HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.su.707 E Hyman Park 1.A03003
.
CASE NUMBER
PARCEL ID #
CASE NAME
PROJECT ADDRESS
PLANNER
CASE TYPE
OWNER/APPLICANT
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
PZ ACTION
ADMIN ACTION
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED
BY
",-----'"
.
,
-'
A030-03
2737-182-27001
PARK PLACE COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY
707 E HYMAN AVE
JAMES LINDT
SUBDIVISION/CONDITINAL USE/AND CON
HYMAN AVENUE HOLDINGS, LLC
STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, LLC
u.e/l'1 i (" 4
5/04/05
D DRISCOLL
....
J
,,_.~..___._"._~_.~e,.~,..._H_U~"_'_"""'"""V'__'_" _... U, 'V"~__
MEMORANDUM
,V\\\ d
",''',",
-",,,,."
TO:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
DATE:
John Worcester, City Attorney n/
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director '1
Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner CANVV1
"Park Place" - 707 E. Hyman Avenue
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 58, Series of 2003. ~.
December 8, 2003 ~ - , ,.( I
THRU:
FROM:
RE:
PROJECT: "PARK PLACE" COMMERCIAL PARKING GARAGE
REQUEST: Approvals to subdivide the parcel and construct a 99 space
Commercial Parking Facility with two (2) affordable housing
units on the eastern parcel currently developed with an "A-
Frame" structure,
ZONING: Office (0) Zone District
LAND USE ACTIONS: Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, Conditional Use,
Subdivision, Rezoning to include a PUD Overlay, Growth
Management allocation, Residential Design Standards
waiver, Condominiumization, and GMQS Exemption for
Affordable Housing.
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION Denial (4-3 vote)
RECOMMENDATION:
GROWTH
MANAGEMENT Approval with conditions (9-1 vote)
COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF Approval with conditions
RECOMMENDATION:
SUMMARY:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan
Clauson Associates, LLC, is requesting land use approvals
to construct a 99 parking space commercial parking facility
with an accessory office and two (2) affordable housing
units.
The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B, C
and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and is
located in the Office (0) Zone District, The property is
currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707 East
Park Place Page I
Hyman, and the "Hannah-Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring, Both are currently office
buildings, No changes are proposed for the Hannah-Dustin Building. The commercial
parking facility is proposed to replace the A-Frame.
The parking operation is proposed as an entirely automated system, Cars are placed on
"pallets" and then mechanically moved within the building. No internal ramping is
involved and patrons do not actually enter the parking area. A small office houses an
attendant who aids patrons with the system, Two affordable housing units are proposed
on the Hyman Avenue side of the building,
The City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application over a series of
four meetings and recommended City Council not approve the project (by a 4-3 vote).
The reasons for recommending denial varied between each commissioner, although
several noted an insecure feeling about the queuing of cars on Hyman Avenue.
The Growth Management Commission (a joint board comprised of both City and County
P&Zs) reviewed and "scored" the project with passing scores necessary for City Council
to grant a growth management allotment. Conditions of the Growth Management
Commission approval have been incorporated into the proposed ordinance,
A CD has been included with the application and can be run on any computer with a CD
drive, City staff can play the CD for Council members or the public. This will also be
played at the public hearing on December 8th.
Staff has reviewed this application against the applicable criteria and believes all criteria
have been met. Staff is recommending approval, subject to conditions outlined in
proposed Ordinance No. 58, Series of 2003.
MAIN ISSUES:
Sketch Plan Review: A parking garage concept (on the A-Frame property only) was the
subject of a "sketch plan review" with City Council and the Planning and Zoning
Commission October 21, 2002. This review process allows a potential applicant to
identify planning issues with the City's boards and neighbors of the site in a public
hearing format. The proposed operation has significantly changed since the sketch plan
reVIew,
The planning issues identified were: Compatibility of the use with surrounding uses and
properties, lighting of the facility, height and aesthetics of the building, hours of
operation, noise, traffic generation and air pollution, employee generation, and potential
future uses of the building, The two boards expressed concerns over these issues on "first
blush" and indicated to the applicant that these issues would need to be addressed in an
application, The two boards indicated acceptance of the project being reviewed as a
PUD, potential flexibility with employee generation calculations, and potential ability for
the project to gain multi-year allotments in growth management.
Aspen Area Community Plan: The 2000 AACP endorsed the following policies and
goals that have applicability to this project:
Park Place Page 2
. Limit traffic on Highway 82 into Aspen to 1993 levels,
. Reduce internal flow of traffic within Aspen,
. Hold the supply of public parking within the Aspen Community Growth
Boundary to 1998 levels, with the exception of affordable housing parking,
. Reduce automobile congestion in the downtown core, particularly in the evening
and on weekends so as to foster economic sustainability.
. Manage the supply of parking to limit adverse impacts of automobile use and to
conserve land in the Aspen area,
. Provide a wide range of flexible transportation management tools and techniques
to reduce single-occupant automobile use.
