commercial design review can be approved by the Community Development Director if "the change represents a minimal affect on the aesthetics" and no other land use review is required by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Since the application requires reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission, an insubstantial amendment cannot be processed. A substantial amendment requires a two -step process unless consolidated into a one -step process; however, the consolidated process is not to be consolidated with a growth management review. Staff recommends consolidating the conceptual and final commercial design review into a one -step process and separating the design review from the growth management review. This will entail two separate reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The design review submission can be submitted at the applicant's convenience and the growth management review can be accepted on February 15, 2008. Land Use Code Sectionis 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.412 Commercial Design Review 26.412.080 B., Substantial Amendments 26.412.040 A., Review Process 26.412.040 A.4 and 5. (application and procedure) 26.412.050, Review Criteria 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards 26.445 Planned Unit Development ?Mk OON %0.01 1VW 26.445.100, Insubstantial Amendment 26.470 Growth Management Quota System 26.470.0801., Expansion or New Commercial Development 26.470.110. C, Application Review Procedures — Major P&Z Review Review by: Staff for complete application Referral agencies for technical considerations if necessary Public Hearing: Yes at P &Z review Planning Fees: $1,470.00 Total Number of Application Copies: 12 Copies To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Application. 5. Signed fee agreement. 6. Pre - application Conference Summary. 7. An 8 112° x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. 9. Existing site plan. 10. Existing and proposed floor plans and elevation drawings that include proposed dimensional requirements. 11. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 12. A written description of proposed construction techniques to be used. 13. All other materials required pursuant to the specific submittal requirements. 14. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for a small fee. 920.5453 15. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)- preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Nq r € y B 2Aa po 9, a�seaaa.a a w I W C) a- 0 J crm Q W m (} a Z 06 `m ci a z° aA LL I yyyp aQ C t I x 6 i- I ai wF�F F� .4 I i j r� 2 E L f a i• s �F �e ®E �f w z s it N2 �i�O F e 7 w z s it N2 �i�O F �mwu Irl w Po gmo m • wig L 0 4 �WI di T 8 0 r4 wc� 0 -Cj": 1: d 1: ci d W, 0 0 ej MON; �Tl F- Z Q J D y$ U gg O m LL L m y �Xg' ss °�{ w ,ro7n syro W W --3 aaLLa® �m Y Z m yU I Y q�ig On pJ pg p ,yy yyy NO! (' p pc 2233§Q g¢g¢ h O v H a d�E�'ag'and ¢ QQ$$€ec F- Z Q J D y$ U gg O m LL L m y �Xg' ss °�{ w ,ro7n syro W W --3 aaLLa® �m Y Z m yU I Y q�ig On pJ pg p ,yy yyy NO! (' p pc 2233§Q g¢g¢ m`Fe a° F m} �F 0 �e ®C �f �a c J c Q L a LL a a Z ¢ QQ$$€ec uka a5 U � �S yyg LLpp� gag� €g¢p 1`iFft ��uY3 (Lmu�i O v r7iy �narE w w x w Z � O --�� NNNNNNNCI !1 !1 rn a aaaa as <aaaaa a a m`Fe a° F m} �F 0 �e ®C �f �a c J c Q L a LL a a w g � � 3 6 A ap 8 c5 am 04 0 o fit IF J° ' • `. _ m_': �T �9 �b W �Jr1 i'I IINXLS HONYNOW Hinos O w a g QIi �• j � W A .owl z a _ • I - z z 0 �I W4 + Y �S °TI S Yi n n P 06 8 \ t (] T . �w a am'T ? }. e b n. W O W S } fill I e{ lull l o 0 e }e �S �e �E ;od 6 W O W S } fill I e{ lull l o 0 e }e �S �e �E `am82988�e a;� o f osragagesa , ,,;`s . a Oils am. In WasI�e � @3 Em; Z 133W HOMOW Hinm rr .. NOUN,sni. �.� a'� !E q J.YY YY 7• `.. Y i Sela�v'� �, .T vv LV I t - -i --' •') '. /�'.., �� I I 111: J I i 1 li 1 ``� n i .•` uy� 5� 't .• I W yy I W 1 • gp 1 :tart I • �] .I I to 1 ` W e g P s` Oil j a m ..i �F • �p I p ®p S' iE 4 p 3 p +( e e • e 1 p S tiE . S 1 W-V z o 1-4 WN oull 49doid II DI I ru I L I r ou!l 741-,dojd-- I I C3 a w y pq � �mcas�ss o z o �m a m v o w Igg -{`�--- ..sar —sar ,,, i � o Id I I I v(S � Na� I ' l aug npaaoM - -�1 - -_ 1 I 8 a m- <�i: o �eEE mod:. �L s I I I ` evil 49doid I I. I I I w. o MW.i a m- <�i: o �eEE mod:. �L s I I I ` evil 49doid I I. I I I (ED (F) O vtti 84H edoid I I _ _� 1 lu r PQ 2 O vtti 84H edoid I I _ _� 1 lu r I • I I I II�j�II I I � I I I I oil Ail 11 I I I I Ifr —_: �Il�!__— — (•L_ —_� Ua. - -. .::._III• f ': -- i i I L�' I I I • I� I }yI. hlfio b/f IR a 3 w w n r i ^ter I li i I I I i S CU ®R ug NINON jj R 1 ME all . .... ...... I ME P F-4 (nu Gill viii lows pn ttO W.M.16O.H.W ME P F-4 ME � q � log O O ---------- - 11 IL mx: 20 z m z < )u Y'. 70 5i �u m m N m =N lP Ul 1> 20 -n -< 20 �mD 00 00 20 EXHIBIT m G 1' uue ss*sstN J N U J, L Cl D D z m m n w DX70 N (z > D m ,fl D - a > @ O D O D O D m N D O GN K) 0 0 Z M 14 , U� g L N O a o N� m w D C) I> nw ^ LO mt. � (PF -- m(n� )> C)�l DOO DpD mm�p Z mTiA m�G� D m m m C) M z w ? z N 71 m O m m D _ iD m ' ? 20 D 3> N z m / Da/ >mGz / §ƒ/ / \ \j � 2)f \ \ƒ\ 9 / I D (l X !?� Z m w p z m � m W D(5, D �J � D D UM N D p m N m D rn Zm �rn D O z AU3AV-09-009-L uol�vlsul,p ®09LS ®A83AV 3laegeB al zesimn e wm-Aiane•nMnM alllne; el za;lnsuo:) /" c v �^ ° jaled g selpe; sauanbg4 � -.J MOHAMMED &ALICE .3109 ASPEN KABINN LLC C/O NIKE COMM/NINA KAMINER BENNIE THOMAS E EXHIBIT OAK 3109 OAKMONT DR 75 BROAD ST RM 500 PO BOX 9884 STATESVILLE, NC 28625 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW YORK, NY 10004 -2415 H BERHORST JERRY BLUE LLOYD JR BOGIN ROBERT M BERHORST CAROLE PLEAS ALEXA 4280 S MEADOW BROOK LN 7161 LINDENMERE DR PO BOX 1569 EVERGREEN, CO 80439 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 GRAYTON BEACH, FL 32459 BRAYMAN WALTER W & PATRICIA BRIGHT GALEN BRIGHT GALEN 844 ROCKWELL LN 205 E DURANT AVE #3D 407 S HUNTER ST #3 KANSAS CITY, MO 64112 -2363 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 BROWNELL LORRAINE B CALKINS GEORGE W CALLAHAN PATRICIA 1030 SECOND