HomeMy WebLinkAbout#landuse case.HP.Rubey Park.0001.2014.AHPCRubey Park
Remodel
HPC Submittal
9 January 2014
Submittal Requirements
Pre-Application Summary
Authorization Letter
Property Description
Disclosure of Ownership
Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Site Survey
Written Description
Land Use Application Form
Deposit Waiver Fee Form
Fee Agreement
Dimensional Requirement Form
Commercial Verification Narrative
Scaled Drawings
Architectural Drawings
Supplemental Materials - 3D model
Preliminary Materials
Mailing List of Adjacent Properties within 300'
1 - 2
3 -5
6
7
8
9
10
11 - 12
13 - 30
31 - 32
33 - 34
35
36
37 - 40
41
42 - 44
45
46 - 47
48 - 52
Rubey Park Remodel
HPC Submittal
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007 Matrix of The City of Aspen's Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements To review full procedures for all applications, reference 26.415 of The City of Aspen Building Code, Historic Preservation Ordinance. When submitting multiple step applications, do not replicate submission materials. Two copies of the application are required for a Certificate of No Effect, 15 copies are required for each meetingall other review. Also note that an electronic version of all text documents is required in a .txt, .doc, .wpd, or .rtf format. Type of Review Application Requirements Fees Deposit Fee Notice Requirements Designation 1-9, 11, 12 $0 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.) at HPC and Council Exempt Development Consult with Historic Preservation Officer to confirm exempt status $0 None Certificate of No Negative Effect 1-9, 15, 17 $245 None Minor Development 1-10, 15, 16, 17, 36 $735 Posting Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (b) Major Development / Conceptual 1-10, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20 Development under 1,000 s.f., $1,470 / Development over 1,000 s.f., $2,940Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Major Development / Final 1-10, 16, 21, 22, 36 Paid at time of conceptual Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Substantial Amendment 1-10, 16, 23, 24, 25, 36 $735 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Demolition 1-9, 26 $2,940 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Relocation 1-9, 27-34 $2,940 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Historic Landmark Lot Split 1-10 $1,470 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) at HPC and Council Rescinding Designation 1-9, 35 $1,470 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) at HPC and Council
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
KEY
1. Contained within a letter signed by
the applicant, the applicant's name,
address and telephone number, and
the name, address, and telephone
number of any representative
authorized to act on behalf of the
applicant.
2. The street address, legal
description, and parcel
identification number of the
property proposed for development.
3. A disclosure of ownership of the
parcel proposed for development,
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. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map
locating the subject parcel within
the City of Aspen.
5. A site plan depicting the proposed
layout and the project’s physical
relationship to the land and its
surroundings.
6. A site improvement survey
certified by a registered land
surveyor, licensed in the State of
Colorado, showing the current
status of the parcel including the
current topography and vegetation.
(This requirement, or any part
thereof, may be waived by the
Community Development Director
if the project is determined not to
warrant a survey document.)
7. A written description of the
proposal and a written explanation
of how the proposed development
complies with the review criteria
and The City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines
relevant to the development
application.
8. Additional materials,
documentation, or reports as
deemed necessary by the
Community Development Director.
9. Completed Land Use Application
Form, Signed Fee Agreement, and
Fee.
10. Dimensional Requirement Form.
11. Site or historic district boundary
map.
12. Property or district description including
narrative text, photographs and/or other
graphic materials that document its physical
characteristics.
13. Identification of the character-defining
features that distinguish the entity which
should be preserved.
14. Verification that the proposal complies with
Section 26.410, Residential Design
Standards, or a written request for a variance
from any standard that is not being met.
15. Photographs, building material samples
and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately
depict location, extent and design of the
proposed work.
16. An accurate representation of all major
building materials and finishes to be used in
the development, depicted through samples or
photographs.
17. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the
proposed work and its relationship to the
designated historic buildings, structures, sites
and features in its context.
18. Scaled drawings of the proposed structure(s)
or addition(s) depicting their form, including
their height, massing, scale, proportions and
roof plan; and the primary features of all
elevations in the neighborhood context.
19. Supplemental materials to provide a visual
description of the context surrounding the
designated historic property or historic district
including at least one (1) of the following:
diagrams, maps, photographs, 3-D model
(digital or physical) or streetscape elevations.
20. Preliminary selection of primary building
materials to be used in construction
represented by samples and/or photographs.
21. A statement, including narrative text or
graphics, indicating how the Final
Development Plan conforms to
representations made or stipulations placed as
a condition of the approval of the Conceptual
Development Plan.
22. Final drawings of all proposed structures(s)
and/or addition(s) included as part of the
development at ¼” = 1.0’ scale
23. A revised site plan
24. Revised scaled elevations and drawings
25. Photographs and other exhibits to illustrate
the proposed changes.
26. Written documentation that the Chief
Building Official has determined the building
an imminent hazard, or narrative text,
graphic illustrations or other exhibits that
provide evidence that the building, structure
or object is of no historic or architectural
value or importance.
27. A written description and/or graphic
illustrations of the building, structure or
object proposed for relocation.
28. A written explanation of the type of
relocation requested (temporary, on-site or
off-site) and justification for the need for
relocation.
29. A written report from a licensed engineer or
architect regarding the soundness of the
building, structure or object, its ability to
withstand the physical move and its
rehabilitation needs, once relocated.
30. A conceptual plan for the receiving site
providing preliminary information on the
property boundaries, existing improvements
and site characteristics and the associated
planned improvements.
31. Evidence of the financial ability to
undertake the safe relocation, preservation
and repair of the building, structure or object;
site preparation and construction of necessary
infrastructure through the posting of bonds or
other financial measures deemed appropriate.
32. Supplementary materials to provide an
understanding of the larger context for the
relocated property and its impact on adjacent
properties, the neighborhood or streetscape.
33. If the applicant does not own the receiving
site, proof from the site’s property owner of
the willingness to accept the relocated
building, structure or object.
34. Evidence that the applicant has or is seeking
the necessary approvals to place the
building on the identified receiving site. If
the site is outside of the city limits,
verification that the building will be
preserved on its new site through a formal
action of the other jurisdiction or a
preservation easement.
35. A written description of how the property
does not meet these criteria for designation.
36. A lighting plan indicating the location of all
exterior light fixtures and site lighting, and
cut sheets for each type of fixture proposed.
Light fixtures must comply with the "City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines" and meet the City Lighting Code.
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION SUMMARY
PLANNER: Justin Barker, 429.2797 DATE: 12.6.13
PROJECT: Rubey Park Remodel
REPRESENTATIVE: BlueGreen/Studio B Architects
DESCRIPTION: The Rubey Park Transit Facility serves as the hub for the Roaring Fork Transit Authority’s bus
system. The current facility was developed in the late 1980s, and is in need of renovation. The property is a
27,000 sq. ft. lot located in the Public zone district with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Overlay. The existing
SPA Plat is recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder as Plat Book 39, Page 6.
On December 18, 2013 the existing SPA will effectively become a Planned Development (PD), and will be
subject to all Land Use Code regulations that apply due to the adoption of Ordinance # 36, Series of 2013.
Redevelopment on this property requires an amendment to the PD. The PD review process is generally a three
step process: Project Review with both the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council, and Detail Review
with P&Z. Dimensional requirements within the Public zone district are established through the adoption of a
Planned Development plan. Since a PD amendment is already required, dimensions will be established with the
amended PD plan.
The property is not landmarked, but is located in the Commercial Core Historic District. This requires
Commercial Design Review (a two-step process) reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. HPC
references the adopted Commercial Core Historic District design guidelines and a separate set of historic
preservation guidelines to review the proposal. Links to the documents are provided below. The application
must address the guidelines and demonstrate compliance where applicable. Specific guidelines to address are
listed in Exhibit A to this pre-application summary.
The existing facility is determined to be an “essential public facility”, and requires Growth Management review for
potential expansion. City Council is the decision-making body, with recommendation from the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Affordable housing mitigation requirements may be assessed, waived, or partially waived
as deemed appropriate by City Council.
Under the new PD process, Project Review and/or Detail Review and other associated reviews may be
combined with HPC review. However, this process is still very new, and staff recommends P&Z perform the
Project Review due to the scope of this particular project.
The anticipated order of board review will occur as follows:
1. HPC – Conceptual Commercial Design Review
2. P&Z – Project Review & Growth Management Review
3. City Council – Project Review & Growth Management Review
4. HPC – Detail Review & Final Commercial Design Review
All of the above listed board reviews are public hearings and require adequate noticing. Due to the nature of this
project and importance to the community, Neighborhood Outreach will be required as outlined in Section
26.304.035. Staff recommends an Information Meeting and/or Enhanced Public Information as the most
appropriate options.
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach
3
26.412 Commercial Design Review
26.470 Growth Management
26.470.050, General Requirements
26.470.090, City Council applications
26.470.110, Growth Management Review Procedures
26.445 Planned Development
26.710.250 Public (PUB) Zone District
A link to the Land Use Code is here: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-
and-Zoning/Title-26-Land-Use-Code/
A link to the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guideline is here:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Current-Planning/
A link to other historic preservation guidelines is here:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Historic-Preservation/Historic-Properties/
A link to the Land Use Application is here:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Applications-and-Fees/
A link to the HPC Application is here:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/2011%20Historic%20Land%20Use
%20App%20Form.pdf
Review by: Staff for complete application
HPC
P&Z
City Council
Public Hearing(s): HPC
P&Z
City Council
Planning Fees: For HPC application - $1,950 for 6 hours at $325 per hour
For P&Z and Council Review - $10,400 for 32 hours at $325 per hour
Referrals: Engineering - $265 per hour
Total Deposit: For HPC application: $1,950
For P&Z/Council application: $10,665
Total Number of Application Copies: 12 Copies for HPC, 20 Copies for P&Z and Council
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. Proof of ownership. 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,
4
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 1/2” x 11” vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen.
8. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all
easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the
state of Colorado.
9. Existing and proposed elevation drawings and site plan that include proposed dimensional requirements as
well as landscaping plan. 11 x 17 size drawings are sufficient for HPC conceptual review and the reviews at
P&Z and Council. Drawings at ¼” = 1’ scale is required for HPC final review.
10. A 3-D model of the proposal in context.
11. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the
proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please
include existing conditions as well as proposed.
11. All other materials required pursuant to the specific submittal requirements.
13. List of adjacent property owners within 300’ for public hearing.
14. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as in digital format.