The Economic Sustainability Report (a follow-up to the AACP) recommended the City
"continue to reinvest in Aspen's infrastructure through collaboratively exploring
public/private and interagency partnerships for certain projects and moving forward on
others that have already been approved. These include: 1) The Entrance to Aspen as
approved in the CDOT Record of Decision; 2) Possible additional and more convenient
parking; and, 3) A gondola interconnect for the four ski areas."
Recent projects and planning efforts also affect this discussion. The Rio Grande Parking
Garage was originally planned for an additional level below grade. This unbuilt level
would have accommodated an additional 80 cars, The Independence Place Plaza project
("Superblock") was planned in this general area as an outgrowth of the 1986 parking
study referenced in the application. 228 parking spaces were contemplated for the lPP
project.
The "hold public parking" statement in the AACP seems to not support this (or any)
additional parking. At the same time the "reduce congestion," "transportation
management," "add more parking," and recent planning activities seem to support this
concept of additional public parking.
Staff believes parking, especially public parking, is an infrastructure necessary for the
success of the downtown shopping district. This parking garage will add capacity and
relieve some of the demand for on street parking, valet parking, and the Rio Grande
facility, Staff believes the proposal complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Traffic Generation: There is a question of whether this facility will attract more auto
trips to town ("build it and they will come") or will this project ease parking frustration of
people already coming to town, Staff suggests its likely a little of both - this facility will
add to the inventory of parking and provide some relief to the "circling phenomenon."
Parking demand is primarily a function of downtown destinations (restaurants, shopping,
skiing, etc,) and parking serves that demand.
This section of Hyman Avenue is one of the least traveled streets downtown
(approximately 2,300 to 3,200 vehicles per day) and no physical improvement are
necessary to accommodate the additional 165 trips per day.
Traffic Queuing. The proposed project has two parking bays and can queue up to four
cars at a time. Parking each car takes approximately 90 seconds - the average time for
the system's mechanics to complete a full cycle. It is suggested that during peak periods,
Park Place Page 3
both bays will accept vehicles and patrons wanting to retrieve their cars will be required
to wait. With the two bays in operation, a minimum of three minutes will be available for
exiting the vehicle, collecting belongings, etc. With a parking space behind each bay,
additional time is available for patrons. The 90-second cycle time of the mechanical
system permits the facility to process up to 40 cars per hour, more than the expected
peak-hour demand of 37 autos, 29 inbound. (See Exhibit D - traffic report) Staff does
not foresee a queuing problem with this project.
Noise: Compliance with the City's noise limitations was raised during the P&Z review,
A system of the same manufacturer located in Washington D.C. was analyzed by an
acoustical engineer. (See exhibit E - noise report.) Sound readings within the lobby of
this system reported an overall sound level of approximately 43 to 48 dBA. It is this "A-
weighted" scale that the City's noise ordinance specifies as the method of measuring
noise. (The second two charts of the noise report describe the "profile" of the noise, or
what it sounds like.)
The City's noise limitation for this commercial zone district is 65 dBA during the day (7
am to 9 pm) and 60 dBA during the night (9 pm to 7 am) measured at the property line.
The lobby readings of the Washington D.C. facility indicate that this facility will be well
within the City's requirement at the property line, In fact, the facility should be within
the City's more-strict residential noise limitations of 55 dBA during the day and 50 dBA
at night.
Sound readings were also taken within the mechanical area of the Washington D.C,
facility, It is these internal readings Herb Klein, attorney for the neighbors, cites in his
letter. These readings aren't pertinent to the noise issue because an overhead door will
remain closed during mechanical operation, patrons do not enter the mechanical area, and
the City does not regulate noise levels within buildings,
Staff believes the facility will be in compliance with the City's noise regulations.
Nonetheless, the proposed ordinance requires a "noise check" prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy (c. 0.). This test will be performed by the City of Aspen and
will be done under a variety of operating conditions.
Public Parking: The level of public access was discussed at P&Z and the applicant
specified 19 parking spaces as permanently available to the public. The public access
element of the project was important to several P&Z members wanting the facility to
remain actively serving parking needs and not storage of vehicles or remaining unused,
The 19-space requirement is specified in the proposed ordinance.
Operations Prospectus: During their review, the Planning and Zoning Commission
requested an operations plan detailing the day-to-day operation of the facility and
documenting representations of the applicant. This plan contains hours of operation, a
description of how the operator will use unused spaces for public parking, and a yearly
report to the City, The operations prospectus is appended to the proposed ordinance,
Pedestrian Improvements: The site currently provides a sidewalk along Spring Street
and essentially no pedestrian provision along Hyman Avenue. The proposal would
complete the sidewalk along the remainder of the block.
Park Place Page 4
"___> '~_.._._.,_..v ____.,_''',......ft_~.._.,~._,,,.~,..,,,~__~..___.".._ ,,-- .,--.-.,.,-.- ".