ST 105 S CHEROKEE 0184 MOUNTAIN LAUREL DR MORGAN CITY, LA 70380 DENVER, CO 80223 -1834 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARRIGAN RICHARD A JR CAUSING JENNIFER M CHAPLIN ARLENE & WAYNE 25526 WILLIAMS RD PO BOX 10343 54 LAGORCE CIR WARRENVILLE, IL 60555 ASPEN, CO 81612 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33141 CHRISPAT ASPEN LLC CHRISTENSEN EUGENE J CHU FAMILY TRUST 2/3 INT 1107 5TH AVE PO BOX 10061 LU NANCY CHAO TRUST 1/3 INT NEW YORK, NY 10128 ASPEN, CO 81612 38 CORMORANT CIR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 CITY OF ASPEN CLAUSEN FAMILY TRUST NO 1 COHN PETER L 130 S GALENA ST C/O GUNDY MGMT CO 1601 S CENTRAL AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 47 GLENDALE, CA 91204 MORRIS, IL 60450 CROSBY CHRISTINE ANN DANCING BEAR LAND LLC DOLLE NORMA 1050 E WATERS AVE #15 210 N MILL ST #203 124 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DONCER JOYCE TRUST ELLIS DIANA L ROQUE TRUSTEE EVANS DAVID COURTNEY 7641 W 123RD PL 13320 MULHOLLAND DR PO BOX 952 PALOS HEIGHTS, IL 60463 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 ASPEN, CO 81612 FAULKNER JOHN L FELDMAN SELMA FOX THOMAS H 2433 ROCKINGHAM ST 300 S POINTE DR APT 2403 119 E COOPER AVE ARLINGTON, VA 22207 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 -7329 ASPEN, CO 81611 T �► j� Tainieaj lead �tse3 JO; jaded paa jT ®09LS 31V1dW31AaAV asn I ®09 LS ®AHqAt/ 1� 1 j' r 1 ioauc uomnissw aac i siaaem iaaa Rsea A83AV-O9-008-I. uotpnilsu!,p Juawa6jegp ap sues 009LS ®AN3AV 3!jege6 a! zes!l!3!1 worAiane mmnn apma; el zaLinsuoD v � -1 ja!ed a sane; sauanbg4 - FREIRICH MARK A FUQUA ALVAH D JR & DIANNE L FYRWALD JON ERIK & GUDRUN L PO BOX 774056 446 LAKE SHORE DR 4348 PLUMWOOD DR STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO 80477 SUNSET BEACH, NC 28468 WEST DES MOINES, IA 50265 GEORGIEFF KATHERINE TRUSTEE OF GLICKMAN EDWIN C GOLDSMITH ADAM D THE LAZY RD SMITH RONA K KATHERINE GEORGIEFF REVOCABLE NO WMASS CO 81654 S NO, PO BOX 9069 LIVING TRS ASPEN, CO 81612 #11 TOPPING LN ST LOUIS, MO 63131 GREINER JERRY M GROOS NICHOLAS D GUBSER NICHOLAS J GREINER TERESA U 210 N INDUSTRIAL PARK RD PO BOX 870 330 SICKLEY RD HASTINGS, MI 49058 ASPEN, CO 81612 GLENSIDE, PA 19038 GUNION JOHN F GUTNER KENNETH H REV TRUST HATCHER HUGH S 1004 MARINA CIR PO BOX 11001 205 E DURANT AVE APT 2E DAVIS, CA 95616 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 HERRON SANDRA A HOLLY TREE INVESTMENTS LLC HORTON KAREN JANE TRUST 119 E COOPER AVE APT 19 4823 HOLLY TREE DR 588 S PONTIAC WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 -1761 DALLAS, TX 75287 DENVER, CO 80224 HOSKIN REEDE HOTEL DURANT IAVARONE GIANFRANCO & RITA PO BOX 2478 122 E DURANT 341 ORIENTA AVE BASALT, CO 81621 -2478 ASPEN, CO 81611 MAMORONECK, NY 10543 ICAHN LIBA IMHOF FAMILY TRUST IMREM SUE GORDON TRUSTEE PO BOX 11137 2409 GREEN ST 219 E LAKE SHORE DR #5D ASPEN, CO 81612 -9627 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 CHICAGO, IL 60611 J &E HANSEN LLC JACOBSON FAMILY TRUST KAPLAN BARBARA C/O EDWARD HANSEN 2168 SANTA MARGARITA DR 3076 EDGEWOOD RD 255 SEASPRAY AVE FALLBROOK, CA 92028 PEPPER PIKE, OH 44124 PALM BEACH, FL 33480 KAUFMAN STEVEN B TRUST KEBER VINCENT M III KEITH JOHN III C/O VIRGINIA HARLOW 1301 WAZEE #2E 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #203 -230 0554 ESCALANTE DENVER, CO 80204 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 -8770 KINGSBURY FAMILY TRUST KULLGREN NANCY A LACY ROANE M JR PO BOX 198 205 E DURANT AVE UNIT 2 -C PO BOX 367 HOLDERNESS, NH 03245 ASPEN, CO 81611 WACO, TX 76703 -0367 T Tam;ead load �(se3 ao; jaded peadT 09LS 31`d1dW31 any ash ® ®09L5 ®�t/1`Y� 1 i iaauc uaunnnsw aae i �,-, clan" lalli d� AN3AF/•O9-008 -1, uolpn� ul,p 1,uawa6jey:) ap Sues 009LS ®AH3AV WegeB al zoslp ;n wortiane•n mm apina; el zagnsuoD *' v r, salad g selpe; souanbl}il ,LARRABEE DONALD C JR LEATHERMAN ROBERT D LEVY HELEN JOAN TRUST 411 LAKEWOOD CIR #A110 PO BOX 11930 421 WARWICK RD COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80910 ASPEN, CO 81612 KENILWORTH, IL 60043 -1145 LIFT ONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC LIFT ONE LLC 72.40% LIMELITE REDEVELOPMENT LLC 131 E DURANT AVE 24 LINDENWOOD LN C/O GENERAL MANAGEMENT ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLETON, CO 80127 1201 GALAPAGO ST #101 DENVER, CO 80204 LOCHHEAD RAYMOND R & EMILIE M LORING PETER & ELIZABETH S MACDONALD KENNETH HUGH REV 200 SHERWOOD RD LORING WOLCOTT & COOLIDGE OFFICE TRUST PASO ROBLES, CA 93446 230 CONGRESS ST 44 W HANNUM BOSTON, MA 02110 SAGINAW, MI 48602 MAGES LAWRENCE M & MARY K 84% MARCUS ANN H MARK KENNETH A 216 LINDEN AVE C/O S MARCUS 200 PANTIGO RD W ILMETTE, IL 60091 117 N MONARCH ST #01 EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCCONNELL THOMAS W & KAY L MCKENZIE BART B & PAIGE PARAVANO MESSNER CHRISTIAN 3814 OAKHILLS 4840 30TH ST NORTH 3111 BEL AIR DR APT 202 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 -2716 LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 MILLER R GREG MOUNTAIN CHALET ENTERPRISES INC MULKEY DAVID A DR PO BOX 4577 333 E DURANT AVE TRUSTEE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 2860 AUGUSTA DR LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 NELSON ARLENE NEWMAN KERRY J & RICKI R ONEAL PROPERTIES LLC 119 E COOPER ST #6 617 PRINCE DR 8100 E CAMELBACK RD #31 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWBURGH, IN 47630 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251 -2773 PASCO PROP LLC PAY ERIC GEOFFREY PHILLIPS B R SMITH PATRICK A 119 E COOPER AVE APT 12 311 S ASPEN ST #1 360 SOUTHFIELD RD ASPEN, CO 81611 -1772 ASPEN, CO 81611 BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009 PIECE OF THE PIE LLC PINES LODGE CONDO ASSOC PINES LODGE DEVELOPMENT LLC PO BOX 2492 152 E DURANT AVE 2353 IRVINE AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 PITNER N KATHRYN POPKIN PHILIP G PRASAD REV TRUST PO BOX 11930 PO BOX 7956 3776 W 3700 N ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 DARLINGTON, ID 