Applicants are advised that building plans will be required to meet the International Building Code as adopted by the
City of Aspen, the Federal Fair Housing Act, and CRS 9.5.112. Please make sure that your application submittal
addresses these building-related and accessibility regulations. You may contact the Building Department at 920-
5090 for additional information.
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.
5
6
rubey park HPC submittal package | 7-1
street address 450 East Durant Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611
legal description City and Townsite of Aspen
Block 90
Lot: K, L,M,N,O,P,Q, R and S
parcel identification number 273718221851
02 property description rubey park HPC submittal package 7
December 9, 2013
VIA EMAIL
Justin Barker
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr. Bendon:
I was asked by Tyler Nielsen to provide an opinion regarding the ownership of property
known as the Rubey Park in Aspen, Colorado, upon which the City proposes to redevelop the
existing transportation facility. I have reviewed the documents associated with the acquisition
and ownership of the subject property. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of
Colorado.
Lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S Block 90 in and to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin
County, Colorado, the parcels upon which the Rubey Park Transportation Center currently sits,
were acquired by the City of Aspen pursuant to a deed recorded in Book 251 at page 619 of the
Real Property Records of Pitkin County, Colorado on October 3, 1970. The property has not
been conveyed to any other person or entity. Thus, it is my opinion that the property upon
which the City intends to remodel the existing Rubey Park Transportation Center is owned by
the City of Aspen. There are no mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, or contracts affecting
the parcel; and, the City of Aspen has the right to proceed with the development of this parcel.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Electronic copy: Original Signed by James R. True
James R. True
City Attorney
8
rubey park HPC submittal package | 4-1
04 vicinity map rubey park HPC submittal package 9
key1 waiting room2 women’s restroom3 men’s restroom4 staff restroom5 vestibule6 tickets & information8 RFTA operations9 driver’s lounge10 mechanical room11 equipment storage12 recycling receptacles - operations13 bus sawtooth berth14 bus linear berth15 bus layover berth16 taxi / shuttle parking19 ADA parking20 public metered parking21 commercial loading / unloading zone22 planting area23 stormwater treatment area24 pedestrian walking zones25 bus rider waiting zones26 pedestrian seating (covered)27 pedestrian seating (uncovered)28 table seating29 aspen tap station30 trash receptacles31 recycling receptacles32 bike racks33 wecycle station34 ski racks35 newspaper kiosks36 exterior real-time bus signage37 bus signage38 route map / schedule39 amenity map direction of vehicular travel alley waydurant avenuedean streetmill streetgalena street21342222232815 15 1515 151313131316239445710814141414141414141414 14111112162121333535363637383839393131321717183030252624242729372632scale01020northSCHEMATIC DESIGNOVERALL PLANRubey Park RemodelCity of Aspen Bluegreen Studio B Fehr & Peers HNTB Sopris Engineering October 30, 2013edhTp10
11
12
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-1
project description Rubey Park (Transit Center) is centrally situated in Aspen's commercial core and is
the southernmost terminus for the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority's (RFTA)
regional bus system. The site is flanked on the west by Mill Street and Wagner
Park, and on the east by Galena Street.
When the Transit Center was designed and constructed thirty years ago, no one
imagined that it would serve as the Grand Central Station of the valley. It is a key
landmark and directional tool, as well as the first experience many visitors have
within the historical urban core of Aspen. As more and more people have chosen
to ride the bus, both to and from Aspen on RFTA’s regional bus routes and within
Aspen on the city’s local bus routes, use has grown to over 4 million passengers
per year. Typically about 30% of the work force in Aspen arrives by transit each
day. In the Winter RFTA moves thousands of skiers between Aspen and the other
three ski resorts.
The site is functionally inadequate and is physically deteriorating beyond repair.
Over the past ten years, increased demand and limited improvements (beyond
annual maintenance) has resulted in functional, safety and maintenance
deficiencies that include:
Tripping and slipping hazards due to cracked and uneven pavement and
icing from overhangs and brick pavers.
• Congestion from undersized driver break rooms, inefficient indoor
passenger waiting areas and under-designed bathrooms that require
constant attention.
• Inadequate space and circulation for buses that results in conflicts
between buses, pedestrians, bicyclists, and private vehicles.
• Limited lighting and deteriorating concrete walls that pose safety risks.
Functionally, the Transit Center cannot adequately accommodate and safely
support bus, rider or transit operation needs. Buses often need to utilize adjacent
and remote parking locations that require additional turning movements in a
congested, tourist oriented area. The drivers are frequently forced to unload their
passengers in a staging area designated for another bus. Consequently, arriving
buses often find all twelve staging areas occupied and are forced to unload
passengers in unsafe areas, wait in travel lanes, stage in unauthorized areas
and/or circulate through the City until space is available. They mix with other
traffic—including hotel shuttle vans, delivery trucks, taxis and cars and often travel
in circles through downtown waiting until a staging space is available. Sometimes
buses are sent out of town to wait at the Brush Creek Intercept Lot, approximately
7 miles away.
The design for the remodel was created through an extensive process. The
process provided a vision for the Transit Center that carefully integrated
transportation planning efforts, community ownership and buy-in, economic
viability and functional and artful spaces that respect the historical character of the
city
07 project description and response to historic preservation guidelines rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package 13
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-2
This process included comprehensive and interactive public outreach meetings,
advisory team meetings, project team meetings, and periodic informational
memorandums to City Council. This synergetic process resulted in a final
schematic design approved by Aspen’s City Council.
The schematic plan grounded on public outreach and professional coordination,
realizes a solution that best satisfies the design criteria, program needs, the
directives of Aspen’s City Council, and ultimately the rider experience at the
Transit Center. The plan incorporates an increase in the number and flexibility of
bus parking spaces, which reduces inessential bus traffic and enables RFTA to
maintain malleable and adaptive operations throughout the year. The design
keeps a significant portion of the existing building and introduces two new
additions that meet the desired interior program needs for RFTA operations and
passengers.
The proposed and existing architecture is joined by a new, low-profile roof that
provides extensive covered outdoor seating area for transit users. Transparent
design features and modest architectural profiles respect and provide vast views of
the surrounding historic district and landscape. These features provide improved
sightlines across the site and to natural amenities such as Ajax and Wagner Park.
Native trees and plantings augment this aesthetic while filtering runoff and
promoting storm water management. Improved user amenities, including portable
seating and fresh signage, create an energetic public space with fun and attractive
features that enriches Aspen’s urban environment and users’ experience of the
transit facility.
For additional information please reference the Rubey Park Outreach and
Schematic Design Report. The report can be viewed or downloaded from the
following website:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Transportation/Rubey-Park-Remodel-
Project/
Following responses are to the applicable guidelines as outlined in the pre-
application summary dated, December 5, 2013.
1.11
Preserve and maintain mature
landscaping on site, particularly
landmark trees and shrubs.
Protect established vegetation
during construction to avoid
damage. Replacement of
damaged, aged or diseased trees
must be approved by the parks
department.
If a tree must be removed as part
of the addition or alteration,
replace it with species of a large
enough scale to have a visual
impact in the early years of the
project.
Response: The proposed plans specify for the preservation and protection of the
mature Cottonwood tree located on the southwest corner of the Transit Center.
Chris Forman, the City of Aspen’s Urban Forester, provided an assessment of the
16 existing trees with a four inch diameter or greater on June 18, 2013. The
report indicates that five of the trees demonstrate significant structural or health
issues. The plans specify the removal of these trees as they are not a long term
asset to the City of Aspen. The reconfiguration of the site is necessary to realize
the City of Aspen’s and RFTA’s design criteria of increasing the efficiency of bus
operations and providing improved public amenities. As a result the proposed
design predicates that all other existing trees be removed from the property. The
removal of these trees equates to a loss of 142 total caliper inches. In coherence
with the municipal code all trees slated for removal will be supplanted by
appropriately sized trees that provide immediate visual impact. The proposed
planting plan for the Transit Center specifies for 37 street trees. The proposed
trees equal 148 total caliper inches being introduced into the urban forest. This
improved quantity of tree caliper inches and layout better contributes to Aspen’s
urban forest than the existing tree and planting design.
14
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-3
1.13
Revisions or additions to the
landscape should be consistent with
the historic context of the site.
Select plant and tree material
according to its mature size, to
allow for the long term impact of
mature growth.
Reserve the use of exotic plants to
small areas for accent.
Do not cover grassy areas with
gravel, rock or paving materials.
Response: All proposed plant material is native to the region, adequately specified
to provide immediate visual impact yet allow for long term mature growth. The
proposed plan does not specify exotic plant species. The plan improvements
predicate the removal of all existing grassy areas as they unsafely contribute to
the pedestrian and vehicular circulation routes. Proposed planting beds replace a
greater amount of total area than the grass removed from the site. In addition,
improved seating areas with permeable pavers and street trees provide safer and
more comfortable amenity areas than the existing grass areas.
1.15
Minimize the visual impacts of site
lighting.
Site lighting should be shielded to
avoid glare onto adjacent
properties. Focus lighting on
walks and entries, rather than up
into trees and onto façade planes.
Response: All site lighting fixtures will be specified with shields and will be
strategically placed to safely illuminate the site without producing excessive
ambient light. As a public building, lighting of the façade is appropriate to
demonstrate its civic significance. This lighting will also do double duty of
illuminating the entries and walkways. The design appropriately plans for holiday
lighting as this was a publicly voiced favored site feature. Site lighting will comply
with the City lighting code.
1.16
Preserve historically significant
landscape designs and features.
This includes the arrangement of
trees, shrubs, plant beds,
irrigation ditches and sidewalks in
the public right-of-way.
Response: This provision is not applicable because the site does not have a
historically significant landscape design or features.
6.1
Maintain the established town grid.
The network of streets and alleys
should be retained as public
circulation space and for
maximum public access.
Streets and alleys should not be
enclosed or closed to public
access, and should remain open
to the sky.
Response: The design is in conformance with the established town grid. All
proposed structures are placed parallel to the street and preserve the existing
street façade. All streets and alleys maintain public circulation, public access, and
are open to the sky.
6.2
Public walkways and through
courts, when appropriate, should be
designed to create access to
additional commercial space and
frontage, within the walkway and to
the rear of the site.
Response: The designs is in conformance with this provision as all public
walkways and through courts provide additional and direct access from multiple
directions to RFTA ticket sales, waiting areas, public restrooms, and bus staging
areas located at the rear of the site. Widened walkways and carefully placed
street trees visually bridge and associate Durant Avenue with the Transit Center
and the adjacent pedestrian mall.