83255 T ��jj Tam;ea; lead �(se3 Jo; jaded PaadT @09LS 3WdW3i G&Dny asn U ®09L5 ®A?J3A\%►Q°//1 i laaue uoi=uiSw aae I clams 1"A 6coa Atl3Atl-O9-008-L uoluni ;suLP _ ;uawaBM43 ap sua5 009LS ®AN3AV ;pege6 al zesIII ;D worAiane mnnm apma; el za3lnsuo3 V jalad q selpe; sauenbl;ill .PRODINGER IRMA PURVIS ROBERT K & CAROLYN K RINGSBY GRAY PO BOX 1245 PO BOX 3089 PO BOX 1292 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 HAIKU, HI 96708 ROARING FORK PROPERTIES C/O HOWARD A WILL JR 5055 26TH AVE ROCKFORD, IL 61109 RUMSEY DANIEL W 13700 MARINA POINTE DR #512 MARINA DL REY, CA 90292 -9259 SCHUMACHER JUDY M 0115 GLEN EAGLES DR ASPEN, CO 81611 SHEFFER BARBARA & DOUGLAS PO BOX 250 ASPEN, CO 81612 SKY BLUE LLC 27.60% 5743 CORSA AVE # 101 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91362 SOUTH POINT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 205 E DURANT AVE #2F ASPEN, CO 81611 STAPLETON DAVID W 206 E DEAN ST #2A ASPEN, CO 81611 STEINER DONALD R BUCKHEAD GRAND 3338 PEACHTREE RD #3307 ATLANTA, GA 30326 SZYMANSKI WILLIAM R & LYNNE E 2220 E SILVER PALM RD BOCA RATON, FL 33432 ROBLES ENRIQUE ALVAREZ ALVAREZ CRISTINA MONTES URALES 350 LOMAS CHAPULTEPEC MEXICO DF MEXICO, 11000 SCHAPIRO MARC & PATRICIA 1685 TAMARAC DR GOLDEN, CO 80401 SCULL JAMES E PO BOX 2051 ASPEN, CO 81612 SHENNAN MELISSA 822 LANE LORRAINE LAKE FOREST, IL 60045 -1643 SILT ASPEN DEAN STREET LLC C/O EPROPERTY TAX DEPT 206 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 852614900 SOUTHPOINT - SUMNER CORP 4828 FORT SUMNER DR BETHESDA, MD 20816 STARK RENEE A 205 E DURANT AVE APT 1D ASPEN, CO 81611 -3813 STITT ELIZABETH WILES IRREV TRUST 1450 SILVERKING DR ASPEN, CO 81611 TAROCH HOLDINGS LTD C/O PATRICK D MCALLISTER PC 315 E HYMAN AVE #305 ASPEN, CO 81611 -2909 ROSSI ELAYNE R 700 LITE AVE #710 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHAYER CHARLES M III 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 SHAW ROBERT W 5208 A PERSHING AVE FORT WORTH, TX 76107 SILVERMAN MARC A& MARILYN L 937 DALE RD MEADOWBROOK, PA 19046 SOUTH POINT CONDO LLC 150 N MARKET WICHITA, KS 67202 SPAULDING RICHARD W THOMPSON ELEANOR M PO BOX 278 CONCORD, MA 01742 -0278 STARWOOD VACATION OWNERSHIP C/O JOAN LAND ACCT MGR 9002 SAN MARCO CT ORLANDO, FL 32819 SULLIVAN JOHN B TRUST 1300 E REUSCH RD ELIZABETH, IL 61028 THALBERG KATHERINE C/O BROOKE ANDERSON 3131 CONNECTICUT AVE NW #2801 WASHINGTON, DC 20008 T Tam;eaj lead Ase3 jo; jaded paajT 009LS 31VIdW31 okantl asD :nJ 1 ®09L5.AN3AV i aaaue uninnn aa sul e _ T. PU — 2 z- AU3AV-09-009-L uolhni}sul,p woxAjane•mmm alllne; el zallnsuo:) J -wiHREE REEDS LLC 2224 VIA SEVILLE RD NW ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87104 -3096 VANDER WALL DEAN ROBERT & BEVERLY J PO BOX 189 LONE PINE, CA 93545 WEINGLASS LEONARD PO BOX 11509 ASPEN, CO 81612 W ITEK ROBERT J & RONA R 225 S MONARCH #G103 ASPEN, CO 81611 WOW LIFT ONE LLC C/O WARSTLER ROBERT T 3225 ELK CANYON CIR SEDALIA, CO 80135 -8573 1UMOBJE43 OP suaS ®0965 ®AH3AV 1ljege8 al zoslum v joled g selpe; sallar bq TOWNE PLACE OF ASPEN CONDO TYDEN FAMILY FARMS PTNP C/O AS INC 1730 IROQUOIS TR C/O ASPEN LODGING COMPANY 747 S GALENA ST HASTINGS, MI 49058 ASPEN, CO 81611 VANTONGEREN HAROLD V & LIDIA M 2000 E 12TH AVE BOX 8 DENVER, CO 80206 WHITE JALEH THICKMAN DAVID 152 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 -1737 WOODING MERRITT B PO BOX 339 HOPE, NJ 07844 WUGALTER JOEL 716 BISHOPS LODGE RD SANTE FE, NM 87501 -1127 VENTER HENDRIK JOHANNES PO BOX 11979 ASPEN, CO 81612 WICHMANN VICTORIA BOX 4388 ASPEN, CO 81612 WOODSON TATJANA REV TRUST PO BOX 125 TETON VILLAGE, WY 83025 T Tamlead lead Ase3 JO; jaded P88:1 0965 31yldW31��p'(��any as j e0965®AH3AVCV i laaUS U011�t1II5U1 aae Q ® aanw iaa, ,ce KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC HERBERT S. KLEIN hsk(alkcelaw.net LANCE R. COTE, PC* lrc(akcelaw.net JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, III, PC iee(akcelaw net EBEN P. CLARK epc(a'kcelaw net COREY T. ZURBUCH ctzakcelaw.net MADHU B. KRISHNAMURTI mtka4 kcelaw net DAVID C. UHLIG dco(akcelaw.net MATTHEW M. LOWRY mmlQkcelaw.net + also admitted in California ATTORNEYS AT LAW April 22, 2008 City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Jennifer Phelan Assistant Community Development Director Planner 130 S. Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 201 NORTH MILL STREET, STE. 203 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE: (970) 925 -8700 FACSIMILE: (970) 925 -3977 RE: Supplement to Application for Minor PUD Amendment and GMQS Allocation for 411 S. Monarch Street, Aspen ( "the Project ") To the Members of the Commission: This letter is a supplement to the application and written description for the applications submitted on February 15, 2008 for the above Project. Staff, in a letter dated March 5, 2008, requested that Applicant address the Commercial Design Review Criteria in sections 26.412.050 and 26.412.060 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code "). This letter is a supplemental written explanation of how the proposed amendment complies with the Commercial Design Review Criteria or why those criteria are inapplicable. I. Introduction: The applicant is Dancing Bear Land, LLC, 210N. Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 ( "Applicant "). Our firm, Klein, Cote & Edwards, LLC, 201 N. Mill Street, Suite 203, Aspen, Colorado 81611, is authorized to act on Applicant's behalf with regard to the Project. Please address all correspondence regarding this application to our firm and to my attention. The subject property is located at 411 S. Monarch Street, Aspen. The parcel is identified C -� City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 2of17 as parcel number 273718219002, and the legal description of the property is: THE DANCING BEAR LODGE ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PUD PLAN AND PLAT RECORDED JUNE 8, 2004 IN PLAT BOOK 69 AT PAGE 80 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 498443, IN THE RECORDS OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; also known as: Lots P, Q, R and S, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado ( "Property "). This firm has certified that Applicant is the owner of the Property and is entitled to submit this development application. A vicinity map is attached as Exhibit D to the initial application and letter. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Project was originally approved by the Aspen City Council in 2003 in Ordinance No. 29 Series of 2003, and the Dancing Bear Lodge Final PUD Plan and Plat is recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County at Plat Book 69 Page 80, Reception No. 498443. The pending application is for permission to enclose the restaurant space that is currently beneath overhangs on the approved and partially constructed building. The proposed amendment would increase the restaurant/commercial space in the Project by approximately 386 square feet and would allow for approximately 30 additional diners in the restaurant throughout the off- season and winter months. Construction and design will be consistent with that which was previously approved for the Project. The amendment will simply allow the recessed walls to be moved to the edge of the sidewalk, flush to the current fagade. This configuration will bring the active dining area to the edge of the sidewalk in the off - season and winter months, promoting interest in and a feeling of vitality to the corner throughout the year. II. Exemption from Commercial Design Review: As a threshold matter, Section 26.412.020, "Applicability" states: This section applies to all commercial, lodging, and mixed -used development with a commercial component, within the City of Aspen requiring a building permit. Applications for commercial development may be exempted from the provisions of this section by the Community Development Director if the development is: A. An addition or remodel of an existing structure that either does not change the exterior of the building or, is determined by the Community Development Director, changes the exterior in such a minimal manner as to not justify this review. C City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 3 of 17 Applicant believes the current application should be exempted from Design Review based on this provision. The current application will make only very minor changes to the exterior and appearance of the building. In fact, the current plan is simply to move the bank of windows, as previously approved for the wall at the back of the over hung area, to the front of that area. Other than the relocation, there are minimal changes to the design and appearance building as already approved. Therefore, the proposed amendment should be considered an addition that does not change the exterior of the building or that changes the exterior in such a minimal manner as to not justify review. Furthermore, the desired change is actually more in conformance with the newly adopted guidelines. This is true because the relocation of the glass wall will bring the activity in the restaurant to the edge of the pedestrian area in the off-season and winter months. In the summer months, there will continue to be outdoor seating at the edge of the sidewalk. All of this will bring the active edge of the structure to the edge of pedestrian area, and increase the vitality and feeling of activity on this corner and important boundary to the Commercial Core Area. These are all goals stated in the Design Objectives and Guidelines. III. Commercial Design Review Criteria: Section 26.412.050 of the Code, titled Review criteria, states that an application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the fagade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 4 of 17 Response: Subsection B is not applicable to the current proposal as this is a new structure and there is no change in the approved use of the space that is to be enclosed. In addition, the proposed amendment will change the exterior appearance only slightly and will be seamless with the existing exterior as approved in the original P.U.D. Therefore, there will be little or no variation in the appearance and design from the previous approval. Therefore, it appears the proposal must meet only the Commercial Design standards set out in Section 26.412.060. Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards sets out the following standards: Standard: The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed -use development: A. Public amenity space. Creative, well- designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights -of -way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on -site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at -grade relationships with adjacent rights -of -way are encouraged. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights -of -way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. C 0 City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 5 of 17 Response: The public amenity space requirement for the entire Project was satisfied in the original approvals by the provision of open space as required in the approval ordinance. The amendment proposes to enclose only spaces that currently exist under a roof overhang, and which are not "open to the sky ". Therefore, those spaces do not fit the Code definition of open space, and the proposal will not enclose any existing "open space" under the Code. Standard: B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A utility, trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060, Utility /trash/recycle service areas, unless otherwise established according to said Section. Response: This standard has been satisfied as part of the original P.U.D. design, review and approval. A utility, trash and recycle service area has been located along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060, Utility /trash/recycle service areas. An enclosure for the recycling, loading and trash area has recently been approved by Staff and added to the design to protect the area from wildlife and further shield the area from view. Standard: 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Response: This standard has been satisfied as part of the original P.U.D. design, review and approval. All utility service pedestals are to be located on private property and along the alley, and easements will allow service providers access. There are no encroachments into alley. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 6 of 17 Standard: 3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Response: This standard has been satisfied as part of the original P.U.D. design, review and approval. The delivery service areas is incorporated along the alley side, and enclosed. The truck loading facility is integrated into the building. Standard: 4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Response: This standard has been satisfied as part of the original P.U.D. design, review and approval. Mechanical exhausts, including parking garage ventilation, are vented through the roof and the exhaust equipment is located as far away from the street as possible. Standard: 5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right -of -way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Response: This standard has been satisfied as part of the original P.U.D. design, review and approval. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting is routed internally within the building and located on the roof, and minimized and recessed behind the parapet and other screening devices such that it is not be visible from a public right -of -way. IV. Commercial Character Area Design Objectives and Guidelines: Section 26.412.050(0) further requires that all applications comply with the applicable Design Review Guidelines. The Project is located in the Commercial Character Area and must comply with the guidelines applicable to that area set forth in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. Staff has advised Applicant that because this is a minor revision and a Consolidated Review, Applicant need only address the Final Design Guidelines. Those Objectives and Guidelines and Applicant's responses follow. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 7 of 17 Objective: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. Strengthening the definition of the street edge in a manner similar to the Commercial Core is desired. At the same time, the Commercial Area is a place where more variety in design is encouraged. Imitating historic styles is not an objective, but re- establishing a sense of a stronger fundamental framework will enhance the urban qualities of this area and is a priority. Response: The proposed amendment will not significantly alter the previously approved fagade of the Project. However, the relocation of the restaurant window, from the back of a recess area as previously approved to the edge of the sidewalk on the east and the edge of the outdoor dining area on the south, will reinforce the street edge in a manner similar to the Commercial Core and help to re- establish the Core framework in an area at the edge of the Core. The proposal will also create a hard sidewalk edge that enhances the urban qualities of the Commercial Character Area and relate it to the characteristics of the Commercial Core. This will also bring the activity in the restaurant to the sidewalk edge, and add vitality to the area in winter and off season months. The remaining characteristics will remain as previously approved. Obiective• 2. Maintain a retail orientation. Greater retail presence at the street edge should be achieved to ensure an enhanced street vitality and an enriched and more urban definition of the commercial street frontage. Response: The approved and proposed space will remain a restaurant as required in the previous P.U.D. approvals. Having the interior restaurant seating area closer to the street and sidewalk edge will mirror a greater retail presence and will allow passersby to see into the restaurant from the sidewalk. This will help to ensure enhanced street vitality and a more urban definition of the commercial street frontage Obiective: 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. Designs should seek creative new solutions that convey the community's continuing interest in exploring innovations. At the same time, the fundamental principles of traditional design must be respected. This means that each project should strike a balance in the design variables that are presented in the following pages. 4i City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 8 of 17 Response: The proposed amendment will not significantly alter the previously approved fagade of the Project. The design variables that were approved to balance traditional and contemporary design will be maintained. Objective: 4. Encourage a well - defined street wall. The intent is to more clearly establish a strongly defined street wall, but with some greater variety than in the Commercial Core Historic District since the historic building edge is not as defined. A stronger street fagade definition should be achieved while at the same time recognizing the value of public dining and landscaped space. Response: By moving the restaurant window, from the back of a recess area as previously approved to the edge of the sidewalk on the east and the edge of the outdoor dining area on the south, this proposal will clearly establish a strong street edge and reinforce the street edge in a manner similar to the Commercial Core. This will aid in the transition from the Commercial Core framework to this area at the edge of the Commercial Core. This stronger street fagade definition is possible while retaining the outdoor public dining space and landscaped areas as previously approved. All of this will add vitality to the area in winter and off season months. The remaining characteristics will remain as previously approved. Obiective: 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. It is important that a range and variation in building height and scale in the Commercial Area be recognized in future development. Larger buildings should be vaned in height and reflect original lot widths. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved heights and fagade of the Project. The varied fagade and roof height and all other exterior dimensional characteristics will remain as previously approved Obiective• 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. Providing space in association with individual buildings remains important, but should be balanced with much greater building street presence and corner definition. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 9 of 17 Response: See Response Above. By placing the restaurant window at the edge of the sidewalk on the east and the edge of the outdoor dining area on the south, this proposal will more clearly and strongly define the street edge in a fashion similar to that in the Commercial Core. This stronger street fagade will be created while preserving outdoor public dining space on the south side. The proposal will also retain the clearly defined street corner as previously approved. Obiective• 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Display cases, architectural details and landscaping are among the design elements that should be used. Response: See Above Responses. The location of the restaurant window at edge of the sidewalk on the east side and the edge of the outdoor dining area on the south will establish a strong street edge while retaining the outdoor public dining space and landscaping. This will bring activity to the street edge and add vitality to the area in winter and off season months. Guideline: 1.29 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width (30 ft.) as expressed by two or more of the following: • Variation in height at internal lot lines • Variation in the plane of the front fapade • Street fagade composition • Variation in architectural detailing and materials to emphasize the building module Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved fagade of the Project, except for the relocation of the previously approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk to the east and edge of the patio area to the south. The variations in height and fapade to reflect lot widths will remain as previously approved. C City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 10 of 17 Guideline: 1.30 The detailed design of the building fagade should reflect the traditional scale and rhythm of the block. This should be achieved using all of the following: • The fenestration grouping • The modeling of the fagade • The design framework for the first floor storefront • Variation in architectural detail and/or the palette of fagade materials Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved fagade of the Project, except for the relocation of the previously approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk to the east and edge of the patio area to the south. The fenestration grouping, modeling of the fagade, variation in architectural detail and/or the palette of fagade materials will remain as previously approved. The design framework for the first floor storefront will be somewhat altered as the storefront and activity within the restaurant will be brought either to the edge of the sidewalk or closer to the edge of the sidewalk. This will contribute to the vitality of the neighborhood in all seasons, but especially in the winter and off seasons when the currently approved exterior seating is unlikely to be used. Guideline: 1.31 A building should reflect the architectural hierarchy and articulation inherent in the composition of the street fagade. The following should be addressed: • The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor • The vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved fagade of the Project, except for the relocation of the previously approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk to the east and edge of the patio area to the south. The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor and the vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area will remain as they existed in the previous approvals. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 11 of 17 Guideline: 1.32 A building should reflect the three- dimensional characteristics of the street fagade in the strength and depth of modeling, fenestration and architectural detail. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved fagade of the Project, except for the relocation of the previously approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk to the east and edge of the patio area to the south. The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor and the vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area will remain as they existed in the previous approvals. Guideline: 1.33 Any new building shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to ceiling on all floors. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved floor to ceiling heights. The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor and the vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area will remain as they existed in the previous approvals. Guideline: 1.34 Maintain the distinction between the street level and upper floors. • The first floor should be the tallest floor to floor height in the building. • The first floor of the primary fagade should be predominantly transparent glass. • Upper floors should be perceived as being more opaque than the street level. Upper story windows should have a vertical emphasis. • Highly reflective or darkly tinted glass is inappropriate. • Express the traditional distinction in floor heights between street levels and upper levels through detailing, materials and fenestration. The presence of a belt course is an important feature in this relationship. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved floor to ceiling heights. The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor and the vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area will remain as they existed in the previous approvals. 0. %owe ... City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 12 of 17 Guideline: 1.35 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level retail frontage. • This should be 13 -15 ft. in floor to floor height on the first floor. • The minimum required first floor height must be maintained for at least the first 50 foot depth of the lot, and may only be dropped to a lower height beyond that point for areas that are devoted to storage, circulation, offices, restaurant kitchens, alley commercial spaces, or similar secondary uses. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved floor to ceiling heights. The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor will remain as it existed in the previous approvals. Guideline: 1.36 Minimize the appearance of a tall third floor. • Where a third floor's floor to ceiling height is in excess of 12 ft., it should be set back a minimum of 15 ft. from the street fagade to reduce the apparent height. • Increase the parapet height to screen the visual impact of a tall top floor. • The design of a set back third floor shall be simpler in form, more subdued in modeling, detail and color than the primary fagade. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved floor to ceiling heights, and will only minimally affect the appearance of the fagade. The previously approved effect of tiered upper floors will remain as it existed in the original approvals. Guideline: 1.37 The first floor fagade should be designed to concentrate interest at the street level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials. • A strong and distinctively designed retail framework for the first floor of the building. • An entryway designed to use the full height of the storefront. • A distinct change in the palette of materials used for the first floor design framework. • The depth and strength of the modeling of elements and details. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 13 of 17 Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved first floor fagade of the Project. The relocation of the approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk and patio area will move the activities within the restaurant to the street edge and concentrate interest at the street level. All construction will use the highest quality of design, detailing and materials to emphasize the retail framework of the first floor of the building as previously approved. The entryway is designed to use the full height of the storefront, and a distinct change in the palette of materials used for the first floor design framework as previously approved. Guideline: 1.38 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. • All entrances shall be ADA compliant. • On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved first floor fagade of the Project. The first floor and restaurant will remain at street level and will provide ADA accessibility. Guideline: 1.39 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. • An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary fagade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. • Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. • Using a temporary vinyl or fabric "airlock" to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved first floor fagade, and will only impact the entryway very slightly. The will still be an airlock entry as in the existing design. Guideline: 1.40 Window area along the first floor shall be a minimum of 60% of exterior street fagade area when facing principal street(s). City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 14 of 17 Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved first floor fagade of the Project. The relocation of the approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk and patio area will increase the window area along the first floor fagade over that required by the previously approvals. Guideline: 1.41 Where appropriate a building shall be designed to maintain the character and transparency of the traditional street level retail frontage. Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved first floor fagade of the Project. The relocation of the approved window of the restaurant to the edge of the sidewalk and patio area will increase the window area along the first floor fagade. By placing the restaurant window at the edge of the sidewalk on the east and the edge of the outdoor dining area on the south, the proposal will add transparency to the restaurant area and also concentrate interest on the first floor fagade and street level by preserving the outdoor public dining space on the south side. Guideline: 1.42 Design of the first floor storefront should include particular attention to the following: • The basic elements and proportions of storefront design • Depth and strength of modeling • The palette of materials and finishes used in both the structural framework and the storefront window • The concentration of architectural detail to ensure a rich visual experience • The complementary use of signage and lettering to enhance the retail and downtown character • The use of lighting to accentuate visual presence Response: The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved first floor fagade of the Project. By placing the restaurant window at the edge of the sidewalk on the east and the edge of the outdoor dining area on the south, the proposal will add transparency to the restaurant area and also concentrate interest on the first floor fagade and street level by preserving the outdoor public dining space on the south side. C City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 15 of 17 Guideline: 1.43 Retail frontage facing onto side courts or rear alleys should follow similar design principles to the street frontage, adjusted for the scale of the space. • It should be designed with a similar attention to architectural articulation, detail and materials. • These should have a richness of detail that is inviting to users. Response: Inapplicable. The store fronts of the restaurant as proposed will face Monarch Street and Durant Avenue. Guideline: 1.44 A larger building should reflect the traditional lot width in the form and variation of its roof. This should be achieved through the following: • A set back of the top floor from the front fagade • Reflect the traditional lot width in the roof plane Response: Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved fagade of the upper floors or the roof. Guideline: 1.45 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building. • Group and screen mechanical units from view. • Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. • Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building. Response: • Use materials which complement the design of the building fagades. • Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street. • Use 'green roof design best practice, where feasible. Inapplicable. The proposed amendment will not alter the previously approved upper floors or the roof. City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 16 of 17 Guideline: 1.46 High quality, durable materials should be employed. • The palette of materials should be specified, including samples of materials as required. Response: The wall materials as previously approved will be used in the relocated wall. The appearance will be altered only insignificantly. Therefore, the proposed amendment will comply with all materials requirements as previously approved. Guideline: 1.47 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen traditionally • Reduce the perceived scale of the building and enhance visual interest of the facade • Convey a human scale • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen's climate Response: Only materials previously approved will be used in the relocated wall, and all will meet the stated criteria. Guideline: 1.48 A building or additions should reflect the quality and variation in materials seen traditionally. Response: Guideline: Only materials previously approved will be used in the relocated wall, and all will meet the stated criteria. 1.49 Where contemporary materials are used they shall be: • High quality in durability and finish • Detailed to convey a human scale • Compatible with a traditional masonry palette C City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission April 22, 2008 Page 17 of 17 Response: Only materials previously approved will be used in the relocated wall, and all will meet the stated criteria. Guideline: 1.50 Materials used for third floor accommodation set back from the street fagade(s) should be more subdued than the primary fagades. Response: The proposal will not alter the third floor of the Project. Only materials previously approved will be used in the relocated wall, and all will meet the stated criteria. Guideline: 1.51 Paving and landscaping should be designed to complement and enhance the immediate setting of the building and area. Response: The proposal will not alter the previously approved paving and landscaping. All paving and landscaping will be constructed as previously approved, and all will meet the stated criteria. V. Conclusion: Based on the foregoing, Applicant meets each of the stated requirements for the requested approvals and amendments Thank you for considering this application. If there is further information that you require, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC b�By: Eben P. Clark cc: Dancing Bear Land, LLC Supplement to PUD Am Application Itr 4- 21- 08.doc 5 M]N]YN IIIM �3]4WE OO'Jf 3UISAWd — 9 Ir WIN i If in Y 6 2 S O FMMIMPI _: i. 9 Ir WIN i If in Y 6 2 S 0 s f u °g u �$ 4 �I s l �h111 � 511LLLYAtp MI MV�G 1N]neiM] N]N]11M NNM1 � 3'.%WE MAf Q M C 9 ME 1LOA�!�III � s C`a MV38 O'N]AY 3QISNNtld - LV3B 9NIONVQ e u °g u �$ 4 �I s i MMEESM!� 000000 u II u II I I II I I I II FIJI II II I II II II TTI I 1 LI J I 3 r c l �h111 � � 1LOA�!�III � s C`a i MMEESM!� 000000 u II u II I I II I I I II FIJI II II I II II II TTI I 1 LI J I 3 r c ' J�1�1� Cl"' +� �,�. 0 E J 4 zLL- oL Zntb W°zo Q� -A LH W p LLI Q� o �> o o' L6 LU > z Q z p iu 0 U 3 Z g cc cc r y S c c I I 0 � I IIII I O m I u i i I I ® I fi I LN I - ------- - - - - -- - - -I 000 � ti I I m, I c o �LLW ZoL �n ZZCulL e �C4 4 0(3.1 Q= ::,: acn W�'op�r ° W �'D W wU W� =��Z �Q �� 1L � �� u�� ty UQO <�LL]Q -q IT m�Z =`rZ c1-T 0 l7� �cf> WXQ m Jam— W cv— Z W �.W W O O r Z Q S 9 J � � j c� Q Q > � U C) N 1 ��9-�41 I § ��0-�41 1 ..0-.9 I ..9•.4 ��f6-�LI ��f•,01 s ��I Nf d g .uu3 d ssvd 111111 1111111 __________L'OIJ31X3_ 1111111 I 1� WIb31N1 ld DS Z51 1 i0 1139 WOb. NvaA lvW1100V 7 I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I O p I d 1 ` 1. L_ - I 6 L: I° I I I Dancing Bear Parkside — Aspen, CO 1.14.08 Restaurant & Kitchen: Proposed Expanded Year Round Seating Current areas as shown on permitted set of drawings: Overall Building: 58,432 sq. ft. 151 Floor: 8,353 sq. ft. Restaurant/Kitchen: 1,808 sq. ft. Proposed re- design area increases: Overall Building: 58,818 sq. ft. (0.66 % increase) 15c Floor: 8,739 sq. ft. (4.6 % increase) Restaurant/Kitchen: 2,194 sq. ft. (21.4 % increase) Note: Depending on seating arrangement this increase could add an additional 30 seats for year round seating. A a T O O n T �IIIYIII� iiNU�ii�■i NI��1 A a T O O n T tt£ylst� .iii: COA��l17, �yY$3IN, ZLLCn OLL S) Z��c) �/O ZZ �LuzZ� W Q � O �� = oz� a LU � LU oc�u QzQ�u mQ �ao��Na w LL] ry? za- VwWwQ n w w N Q > ° N L V AllI� l _J Ha bl NJtlS13S of 1LVtld IT1 3N11 lltl3dOYd 15V3 It t I I� e i w err: f� k3B ' ' T 700000• • i 9p�aZ�7 �n� Inc �a r�� . . . . L13. 103 3. NMI - 3.. OM C ffifl O IONVO 3015MNdd - NV3B 9NIJNYO I P V I I I LIB .acoma�wo�a��aa�ao�oti +_ 9 Lalg�tl 5 rl ' ' T 700000• • i 9p�aZ�7 �n� Inc �a r�� . . . . L13. 103 3. NMI - 3.. OM C ffifl O IONVO 3015MNdd - NV3B 9NIJNYO I P V I I I LIB