6.3
Develop an alley façade to create
visual interest.
Use varied building setbacks and
changes in materials to create
interest and reduce perceived
scale.
Balconies, court yards and decks
are also appropriate.
Providing secondary public
entrances is strongly encouraged
along alleys. These should be
clearly intended for public use,
but subordinate in detail to the
primary street-side entrance.
Response: The design provides a visually exceptional alley through the inclusion
of a strong line of street trees. The row of street trees reduces the perceived scale
and back-of-house view of the buildings located on Cooper Avenue. In addition
the proposed trees buffer the view of the bus staging area from the residential
units located on the Cooper Avenue alley. Those neighbors who participated in the
design process appreciate this design feature. No Transit Center buildings extend
to the alley due to the unique nature of the transit program; however the alley
side façade is visually interesting with varied setbacks and material changes.
Given outreach participants’ desire to keep the buildings to one story, no
balconies, or decks are proposed. Courtyards between the buildings provide
secondary entries to the Transit Center.
15
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-4
6.4
Structured parking should be placed
within a ‘wrap’ of commercial and or
residential uses
The exposure of auto entry areas
should be minimized.
Response: This provision is not applicable because structured parking is not
proposed. Entries for bus vehicles are limited to the two that exist today and are
accessed from the Mill and Galena secondary streets.
6.5
Structured parking access should not
have a negative impact on the
character of the street.
Located on an alley or secondary
street if necessary.
Designed with the same attention
to detail and materials as the
primary building façade.
Integrated into the building
design.
Response: This provision is not applicable because structured parking is not
proposed.
6.6
A street-facing amenity space shall
meet all of the following
requirements:
Abut the public sidewalk
Be level with the sidewalk
Be open to the sky
Be directly accessible to the
public
Be paved or otherwise landscaped
Response: The majority of the Transit Center’s site is dedicated to public amenity
space—55 percent (or roughly 16,000 square feet). The proposed amenity space
includes fixed and movable outdoor seating for both transit and non-transit users.
The amenity space is level with and extends from the site into the adjacent public
rights-of-way to create a streetscape that facilitates a variety of uses. Most of the
public amenity space is open to the sky and visually and physically accessible from
adjacent public rights-of-way. Public amenity space provided under roof or
overhang is intended to provide protection from the elements—a desired design
feature requested from existing Transit Center users. Planted areas complement
the Aspen landscape with native and ecologically functional vegetation.
Bioretention planting areas mitigate storm water through recharging the
groundwater supply and filtering contaminants. The proposed plantings and street
trees enrich the streetscape with seasonal color, texture, and interest.
6.7
A street-facing public amenity space
shall remain subordinate to the line of
building fronts in the commercial core
Any public amenity space
positioned at the street edge shall
respect the character of the
streetscape and ensure that street
corners are well defined, with
buildings placed at the sidewalk
edge.
Sunken spaces, which are
associated with some past
developments, adversely affect
the street character. Where
feasible these should be replaced
with sidewalk level improvements.
Response: The proposed improvements conform to this provision. All public
amenity space is positioned to maintain a well-defined street façade with buildings
placed at the sidewalk edge. Proposed groupings of street trees strongly define
the street corners. The design does not propose sunken spaces.
6.8
Street-facing amenity space shall
contain features to promote and
enhance its use. These may include
one or more of the following:
Street Furniture
Public Art
Historical interpretive marker
Response: The proposed street facing amenity space includes movable and fixed
street furniture and artistic public information signage. While not yet designed,
the intent for the signage is to include information on the history of the transit
service in Aspen and the Valley, including the site’s role in providing this service.
16
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-5
6.9
Mid-block walkways shall remain
subordinate in scale to traditional lot
widths.
Mid-block public walkways shall
be between 8ft. and 10ft. in width.
Response: This provision is not applicable because mid-block walkways are not
proposed due to the desire to protect pedestrians from potential conflicts with
buses.
6.10
A mid-block walkway should provide
public access to the following:
Additional commercial space and
frontage within the walkway.
Uses located at the rear of the
property.
Response: This provision is not applicable because mid-block walkways are not
proposed.
6.11
An alley side amenity space shall be
designed to have these
characteristics:
Direct public access to
commercial space at street or
second floor levels
Maximize solar access to the alley
side amenity space
Enhance the attractiveness and
use of the rear alley
Minimize the adverse impacts of
adjacent service and parking
areas
Response: This provision is not applicable because alley side amenity space is not
proposed. However, proposed amenity space is visible from the alley and is
located on the alley-side of the proposed buildings.
6.12
Second level amenity space should be
compatible with the character of the
historic district.
It shall remain visually
subordinate to any historic
resource on the property.
If located on a historic property, it
may not alter the appearance of
the resource as seen from the
street.
Response: This provision is not applicable because second level amenity space is
not proposed.
6.13
A second level floor amenity space
should meet all of the following
criteria:
Ensure consistent public access.
Be dedicated for public uses.
Provide a public overlook and/or
an interpretive marker.
Be identified by a marker at street
level.
Response: This provision is not applicable because second level amenity space is
not proposed.
6.14
Second level space should be
oriented to maximize solar access and
mountain views, or views of historic
landmarks.
Response: This provision is not applicable because second level amenity space is
not proposed.
6.15
Second level space should provide
public access by way of visible and
attractive public stair or elevator from
a public street, alley, or street level
amenity space.
Response: This provision is not applicable because second level amenity space is
not proposed.
17
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-6
6.16
Second level dining may be
considered.
If the use changes, the space must
remain accessible to the public,
so long as it is to be considered
meeting the public amenity space
requirement.
Response: This provision is not applicable to this application because no second
level amenity space is proposed.
6.17
Front and side yard amenity space
should be considered in the context of
a historic one story residential type
building.
Response: This provision is not applicable because the site buildings are not
historic one story residential type buildings. However, front and side yard amenity
spaces are provided.
6.18
Maintain the alignment of the façades
at the sidewalk’s edge.
Place as much of the façade of
the building at the property line as
possible.
Locating an entire building front
behind the established storefront
line is inappropriate.
A minimum of 70% of the front
façade shall be at the property
line.
Response: The roof overhang of proposed buildings creates an aligned street
frontage setback 3 feet from the property line. The buildings’ façades are setback
a few feet from the roof overhang. The additional space—a desired design feature
requested from existing Transit Center users creates a covered outdoor waiting
area and ensures adequate pedestrian circulation space and bus rider queuing
space along the Durant Avenue sidewalk.
6.19
A building may be set back from its
side lot lines in accordance with
design guidelines identified in Street
& Circulation Pattern and Public
Amenity Space Guidelines
Response: The east building is setback 32 feet from the east-side property line
and the west building is setback 54 feet from the west-side property line. These
side setbacks are in accordance with the design guidelines identified in Street &
Circulation Pattern and Public Space Guidelines.
6.20
Orient a new building to be parallel to
its lot lines, similar to that of
traditional building orientations.
The front primary structure shall
be oriented to the street.
Response: The proposed Transit Center preserves the existing building with
significant interior renovations. The two proposed buildings are oriented parallel
to lot lines and the street.
6.21
Orient a primary entrance toward the
street.
Buildings should have a clearly
defined primary entrance. For
most commercial buildings, this
should be a recessed entry way.
Response: The entrance of the primary building – the existing structure – faces
Durant Avenue. The entrance is recessed under the roof and columns that create
the buildings entrance way.
6.22
Rectangular forms should be
dominant on commercial core
façades.
Rectangular forms should be
vertically oriented.
The façade should appear as
predominantly flat, with any
decorative elements and
projecting or setback
“articulations” appearing to be
subordinate to the dominant roof
form.
Response: The buildings at the Transit Center use rectangular forms as the
dominant feature of their design. The buildings’ façade are predominantly flat with
all decorative elements subordinate to the dominant roof form. The dominant roof
form connects all buildings as a signature design element.
18
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-7
6.23
Use flat roof lines as the dominant
roof form.
A flat roof, or one that gently
slopes to the rear of the site,
should be the dominant form.
Parapets on side facades should
step down towards the rear of the
building.
False fronts and parapets with
horizontal emphasis also may be
considered.
Response: Flat roof lines define the new buildings’ architectural form. The
existing building will retain its gabled roof and clock tower but are connected to
the new flat dominant roof form that links all three buildings. The flat roof line
steps down in scale from the gabled roof and clock tower of the existing building.
The flat roof line projects over entrances and all side building façades to establish
a human scale that invites pedestrian activity. The parapets of the proposed
buildings do not step down on the sides given the scale of the proposed buildings.
6.24
Along a rear façade, using building
forms that step down in scale toward
the alley is encouraged.
Consider using additive forms,
such as sheds, stairs and decks to
reduce the perceived scale. These
forms should however, remain
subordinate to the primary
structure.
Use projecting roofs at the ground
floor over entrances, decks and
for separate utility structures in
order to establish a human scale
that invites pedestrian activity.
Response: The proposed roof incorporates an overhead canopy that projects over
the entrances. This overhead canopy will invite pedestrian activity by providing
shelter from the adverse weather conditions.
6.25
Maintain the average perceived scale
of two-story buildings at the sidewalk.
Establish a two-story height at the
sidewalk edge, or provide a
horizontal design element at this
level. A change in materials, or a
molding at this level are examples.
Response: This provision is not applicable because the existing building and
proposed buildings are one-story buildings.
6.26
Building façade height shall be varied
from the façade height of adjacent
buildings of the same number of
stories.
If an adjacent structure is three
stories and 38 ft. tall, new infill
may be three stories, but must
vary in façade height by a
minimum of 2 ft.
Response: Existing building façade height (not including the clock tower) is taller
than the façades of the proposed buildings. They vary in height by 4 feet, 8
inches.
6.27
A new building or addition should
reflect the range and variation in
building height of the commercial
core.
Refer to the zone district
regulations to determine the
maximum height limit on the
subject property.
A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling
height is to be maintained on
second stories or higher.
Additional height, as permitted in
the zones district, may be added
for one or more of the following
reasons:
Response: The existing building and proposed two buildings reflect a height
variation historically established throughout the commercial core. In particular,
the existing building’s total height is 28 feet as measured to the top of the clock
tower. The two additions reflect a total height of 14.5 feet as measured to the top
of the proposed photovoltaic panels.
19
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-8
6.28
Height variation should be achieved
using one or more of the following:
Vary the building height for the
full depth of the site in
accordance with traditional lot
lines.
Set back the upper floor to vary
the building façade profiles and
the roof forms across the width
and depth of the building.
Vary the façade of parapet
heights at the front.
Step down the rear of the
building towards the alley, in
conjunction with other design
standards and guidelines.
Response: The varying heights are achieved by contrasting the existing clock
tower and gable roof with the one story flat roof of the proposed additions and
overhangs.
6.29
On sites comprising more than two
traditional lot widths, the façade
height shall be varied to reflect
traditional lot width.
The façade height shall be varied
to reflect traditional lot width.
Height should be varied every 60
ft. minimum and preferably every
30 ft. of linear frontage in
keeping with traditional lot
widths and development
patterns.
No more than two consecutive 30
ft. façade modules may be three
stories tall, within an individual
building.
A rear portion of a third module
may rise to three stories, if the
front is set back a minimum of 40
ft. from the street façade.
Response: The varying heights are achieved by contrasting the existing gable roof
with the one-story flat roof of the proposed buildings. However, they do not
reflect the traditional lot width. The existing Transit Center building is not oriented
with or reflects the traditional lot lines. The existing building dictates the spatial
relationship and scale of the flanking two proposed buildings. As a result the two
buildings do not correlate with the traditional lot width or lines. In addition, the
total area and orientation of the Transit Center predicates the buildings’ widths to
be greater than the traditional 30-foot width lot in order to realize the City of
Aspen’s and RFTA’s design criteria of increasing the efficiency of bus operations
and providing improved public amenities.
6.30
On sites comprising two or more
traditional lots, a building shall be
designed to reflect the individual
parcels.
Variation in height of building
modules across the site.
Variation in massing achieved
through upper floor setbacks, the
roofscape form and variation in
upper floor heights.
Variation in building façade
heights or cornice line.
Response: The proposed project specifies for the existing building at the Transit
Center to be preserved with minor structural renovations. The additional two
proposed buildings are situated parallel to lot lines but not aligned with the lot
lines. Conforming to this provision would predicate the demolition of the existing
building and developing buildings that would counteract the transit oriented
program of the Transit Center. However, the proposed design does develop a site
with varying height of building modules across the site.
20
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-9
6.32
When adjacent to a one or two story
historic building that was originally
constructed for commercial use, a
new building within the same block
face should not exceed 28 ft. in height
within 30 ft. of the front façade.
In general, a proposed multi-story
building must demonstrate that it
has no negative impact on
smaller, historic structures nearby.
The height and proportions of all
façade components must appear
to be in scale with nearby historic
buildings.
Response: This provision is not applicable to this application as there are no
historic buildings located along the block.
6.35
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
façade.
Street façade composition
Variation in architectural
detailing and materials to
emphasize the building module.
Response: This provision is not applicable. The total area and orientation of the
Transit Center predicates the buildings widths to be greater than the traditional 30
foot width lot lines in order to order to realize the City of Aspen’s and RFTA’s
design criteria of increasing the efficiency of bus operations and providing
improved public amenities. Conforming to this provision would predicate the
demolition of the existing building and developing buildings that would counteract
the transit oriented program of the Transit Center.
6.36
The detailed design of the building
façade should reflect the traditional
scale and rhythm of the block.
The fenestration grouping.
The modeling of the façade.
The design framework for the
first floor storefront.
Variation in architectural detail
or the palette of façade
materials.
Response: The proposed buildings reflect the scale and rhythm of the existing
Transit Center building by repeating the same scale of fenestration groupings and
maintaining the same architectural details of the first floor façade.
6.37
Divide a larger building into
“modules” that are similar in width to
buildings seen historically.
Response: The design criteria for the Transit Center building dictates additional
building square footage to meet RFTA’s operational needs. The proposed
additional square footage is divided into smaller “modules” that flank the east and
west sides of the existing building. The widths of these buildings are appropriately
scaled to balance the architectural composition of existing and proposed buildings.
6.38
Buildings should be designed to
reflect the architectural hierarchy and
articulation inherent in the
composition of the street façade.
The design and definition of the
traditionally tall first floor.
The proportions of the upper
level fenestration pattern.
The completion of the sheer
street façade with capping
cornice or other horizontal
modeling.
Response: The proposed flat roof overhang preserves the composition of the
street façade by creating a horizontal architectural feature that defines the
traditionally tall first floor and extends the 65% of the block length.
21
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-10
6.39
A building should reflect the three
dimensional characteristics of the
street façade in the strength and
depth of modeling, fenestration and
architectural detail.
Response: The proposed buildings reflect the three dimensional characteristics of
the street façade by repeating the same scale of fenestration groupings,
preserving the predominant architectural forms, and maintaining the same
architectural details as the existing building.
6.40
Maintain the repetition of similar
shapes and details along the block.
Upper story windows should
have a vertical emphasis. In
general, they should be twice as
tall as they are wide.
Headers and sills of windows on
new buildings should maintain
the traditional placement relative
to cornices and belt courses.
Response: The proposed architectural design preserves the scale, shape, and
general details as established by the existing building.
6.41
Maintain the pattern created by
recessed entry ways that are repeated
along a block.
Set the door back from the front
façade approximately 4 ft. This is
an adequate amount to establish
a distinct threshold for
pedestrians.
When entries are recessed, the
building line at the sidewalk
edge should be maintained by
the upper floors.
Use transoms over doorways to
maintain the full vertical height
of the storefront.
Response: The primary entrance to the primary building is set back 5.5 feet from
the entryway. The building line is maintained by the roof overhead of the
entryway. Entrances to the proposed buildings are located on the buildings’ sides
because of their functions as a RFTA staff operations and public restrooms.
6.42
The general alignment of horizontal
features on building fronts should be
maintained.
Typical elements that align
include window moldings, tops
display windows, cornices,
copings and parapets at the tops
of buildings.
When large buildings are
designed to appear as several
buildings, there should be some
slight variations in alignments
between the façade elements.
Response: The proposed buildings maintain the horizontal alignments of the roof
line, window tops and sills as the existing building. The proposed buildings’ roof
lines are varied from that of the existing building.
6.43
Any new building shall be designed to
maintain a minimum of 9 feet from
floor to ceiling on all floors.
Response: The proposed buildings will maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to
ceiling clearance. The floor to ceiling height of the existing building will be 16 feet
as the renovation specifies vaulted ceilings.
22
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-11
6.44
Maintain the distinction between the
street level and upper floors.
No upper floor shall be taller
than the first floor.
Floor-to-floor heights should
appear to be similar to those
seen historically. In particular,
the windows in new construction
should appear similar in height
to those seen traditionally.
The first floor of the primary
façade should be predominantly
transparent glass.
Upper floors should be perceived
as being more opaque that the
street level. Upper story
windows should have a vertical
emphasis.
Highly reflective of 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: This provision is not applicable as proposed upper floors are not
proposed.
6.45
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 ft. depth of the
lot, and 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 buildings maintain a floor to floor height of 11 feet for
the full depth of all interior spaces. Their programs differ from retail as they are to
be offices and restrooms. The existing building floor to ceiling height is 16 feet.
23
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-12
6.47
The first floor façade and retail
frontage should be designed to
concentrate interest at the street level,
using the highest quality of design,
detailing and materials.
The framework for the first floor
of the façade as identified in
architectural tradition as
characteristic first floor design.
An entryway, door and transom
light designed to use the fill
storefront height.
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.
Response: The first floor façade will concentrate interest at the street level
through the use of design detailing, quality materials, and architectural elements
of interest. In particular, the design proposes the installation of a green screen on
portions of the buildings’ façades at the first floor. This green screen enables
vines to cover the façade without damaging the building exterior materials and
structure. The façades covered in vines provide a visual and textural interest.
6.48
The retail entrance should be at the
sidewalk level.
All entrances should be ADA
compliant.
On sloping sites the retail
frontage should be designed to
maintain as close to a level
entrance as possible.
Response: All entrances into the proposed and existing buildings are flush with
the sidewalk level and ADA compliant.
6.49
Incorporate an airlock entry into the
plan for all new structures.
An airlock entry that projects
forward of the primary façade 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 of fabric
“airlock” to provide protection
from winter weather is not
permitted.
Response: The proposed buildings and existing building include vestibules
integrated within the interior of the architecture.
6.50
Window area along the first floor shall
be a minimum of 60% of exterior
street façade area when facing
principal street(s).
Response: Seventy percent of the façade of the existing building at the Transit
Center consists of window area which is an increase over what exists today. The
façade of the eastern building (public restrooms) consists of 40% of window area.
The façade of the western building (RFTA operations) consists of 45% of window
area. Altogether the total percentage of window area along the street façade is
50%. The semi-transparency of the proposed buildings is due to their program of
RFTA offices and restrooms.
24
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-13
6.51
A building shall be designed to
maintain or create the character and
transparency of the traditional street
level retail frontage.
A traditional recessed retail
entrance.
Retail display cases.
Appropriately designed signage
and lighting.
Response: The remodeled existing building maintains and enhances the character
and transparency of the traditional street level retail frontage by providing large
windows on the majority of the front façade. The design preserves the primary
existing entrance which is recessed under the entryway overhang. Transit Center
users identified the need for improved identification, wayfinding, informational,
and interpretative signage. While not yet designed, the design and material
concept for the signage is transparency. In addition, all site signage will be
located and sized to ensure clear views into the building and across the site.
Lighting of all signage at the Transit Center will ensure nighttime legibility and
provide passenger safety ambient light.
6.52
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 careful and complementary
use of signage and lettering to
enhance the retail and downtown
character.
The careful use of lighting to
accentuate visual presence.
Response: Careful consideration, planning, and design determined the
proportions, modeling, and materials for the remodeled and new buildings. In
particular, the proposed buildings are sensitively crafted to ensure the aesthetic
and functional compatibility with the existing building. The design specifies the
replacement of the existing building’s residential windows with storefront windows.
Repetition of vertical window modules, transparency, green screen, and the scale
of the brick veneer creates a rich visual experience. In addition, proposed site
signage and lighting facilitates and accentuates the transit oriented operations and
features of the Transit Center. While not designed yet, the intent is to ensure for
signage to not obstruct views into the Transit Center buildings or across the site.
The signage is to be placed within the interior of the existing Transit Center
building and integrated throughout the exterior of the site. Sensible lighting will
accentuate architecture features while improving safety and wayfinding at night.
6.53
Side and rear building façades should
be designed and articulated to reduce
the apparent scale of the building and
create visual interest.
Response: The side façades of the proposed buildings reduce the apparent scale
of the buildings by nature of their narrow width compared to the width of the
street-facing façade. Clerestory windows along the side façades further diminish
the scale of side façades. Fenestration and the roof overhang reduce the scale of
the rear façades. The program requirements of the Transit Center are broken into
3 buildings to reduce the apparent scale of the site.
6.56
Special features that highlight
buildings on corner lots may be
considered.
Develop both street elevations to
provide visual interest to
pedestrians.
Corner entrances, bay windows
and towers are examples of
elements that may be considered
to emphasize corner locations.
Storefront windows, display
cases and other elements that
provide visual interest to facades
along side streets re also
appropriate.
Response: This provision is not applicable because buildings at the corners of the
right-of-way are not proposed. However, the public amenity spaces proposed for
the corner lots provide visual interest to pedestrians and emphasize the entries to
the pedestrian malls.
25
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-14
6.57
A larger building should reflect the
traditional lot width in the form and
variation of its roof in order to
maintain the scale of the area. This
should be achieved through the
following:
A set back of the top floor from
the front façade.
Reflect the traditional lot width
in the roof plane.
Response: This provision is not applicable because multi-stories are not proposed.
However, variation in the roofs of the three buildings is proposed to maintain the
neighborhood scale.
6.58
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.
Use materials which complement
the design of the building
facades.
Design roof garden areas to be
unobtrusive from the street.
Use ‘green roof’ design best
practice, where feasible.
Response: This proposed flat overhanging roof and roofscape complement and
unify the existing building with the two proposed buildings. All mechanical
equipment is located towards the rear of the building and screened from view.
Proposed zinc roofing for the existing building complements the proposed roof-
mounted photovoltaic solar panels. Green roofs on the two proposed buildings will
be studied during the next design phase to determine feasibility.
6.59
High quality, durable materials should
be employed.
The palette of materials
proposed for all development
should be specified and
approved as part of the general
and detailed development
approvals process, including
samples of materials as required.
Response: The proposed materials for the Transit Center improvements are of
high quality and durability and include brick, zinc, glass, concrete and other
architectural metals. Image boards are provided as part of this application and
illustrate proposed materials.
6.60
Building materials should have these
features:
Convey the quality and range of
materials seen historically.
Reduce the scale and enhance
visual interest.
Convey human scale.
Have proven durability and
weathering characteristics within
this climate.
Response: The design specifies only materials that are harmonious with the
character and quality of materials found within the Commercial Core Historic
District. The window modules, roof overhang, green screen, and brick size
reinforce the human scale of the Transit Center. The texture of the brick and
green screen provide visual interest through their textural qualities. All specified
materials are selected for their durability and weathering performance and have
been successfully used within this climate.
6.61
The palette of materials used for new
buildings within the core should
reflect the predominantly masonry
(brickwork and natural stonework)
palette of this area.
Response: The principal material component of the buildings is brick.
26
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-15
6.62
A building or additions to a building
should reflect the quality and the
variation traditionally found in these
materials within the central
commercial core.
Response: The principal material component of the buildings is brick. Other
proposed materials that are found within the commercial core include zinc, glass,
and architectural metals.
6.63
Where contemporary materials are
used they shall be:
High quality in durability and
finish.
Detailed to convey human scale.
Compatible with a traditional
masonry palette.
Response: The foremost contemporary material proposed for the Transit Center is
the proposed flat overhanging glass roof. This canopy will provide weather
protection for passengers while allowing natural light to reach these waiting areas.
The glass and metal frames will be aesthetically compatible with the proposed
masonry work and surrounding context.
6.64
Materials used for third floor
accommodation set back from the
street façade should be more subdued
than the primary facades.
Response: This provision is not applicable because a third floor is not proposed.
6.65
Paving and landscaping should be
designed to complement and enhance
the immediate setting of the building
area.
Response: Refined architectural concrete and permeable pavers make up the
public walkways and amenity areas. Scoring patterns and concrete texture will be
detailed to provide interest to the site and complement the buildings. Deciduous
canopy trees will moderate the scale of the buildings. Plantings in pockets and
bioretention areas will complement the hardscape and building area with softening
green and seasonal color.
14.1
These standards should not prevent or
inhibit compliance with accessibility
laws.
All new construction should
comply completely with the
American with Disabilities Act.
Owners of historic properties
should comply to the fullest
extent possible, while also
preserving the integrity of the
character-defining features of
their buildings. Special
provisions for historic buildings
exist in the law that allow some
alternatives in meeting the ADA
standards.
Response: All new construction and renovations to the existing building will be
compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
14.14
Minimize the visual impacts of service
areas as seen from the street.
When it is feasible, screen
service areas from view,
especially those associated with
commercial and multifamily
developments.
This includes locations for trash
containers and loading docks.
Service areas should be
accessed off of the alley if one
exists.
Response: The service area is fully enclosed and concealed within the architecture
of the western RFTA staff building. Today the individual trash and recycling
containers are stored outside. The proposed utility, trash, and recycling service
area is accessed from the internal bus lane, similar to how it is accessed today.
The design intentionally separates RFTA circulation including service vehicles from
the alley to discourage non-RFTA vehicles from cutting through the site when the
alley is in use. The proposed design provides the best design solution for ensuring
waste is safely collected and disposed, and access is adequate for occupants and
waste hauling companies. Placing the utility, trash, and recycling service area in a
location accessible from the alleyway will interfere with bus staging and
movements, block alleyway circulation, and muddle the streetscape visual
appearance.
27
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-16
14.15
Minimize the visual impacts of
mechanical equipment as seen from
the public way.
Mechanical equipment may only
be installed on an alley façade,
and only if it does not create a
negative visual impact.
Mechanical equipment or vents
on a roof must be grouped
together to minimize their visual
impact. Where rooftop units are
visible, provide screening with
materials that are compatible
with those of the building itself.
Screen ground mounted units
with fences, stone walls or
hedges.
A window air conditioning unit
may only be installed on an alley
façade, and only if it does not
create a negative visual impact.
Use low profile mechanical units
on rooftops so they will not be
visible from the street or alley.
Also minimize the visual impacts
of utility connections and service
boxes. Use smaller satellite
dishes and mount them low to
the ground and away from front
yards, significant building
facades or highly visible roof
planes.
Paint telecommunications and
mechanical equipment in muted
colors that will minimize their
appearance by blending with
their backgrounds.
Response: Mechanical equipment is located within the architecture of the
proposed western building and fully enclosed. All mechanical equipment situated
on roofs are grouped together at the rear of building and shielded from street view
by photovoltaic panels. The design maintains connections to existing utility
pedestals located along the alley.
14.17
Design a new driveway in a manner
that minimizes its visual impact.
Plan parking areas and
driveways in a manner that
utilizes existing curb cuts. New
curb cuts are not permitted.
If an alley exists, a new driveway
must be located off of it.
Response: The bus drive lane is located internal to the site and parallel to Durant
Avenue thus minimizing its visual impact. The bus drive lane cannot be located off
of the alley because of the dimensional requirements for the bus staging area and
the bus turning radii. Two curb cuts exist today in generally the same locations,
located on secondary Mill and Galena Streets.
14.19
Use a paving material that will
distinguish the driveway from the
street.
Using a change in material,
paving pattern or texture will
help to differentiate the driveway
from the street.
Porous paving materials will also
help to absorb potential water
runoff typically associated with
impervious surfaces such as
asphalt or concrete.
Response: The concrete improvements to Mill and Galena Streets provide material
contrast to the asphalt bus drive lane and alley. Pervious pavers are proposed in
the pedestrian areas. The weight and turning movements of buses preclude the
ability to use pervious pavers in the driving areas.
28
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-17
14.22
Driveways leading to parking areas
should be located to the side or rear
of a primary structure.
Locating drives away from the
primary façade will maintain the
visual importance the structure
has along a block.
Response: Entries for bus vehicles are limited to the two that exist today and are
accessed from the Mill and Galena secondary streets at the rear of the buildings.
14.23
Parking areas should not be visually
obtrusive.
Large parking areas should be
screened from view from the
street.
Divide large parking lots with
planting areas. (Large parking
areas are those with more than
five cars)
Consider using a fence, hedge or
other appropriate landscape
feature.
Automobile headlight
illumination from parking areas
should be screened from
adjacent lots and the street.
Response: The bus staging area is screened from Durant Avenue by the proposed
and existing buildings and concentrated layout of street trees. Planting areas are
integrated into the bus staging area. Headlights will be partially screened by other
buses, the existing and proposed buildings, and new plantings. This is an
improved condition compared to the existing parking arrangement of the Transit
Center.
14.24
Large parking areas, especially those
for commercial and multifamily uses,
should not be visually obtrusive.
Locate parking areas to the rear
of the property, when physical
conditions permit.
An alley should serve as the
primary access to parking, when
physical conditions permit.
Parking should not be located in
the front yard, except in the
driveway, if it exists.
Response: The bus staging area is located to the rear of the property and
screened from Durant Avenue and the alley by the existing and proposed buildings
and the concentrated planting of street trees. The bus staging area cannot be
accessed from the alley because of the dimensional requirements for the bus
staging area and the bus turning radii.
14.25
Locate signs to be subordinate to the
building design.
Signs should not obscure
historic building details.
Small scale signs, mounted on
the building, are encouraged.
Free-standing signs should not
be so large as to obscure the
patterns of front facades and
yards.
Response: Signage plays an integral role of informing and directing visitors at the
Transit Center. Bus rider surveys and public outreach efforts identified critical
signage needs for the Transit Center improvements. In particular, Transit Center
users identified the need for improved identification, wayfinding, informational,
and interpretative signage. Signage will more efficiently convey bus service
routes, schedule, bus berths, and wayfinding to points of local and regional
interest. The proposed design integrates signage within the architecture and
places minimal signs within the site. While not designed, the concept of the bus
berth signage is transparency in order to blend into the background. Signage will
be adequately lit for comfortable nighttime reading. All proposed signage will
comply with the city’s requirements.
14.26
Sign materials should be similar to
those used historically.
Painted wood and metal are
appropriate.
Plastic and highly reflective
materials are inappropriate.
Response: The materials of the signage will complement the architecture at the
Transit Center through the use of matching materials, appropriate scale, and
simple graphics. While not designed, all signage will be semi-translucent in order
to blend into the landscape and enhance transparency. Matching the proposed
overhead structure, the proposed site signage is made of refined architectural
metals and tempered glass.
29
rubey park remodel HPC conceptual major development submittal package | 7-18
14.27
Use signs to relate to other buildings
on the street and to emphasize
architectural features.
Position signs to emphasize
established architectural
elements. It is best to mount
signs so they fit within ‘frames’
created by components of the
façade design.
Pay particular attention to
placing new signs on existing
buildings when renovating. The
signs should not obscure
existing details.
Response: Identification, wayfinding, informational, and interpretative signage is
necessary to assist Transit Center operations and enhance public amenity space.
Transit Center signage integrated into the architecture will be compatible with the
façade detailing and will be located cohesively with pedestrian circulation through
and around the buildings.
14.28
Pictographic symbols are encouraged
on signs.
These add visual interest to the
street.
Response: All signage will be visually artful and informative and add to the
interest of the streetscape. All signage at the Transit Center will use symbols
established by the International Organization for Standardization.
14.29
Illuminate a sign such that it
complements the overall composition
of the site.
If signs are to be illuminated, use
external sources. Light sources
should be placed close to, and
directed onto, the sign and
shielded to minimize glare into
the street or onto adjacent
properties, and shall be very low
wattage. If possible, integrate the
lights into the sign bracket.
Response: The design intent is to light all signage at the Transit Center to ensure
legibility and to provide passenger safety ambient light. All light sources will be
placed close to and directed onto the signs and shielded to minimize glare. Low
wattage and energy efficient fixtures will be specified. The apparent light
temperature of each fixture will be coordinated to ensure a cohesive nighttime
illumination and appearance. The proposed illumination of the Transit Center will
comply with the City’s Outdoor lighting code.
30
ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application
PROJECT:
Name:
Location:
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________
APPLICANT:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_____________________
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:______________________
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
Historic Designation
Certificate of No Negative Effect
Certificate of Appropriateness
-Minor Historic Development
-Major Historic Development
-Conceptual Historic Development
-Final Historic Development
-Substantial Amendment
Relocation (temporary, on
or off-site)
Demolition (total
demolition)
Historic Landmark Lot Split
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
31
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
General Information
Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This
information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that
may be involved.
YES NO
Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions,
demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?
Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling,
rehabilitation, or restoration?
Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this
time?
In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No
Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of
Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?
If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in
conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed
on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential
properties are not.)
If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for
Historical Preservation?
Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:
Rehabilitation Loan Fund Conservation Easement Program Dimensional Variances
Increased Density Historic Landmark Lot Split Waiver of Park Dedication Fees
Conditional Uses Exemption from Growth Management Quota System Tax
Credits
32
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE WAIVER POLICY
Fee waiver requests may be made by the Community Development Director and fees may be
waived according to the criteria stated below. All remaining fees due shall be paid prior to the
issuance of a building permit or upon submittal of a land use application.
The fee waiver form shall contain a description of the project, the fee amount to be waived,
and a statement of eligibility for fee waiver. The request will be approved, denied, or referred
to the City Manager or City Council as needed. The Director shall not waive fees charged by
other City Departments or other organizations.
Unless otherwise agreed to, a fee waiver request must be approved prior to submission of a
building permit application or land use application. Alternatively, an applicant may submit all
fees due with their application and receive a refund for any subsequent waiver.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
1. City Projects – General Fund Departments, with the exception of Capital Projects, shall not
pay Community Development fees.
2. City Projects – Non-General Fund Departments and Capital Projects shall receive a 50% fee
waiver of Community Development fees.
3. Projects granted a waiver or partial waiver by City Council. Applicants must provide
documentation of the waiver or have the Director verify that a waiver was granted.
All fees waived for these projects will be tracked by the Community Development Department;
journal entries are not required. All waivers must be documented with an approved form.
General Fund Departments include:
General Fund Departments FUND.DEPT General Fund Departments FUND.DEPT
Non-Departmental 001.00
Streets Department 001.41
City Council 001.03 Parks Department 001.55
City Manager 001.05 GIS Department 001.60
Personnel 001.06 IT Department 001.61
City Clerk 001.07 Special Events 001.70
City Attorney 001.09 Recreation Activities 001.71
Risk Management 001.10 Aspen Recreation Center (ARC) 001.72
City Finance Department 001.11 Ice Garden Operations 001.74
Community Development 001.13 Cons. Trust FD/Lottery 001.75
Engineering Department 001.15 *Capital Projects 001.90
Building Department 001.21 Asset Management Plan (AMP) 001.91
Environmental Health 001.25 *Tabor Capital Projects 001.94
Police Department 001.31 Outgoing Transfers 001.95
Records 001.33
Communications 001.39 NOTE* Capital Projects are not exempt from fees
33
Fee Waiver Request Form
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
This form must be submitted to the Community Development Director. You will be notified when a decision has been made.
For what fees are you requesting waiver? BUILDING PLANNING
Applicant Name: Contact Ph.#
Department or Mailing address:
E-mail address:
Project address:
Project description:
Fee Breakdown:
BUILDING & PLANNING FEES
Fee Description Fee Amount Requested
Waiver Fee Description Fee Amount Requested
Waiver
Energy Code Fee REMP Fee
Excavation Foundation Fee Zoning Review Fee
Inspection Fee Planning Application Fee
Permit Fee HPC Application Fee
Plan Check Other:
Total of Request: $
Reason for Waiver:
City General Fund Department – 100% waiver
City Capital or Other Department – 50% waiver
Waived or decreased by City Council (please provide documentation)
Other – Please explain with attached letter of request
Applicant Signature Date
For office use only:
APPROVED DISAPPROVED Total fees waived: $
Community Development Director Date
34
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and
Property
Owner (“I”):
Phone No.:
Email:
Address of
Property:
(subject of
application)
Billing
Address:
(send bills here)
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications
and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand
that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these
flat fees are non-refundable.
$_________ flat fee for _____________________. $_________ flat fee for _____________________.
$_________ flat fee for _____________________. $_________ flat fee for _____________________.
For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I
understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is
impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable
legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full.
The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not
returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30
days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services.
I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment.
I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment
of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs
exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the
processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated.
$___________ deposit for _______ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at $315 per hour.
$___________ deposit for ______ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit
amount will be billed at $265 per hour.
City of Aspen: Property Owner:
Chris Bendon
Community Development Director Name:
Title: ____ City Use:
Fees Due: $___________ Received: $____________
November, 2011 City of Aspen | 130 S. Galena St. | (970) 920-5090
35
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone
District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within
the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot
Area in the Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________
Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________
Number of bedrooms: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________
Proposed % of demolition:__________
DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Height
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N, S, E, W
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Distance between
buildings:
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
36
The remodel of the Rubey Park Transit Center fulfills the Commercial Design
Standards through compliance and thoughtful applications of variance to the
detailed provisions. The design proposes solutions that best sustain and enhance
the pedestrian and historic scale and character of Aspen’s commercial district. The
design vision for the Transit Center carefully integrates transportation planning
efforts, community ownership and buy-in, economic viability and functional and
artful spaces that respect the character of the city.
The design augments the commercial core with services and amenities that
contribute to the favorable walking nature of the downtown core. The Transit
Center is a critical public amenity due to its unique role as a transit hub and close
proximity and direct connections to the downtown commercial core. The Transit
Center maintains its transit-oriented program as the southern and most utilized
hub of RFTA’s bus services. As a result, thousands of individuals will arrive and
depart daily from Aspen’s commercial core. The proposed design significantly
improves pedestrian safety by reducing the quantity of vehicle and pedestrian
conflicts and by improving sightlines across the Transit Center. In addition, the
improvements also provide convenient and upgraded public amenities such as
outdoor lounge areas, restrooms, and drinking fountains.
The proposed design acknowledges and enriches the surrounding context of the
historic district and revered Aspen landscape. The Transit Center promotes
sustainable initiatives by promoting the use of public transportation and
implementing design strategies such as using a native plant palette and placing
street trees to passively provide solar protection for the proposed buildings. In
addition, the buildings respect all established historic and scenic view corridors and
provide direct views to the downtown core and Ajax Mountain.
Lastly, the organization of the Transit Center ensures that the transit operations,
solid waste management, and general site maintenance provide the least intrusion
to the inviting pedestrian environment.
37
Response:
1. The majority of the Transit Center’s site is dedicated to public amenity
space—55 percent (or roughly 16,000 square feet). The proposed
amenity space includes fixed and movable outdoor seating for both transit
and non-transit users. The amenity space also extends from the site into
the adjacent public rights-of-way to create a streetscape that facilitates a
variety of uses. Most of the public amenity space is open to the sky and
readily viewed from adjacent public rights-of-way. Public amenity space
provided under roof or overhang is intended to provide protection from
the elements—a desired design feature requested from existing Transit
Center users. Planted areas complement the Aspen landscape with native
and ecologically functional vegetation. Bioretention planting areas
mitigate storm water through recharging the groundwater supply and
filtering contaminants. The proposed plantings and street trees enrich
the streetscape with seasonal color, texture, and interest. The low-
maintenance planting design is cared for in perpetuity by either the Parks
Department or RFTA.
2. The Rubey Park Remodel provides creative, well-designed public amenity
spaces through improvements to the public rights-of-way and within the
property. Widened walkways and carefully placed street trees visually
bridge and associate Durant Avenue with the Transit Center and the
adjacent pedestrian mall. Public lounge areas take advantage of solar
exposure to create inviting areas for winter-time use. Deciduous canopy
trees contribute summer-time shade and enhance the pedestrian scale of
the Transit Center. Movable furniture allows users to create flexible
seating arrangements conducive to their particular group size. The
building design maintains and improves views of Aspen Mountain—
identified by users as a favored element of today’s Transit Center. On-site
public amenity space is located at the same level of the adjacent rights-
of-way.
3. The proposed one-story buildings (including the remodel of the existing
Transit Center building) maintain the pedestrian scale of the Transit
Center. The existing building is proposed to be significantly remodeled to
be transparent with large expanses of glass and openings to increase
visibility across the site. The buildings are sited along the Durant Avenue
property line to reinforce the commercial street frontage and to lessen
views of staged buses located on site. The existing and proposed
buildings, combined with street trees and broad walkways, create a
streetscape that facilitates thru-foot traffic and minimizes conflicts with
waiting bus riders.
4. The Transit Center’s public amenity space provides a unique setting for
Aspen residents and visitors as it serves as the gateway to the town,
provides critical connections to the pedestrian mall and downtown
commercial core, and serves as Aspen’s essential transportation hub. In
addition, the Transit Center plays a significant role for access to regional
special events as it is often the transportation origin or destination for
event-goers. In particular the amenity space provides an exceptional
space and comfortable conveniences for RFTA bus riders. The
conveniences include improved public restrooms, Aspen TAP station,
information signage and a We-Cycle station that allows individuals to rent
a bicycle for short term use.
5. The design does not propose any variations to the design and operational
standards for public amenity space.
38
Response:
1. The proposed design complies with the space required for trash and
recycling storage for commercial buildings as detailed in Section
12.10.030 of Aspen’s municipal code. The trash and recycling service
area is 200-square feet in size, and is located within the proposed
western building housing RFTA staff.
2. The proposed utility area complies with the minimum standards
established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code. The applicant
agrees with “The Aspen Electrical Department’s” conditions and electrical
service rates and “The City of Aspen Water Utility’s” conditions and water
service rates.
3. All utility, trash and recycling services areas are combined and located
within the proposed western building. Public trash and recycling
receptacles are located on the west and east ends of the Transit Center’s
public amenity spaces to ensure convenient disposal of rubbish. The
rubbish placed in the public trash and recycling receptacles is regularly
collected and consolidated within the fully enclosed utility, trash and
recycling area.
4. The proposed utility, trash, and recycling service area is located centrally
within the site within the proposed western building. The proposed
design provides the best design solution for satisfying Provision 4’s intent
of ensuring that waste is safely collected and disposed, and access is
adequate for staff and waste hauling companies. The proposed area
ensures unrestricted access for waste hauling companies to quickly and
safely remove rubbish. Placing the utility, trash, and recycling service
area in a location accessible from the alleyway will interfere with RFTA
bus staging and movements, block alleyway circulation, and muddle the
streetscape’s visual appearance. The applicant will seek a variance on
this condition pursuant to Section 12.10.080 of Aspen’s municipal code.
The applicant deems the requirements of Section 12.10.030 cannot be
met given the nature of the property.
5. The proposed utility, trash, and recycling area is completely enclosed and
located in the rear of the proposed western building. This arrangement
ensures that the service area is completely hidden from all street views.
This proposed location provides a fully secure, bear-proof, and visually
unified space for solid waste collection. In addition, the proposed design
minimizes the public’s exposure to the area’s odors. The applicant will
seek a variance on this condition pursuant to Section 12.10.080 of
Aspen’s municipal code. The applicant deems the requirements of
Section 12.10.030 cannot be met given the nature of the property.
6. The proposed utility, trash, and recycling service area does not abut the
alleyway. Thus none of the proposed buildings extend to the property
line. The applicant will seek a variance on this condition pursuant to
Section 12.10.080 of Aspen’s municipal code. The applicant deems the
requirements of Section 12.10.030 cannot be met given the nature of the
property.
7. The proposed design preserves the existing utility pedestal locations that
currently provide service to the Transit Center. Comcast Cable service is
provided from a utility pedestal located outside of the property lines along
the north side of the alleyway. Electrical service is provided from a
transformer located outside of property lines along the north side of the
adjacent alleyway. Century Link telephone service is provided from a
pedestal outside of property lines along the north side of the alleyway
near McDonalds.
8. This provision is not applicable because the transit related activities at the
Transit Center do not require the regular delivery of goods, supplies or
materials.
39
9. The remodeled existing and proposed buildings contain vestibules located
interior to the structures pursuant to the International Energy
Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen.
10. All mechanical exhaust is proposed to be vented through the roof or
through architecturally integrated wall grills and registers. Integrated
wall grills and registers are located on the rear of the building to ensure
they are not visible from adjacent streets. Integrated wall grills and
registers are also sensitively placed to avoid conflicts with pedestrian
traffic.
11. All mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting is located within the
building. Adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs is
incorporated within the design.
12. Utility, trash and recycling service area requirements are compliant to
definitions, provisions and intent detailed in Title 12, Solid Waste, of the
Municipal Code.
Response: Signage plays an integral role of informing and directing visitors at the
Transit Center. Bus rider surveys and public outreach efforts identified critical
signage needs for the Transit Center improvements. Four types of signs are
proposed: identification, informational, wayfinding and interpretive. In particular,
improved signage is needed to better convey RFTA bus service routes, schedule,
associated bus berth staging areas, and wayfinding to points of local and regional
interest. While not designed, the proposed design concept is to integrate signage
with the architecture and place minimal signs within the site. Bus berth signage,
located adjacent to each bus berth loading area, is elegant and visually blends into
the background. The character of the signage complements the architecture at
the Transit Center through the use of matching materials, appropriate scale, and
simple graphics. Signage is adequately lit for comfortable nighttime reading. All
proposed signage will comply with the city’s requirements.
Response: The glazing of the proposed structures allows waiting passengers,
RFTA staff, and passing pedestrians to see activity through, within, and beyond
the public waiting building. The transparent nature of the proposed central
building also boosts the site’s safety by ensuring all public activity is perceptible
from street view. The proposed new buildings also include transparency, but to a
lesser degree given their uses as restrooms and offices.
Response: The design intent is to safely and comfortably light the Transit Center
for passengers and staff while preserving Aspen’s night sky. All fixtures are
shielded to prevent ambient light pollution. The apparent light temperature of
each fixture is coordinated to ensure a cohesive nighttime illumination and
appearance. In total, the proposed illumination of the Transit Center complies
with the City’s Outdoor lighting code.
40
key6” concrete (parking & driving aisle) 14,113 S.F.asphalt 8,857 S.F.permeable pavers 2,500 S.F.planting areas 911 S.F.bio retention areas 2,182 S.F.street trees 39existing street trees to remain 1alley waydurant avenuemill streetgalena streetSCHEMATIC DESIGNMATERIALS PLANRubey Park RemodelCity of Aspen Bluegreen Studio B Fehr & Peers HNTB Sopris Engineering October 30, 2013edhTpscale01020north41
42
43
44
SCHEMATIC DESIGNPERSPECTIVESRubey Park RemodelCity of Aspen Bluegreen Studio B Fehr & Peers HNTB Sopris Engineering October 16, 2013edhTp45
A grove of gridded trees provide shaded seating areas, a visual buffer from the alley, and passive seasonal thermal protection. Native, low maintenance perennials and grasses in varying heights, textures, and colors add seasonal interest. The layering of overhead canopy and lower perennials and ground cover maintains a clear interior of the plaza, and allows for easy navigation to outer buses.The renovated facade is made of narrow modular bricks providing an modernizing aesthetic to the Rubey Park buildings. Vines envelop the facade providing a softening texture and seasonal intererst to the buildings. A minimal and elegant metal frame supports the panels complement the Varying textures of concrete create visual interest; paving modules and joint work break down the plaza scale to a pedestrian level. Concrete material and a durable and low maintenance plaza that can tolerate heavy seasonal snow removal.Permeable paving allows stormwater and the ground instead of running across site. GENERAL CHARACTERRubey Park RemodelCity of Aspen Bluegreen Studio B Fehr & Peers HNTB Sopris Engineering October 30, 2013edhTpplanting character imagesarchitecture character imageshardscape character images46
furniture character imagesbike rack trash/recyclingsignage characternewspaperSCHEMATIC DESIGNSITE AMENITIESRubey Park RemodelCity of Aspen Bluegreen Studio B Fehr & Peers HNTB Sopris Engineering October 30, 2013edhTpview of rubey park amenitiesareas into assorted shade depending on season and solar streamlined and Clean lines and simple the transit plaza and to 47
315 EAST DEAN ASSOC INC
150 E 58TH ST
14TH FLR
NEW YORK, NY 10155
4 SKIERS LP
1108 NORFLEET DR
NASHVILLE, TN 372201412
434 EAST COOPER AVENUE LLC
2001 N HALSTED STE 304
CHICAGO, IL 60614
450 SOUTH GALENA ST INVESTORS LLC
450 S GALENA ST #202
ASPEN, CO 81611
520 EAST COOPER PTNRS LLC
402 MIDLAND PARK
ASPEN, CO 81611
AGRUSA LISA ANN
4761 W BAY BLVD #1704
ESTERO, FL 33928
AJAX MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES LLC
520 E DURANT ST #207
ASPEN, CO 81611
AP RT 29 LLC
418 E COOPER AVE #207
ASPEN, CO 81611
ASHKENAZY ASPEN COMMERCIAL LLC
150 E 58TH ST
PENTHOUSE
NEW YORK, NY 10155
ASPEN GROVE ASSOCIATES LLP
51027 HWY 6 &24 #100
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
ASPEN RESIDENCE CLUB & HOTEL
CONDO ASSOC INC
C/O SVO ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT
9002 SAN MARCO COURT
ORLANDO, FL 32819
ASPEN RETREAT LLC
6536 E GAINSBOROUGH
SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251
ASPENHOF CONDO ASSOC
COMMON AREA
520 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
AV STEIN LLC 19.08%
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
AVH ONION VENTURES II LLC 8.208%
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
BACSANYI ERNEST A TRUST
PO BOX 89
HIGGINS LAKE, MI 48627-0089
BAKER HUGH LEE JR 50%
555 E DURANT AVE STE 2K
ASPEN, CO 81611
BARNETT-FYRWALD HOLDINGS INC
2222 COTTONDALE LN #200
LITTLE ROCK, AR 722022017
BASH GAIL TRUST
2070 WOODSTOCK RD
GATES MILLS, OH 44040
BASTIL DEAN D
4460 CHEROKEE DR
BROOKFIELD, WI 53045
BECKER ASPEN 4A LLC
555 E DURANT
ASPEN, CO 81611
BELL 26 LLC
125 W CENTRAL AVE #218
BENTONVILLE, AR 72712
BICKERS EVERETT E
6031 GEORGETOWN GREENVILLE RD
GREENVILLE, IN 471249622
BLACK HAWK ASPEN LLC
ROECLIFFE COTTAGE JOE MOORES LN
WOODHOUSE EAVES
LEICESTERSHIRE LE12 8TF ENGLAND,
BOURQUARD RICHARD E
10859 WINTERSONG WAY
HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80126
BRADEN PAMELA J TRUST
80 M ST SE #600
WASHINGTON, DC 20003
C5B LLC
2907 SHADOW CREEK DRIVE #104
BOULDER, CO 80303
CARELLA RICHARD J & JOAN
555 E DURANT AVE #3I
ASPEN, CO 81611
CHISHOLM REVOCABLE TRUST
3725 N GRANDVIEW DR
FLAGSTAFF, AZ 86004-1603
CITY OF ASPEN
ATTN FINANCE DEPT
130 S GALENA ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
48
COASTAL MOUNTAIN INVESTMENTS
LLC
2519 N MCMULLEN BOOTH RD #510-307
CLEARWATER, FL 33761
COASTAL MTN PROPERTIES LLC
2639 MC CORMICK DR
CLEARWATER, FL 33759
COOBAC DEAN P TRUST #1
4468 JUNIPER DR
KEWADIN, MI 94648
COOBAC SANDRA L TRUST #1
4468 JUNIPER DR
KEWADIN, MI 94648
COOPER NORTH OF NELL CONDOS LLC
903 N 4TH ST
ROGERS, AR 72756-9615
COOPER STREET COMPANY
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
COOPER STREET DEVELOPMENT LLC
C/O PYRAMID PROPERTY ADVISORS
418 E COOPER AVE #207
ASPEN, CO 81611
DALY JACQUELYN
249 HEATHER LN
ASPEN, CO 81611-3347
DALY NOAH THOMAS IRREVOCABLE
TRUST
249 HEATHER LN
ASPEN, CO 81611
DALY THOMAS J & JUDITH J
1590 HOMESTAKE DR
ASPEN, CO 81611
DCGB LLC
ATT GIORGIO RIGHETTI CFO
610 WEST 52 ST
NEW YORK, NY 10019
DEXTER ASPEN LLC
1417 W 10TH ST
AUSTIN, TX 78703
DURANT GALENA CONDOS
COMMON AREA
500 E DURANT AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
DURWARD QUENTIN J TRUST
702 E SAWGRASS TR
DAKOTA DUNES, SD 57049
EW PROPERTIES LLC
C/O AEROCAPE LIMITED
230 S MILL ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
FARVER JOAN LIVING TRUST
617 FRANKLIN PL # 200
PELLA, IA 50219
FITZGERALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD
C/O PITKIN COUNTY DRY GOODS LLC
520 E COOPER
ASPEN, CO 81611
FORD ANN MICHIE
216 WAPITI WAY
BASALT, CO 81621
FRAZIER FAMILY DEC TRUST
624 E BLACKWELL AVE
BLACKWELL, OK 74631
G A RESORT CONDO ASSOC INC
1000 S MILL ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
GA RESORT CONDO ASSOC
C/O VIC GIANNELLI
415 E DEAN ST
ASPEN, CO 81611-3800
GALENA COOPER LLC
601 E HYMAN
ASPEN, CO 81611
GERARDOT J REVOCABLE TRUST
5526 HOPKINTON DR
FORT WAYNE, IN 46804
GLENROY PARTNERS 2.9%
PO BOX 2157
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95063
GOLDEN HORN BUILDING CONDO
ASSOC
COMMON AREA
400 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
GONE WEST LLC
401 W CENTER
SEARCY, AR 721451406
GOODWIN WILLIAM N
418 6TH AVE #1200
DES MOINES, IA 50309
GORDON DAVID F & LETICIA LLC
C/O JOE RACZAK/NORTH OF NELL MGT
555 E DURANT
ASPEN, CO 81611
GORSUCH COOPER LLC
263 E GORE CREEK DR
VAIL, CO 81657
GRAND ASPEN LODGING LLC
PO BOX S
ASPEN, CO 81612-7420
49
GREEN JUDE TRUST
425 N MAPLE DR #205
BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210
GRENKO PROPERTIES LTD
PO BOX 2327
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 816022327
GROSSE EDWIN J & ADELINE M REV
TRUST
555 E DURANT
ASPEN, CO 81611
GUIDOS SWISS INN LLC
23655 TWO RIVERS RD
BASALT, CO 81621
HAMMER DRU RESIDENTIAL TRUST
2828 HOOD ST #1602
DALLAS, TX 75219
HOPPES DIANA
5400 VERNON AVE #106
EDINA, MN 55436
HUDSON KAREN DAY
409 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
HYATT GRAND ASPEN
415 E DEAN ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
HYMAN BARBARA TRUST
150 BRADLEY PL #405
PALM BEACH, FL 33480
INDEPENDENCE PARTNERS
602 E COOPER AVE #202
ASPEN, CO 81611
INDEPENDENCE SQUARE UNITS LLC
400 E MAIN ST #2
ASPEN, CO 81611
INDY UNIT 312 LLC
PO BOX 11627
ASPEN, CO 81612
JACKSON JERRY & SHARON
4320 HOUSE OF YORK #2
AUSTIN, TX 78730
JENNE LLP
1510 WINDSOR RD
AUSTIN, TX 77402
JMJMK LLC
620 STONEGATE TERRACE
GLENCOE, IL 60022
K & W PROPERTIES INC
728 W CANAL ST
NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FL 32168
KEENE KAREN M
1700 BASSETT ST #503
DENVER, CO 80202
KOOSH ENTERPRISES LLC
2070 WOODSTOCK RD
GATES MILLS, OH 44040
KOVAL BARBARA W 2012 QPR TRUST
555 E DURANT ST #2C
ASPEN, CO 81611
KRISTAL ASPEN LLC
1417 WEST 10TH ST
AUSTIN, TX 787034816
LCT LP
TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
PO BOX 101444
NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444
LEFFERS JEFFREY J TRUSTEE
5526 HOPKINTON DR
FORT WAYNE, IN 46804
LYSTER BARBARA
37 OCEAN HTS DR
NEWPORT COAST, CA 92657
MAIERSPERGER RENELL
404 S GALENA
ASPEN, CO 81611
MARCUS DURANT GALENA LLC
C/O STEPHEN J MARCUS
PO BOX 1709
ASPEN, CO 81612
MAYFAIR INVESTMENTS NON LLC
7 DOVER ST
RICHMOND VIC 3121
AUSTRALIA,
MCDONALDS CORPORATION 05/152
PAUL NELSON
142 TANAGER DR
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
MEYER BUSINESS BUILDING LLC
23655 TWO RIVERS RD
BASALT, CO 81621
MILLER MARK EDWARD & LISA
WEATHERBY
3595 TUXEDO CT
ATLANTA, GA 30305
MORRIS ROBERT P
600 E HOPKINS AVE STE 304
ASPEN, CO 81611
50
MOUNTAIN CHALET ENTERPRISES INC
333 E DURANT AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
NAYLOR IRVIN S
100 BOXWOOD LN STE#2
YORK, PA 17402
NH ONION VENTURES II LLC 16.918%
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
NJ STEIN LLC 52.98%
418 E COOPER AVE #207
ASPEN, CO 81611
NN LLC
PO BOX 411144
CHICAGO, IL 60641
NORTH OF NELL CONDO ASSOC
555 E DURANT AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
OSHAUGHNESSY JANE A
2492 E TERRARIDGE DR
HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80126
P & L PROPERTIES LLC
101 S 3RD ST #360
GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501
PARAGON BUILDING CONDO ASSOC
COMMON AREA
419 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
PARK PLACE CONDO ASSOC
COMMON AREA
408 S MILL ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
PAULUS REV FAMILY TRUST
555 E DURANT
ASPEN, CO 81611
PEYTON MARI
409 E COOPER #4
ASPEN, CO 81611
PH 006 LLC
555 E DURANT ST #3J
ASPEN, CO 81611
PUCHY SHIRLEY
555 E DURANT
ASPEN, CO 81611
RANKMORE KEVIN L & JASMINE
PO BOX 168
WELLINGTON NSW 2820 AUSTRALIA,
RED ONION INVESTORS LLC 65.784%
418 E COOPER ST #207
ASPEN, CO 81611
RESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL DEV LLC
150 E 58TH ST
PENTHOUSE
NEW YORK, NY 10155
RESIDENCES AT THE LITTLE NELL
CONDO ASSOC INC
501 DEAN ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
RESNICK EDITH L TRUST
2245 CAMEO LAKE DR
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48302
RG COOPER ST 4.83%
C/O RONALD GARFIELD
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
RG ONION VENTURES II LLC 6.9%
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
RLN REAL PROPERTIES LLC
1375 ENCLAVE PKWY
HOUSTON, TX 77077
RONCHETTO LYNN A
320 E 42ND ST #101
NEW YORK, NY 10017
ROSS BARBARA REVOCABLE TRUST
PO BOX 594
HANALEI, HI 96714
ROSS ROGER A REVOCABLE TRUST
4720 WAILAPA RD
KILAUEA, HI 96754
RUTHERFORD GROUP
5514 CALUMET AVE
LA JOLLA, CA 92037
RUTLEDGE REYNIE
51 COUNTRY CLUB CIR
SEARCY, AR 72143
SALTON PROPERTY LLC
221 VALLEY RD
ITHACA, NY 14850-6152
SCHROEDER FAMILY TRUST
4 GREENWOOD CT
ORINDA, CA 94563
SCHULTZE DANIEL G
404 S GALENA ST #210
ASPEN, CO 81611
51
SEGUIN MICHAEL
793
793 CEMTERY LN
ASPEN, CO 81611
SEVEN CONTINENTS LLC
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
SH ONION VENTURES II LLC 2.19%
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
SHAPIRO EUGENE B & MARLENE R
6301 E NAUMANN DR 3-E
PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253
STEIN BUILDING LLC 23.11%
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
STEPHENS ROSS DAVID
1337 B DANIELSON RD
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93108
SWENERG JAMES & SANDRA L
2660 ROCK REST RD
PITTSBORO, NC 27312
TENNESSEE THREE
PO BOX 101444
NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444
TENNESSEE THREE RENTALS
C/O J H COBLE
5033 OLD HICKORY BLVD
NASHVILLE, TN 37218-4020
TOMKINS FAMILY TRUST
520 E COOPER AVE #209
ASPEN, CO 81611
VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC
602 E COOPER #202
ASPEN, CO 81611
VBS LLC
7138 MEADOWCREEK DR
DALLAS, TX 75214
WAVO PROPERTIES LP
512 1/2 E GRAND AVE #200
DES MOINES, IA 50309-1942
WEINGLASS LEONARD
PO BOX 11509
ASPEN, CO 81612
WF SWEARINGEN LLC
450 CONWAY MANOR DR NW
ATLANTA, GA 30327
WOLF LAWRENCE G TRUSTEE
22750 WOODWARD AVE #204
FERNDALE, MI 48220
WORCHESIK JILL 25%
202 4TH ST
CROSBY, TX 77532
WORCHESIK SHANNON 25%
202 4TH ST
CROSBY, TX 77532
ZEFF DANIEL
C/O NORTH OF NELL
555 E DURANT AVE STE 4K
ASPEN, CO 81611
ZEFF ELEANOR E & ROBERT H
555 E DURANT AVE #4C
ASPEN, CO 81611
52