~ - ..1'
, -
Sidewalk along
Benedict
Commons and
existing
condition along
subject property,
Dimensional Requirements: The dimensions of this project are proposed to be
established through adoption of a PUD (Planned Unit Development). Following is a
comparison of the roposed dimensions and those allowed in the Office Zone District
Dimension: Proposed Proposed Hannah Office Zone
Park Place Dustin Lot: District:
Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft. 60 ft, 60 ft,
Front Yard Setback 6.5 ft. O-IOft, (varies) (west- lOft, (secondary front
primary) yard is 2/3 of primary
6.5 ft, (north = front yard)
secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east) 5 ft,
5 ft, (east)
Rear Yard Setback Oft, lOft (existing) 15 ft,
Maximum Height 35 ft, 28 ft. (existing) 25 ft.
Percent of Open No No Requirement No Requirement
Space Requirement
Allowable FAR 1.29:1 Same as Office zone ,75:1. May be
requirement increased to 1:1
through Special
Review
Residential Off- 3 total N/A Minimum: Lesser of I
Street Parking /bedroom or 2/unit.
Commercial Off- 99 spaces 3 along alley (Joss of 3 3/1 ,000 s,f. net leasable
Street Parking surface spaces on space.
north side)
Distance between 10 ft. 10 ft, 10 ft.
Buildings on the lot.
Park Place Page 5
Staff believes the proposed dimensions are appropriate. Both the neighboring Benedict
Commons Building and the Aspen Athletic Club building across the street exceed a 1: 1
FAR with the Aspen Athletic Club Building
having an FAR of approximately 1.82:1. The
Benedict Commons building has a 6.5-foot
setback along the Hyman Avenue property line.
The 35-foot proposed height of the parking
facility is measured to the top of the flat roof. The
adjacent Benedict Commons building was
approved for a 30-foot height limit (measured at
the midpoint of the sloped roof) and certain
ridgelines are developed to approximately 34 feet
The portion of the building closest to Hyman
Avenue has been restricted to 26 feet, reducing Neighboring Benedict Commons Building
the appearance of massing on the front fayade,
The proposed west side yard setback (between the
proposed parking garage and the Hannah Dustin
building) of 3 feet is less than the Office Zone
requirement The proposed setback for the
Hannah Dustin building is 0 feet The City's
Building Department has suggested the proposed
property line be repositioned such that the parking
garage has a 0- foot setback. This would prevent
the east facing walls of the Hannah Dustin
Building from having to be retrofit as "fire walls." If this route were pursued,
minimum lot size ofthe parking garage structure would need to be varied.
The proposed east side yard setback of 5 feet
meets the requirement of the Office Zone Districts
and mirrors the 5-foot setback of the Benedict
Commons building.
Bell Mountain Townhomes across the
alleyfrom subject site,
the
The Hannah-Dustin building is not proposed to be altered. The dimensional requirements
that are proposed to be established through the PUD reflect the existing dimensional
conditions of the building,
Employee Generation & Affordable Housing: This project will generate approximately
5 FTE (full-time equivalents) plus a potential part-time bookkeeper/manager. The City
requires mitigation for 60% of the employees generated. The applicant has proposed two
affordable units - a Category lone-bedroom unit and a Category 3 three-bedroom unit.
These units house 4.75 employees, in excess ofthe City's requirement The Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority has reviewed this proposal and has recommended approval
with a series of conditions. These conditions require an audit of the operation to
determine actual employee generation and a legal mechanism to guarantee the rental units
remain affordable (considering the Telluride decision),
Park Place Page 6
Subdivision: The subdivision request is to divide the lot into two properties and is also
necessary for the creation of multi-family housing (a unit in a mixed-use building is
multi-family housing by definition). The site is flat and contains no geologic hazards or
other reasons to recommend denial and is suitable for subdivision. Staff believes that the
proposed subdivision application complies with all of the City's standards,
Residential Design Standards Waiver: There is little practical benefit of applying the
City's Residential Design Standards to this project. As designed, the project does not
meet the following standards:
Secondary Mass - Requires a portion of the FAR be detached from the main
building,
- Requires a porch be developed on the front fas;ade,
- Requires 20% of the front fas;ade to be one story In
height.
Porch
One Story Element
Staff believes that compliance with these standards would detract from the project and
that the combination of uses within the project dictates the architecture of the building.
Staff believes the proposed architecture is appropriate and adequately provides a
residential aesthetic on Hyman Avenue fas;ade on the upper levels of the building.
Staff recommends the residential design standards be waived for this project and the
architecture of the building be guided by the PUD standards,
Growth Management: The proposed parking garage requires a GMQS scoring approval.
A scoring by the Growth Management Commission was held on November II th, and the
application received passing scores. The process requires "acceptance" of the scores by
both City Council and the Pitkin County BOCC. City acceptance is accomplished
through the iroposed ordinance, Pitkin County BOCC acceptance is scheduled for
December 3' and staff will update City Council at the hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 58, Series of2003.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No, 58, Series of2003,"
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
A TT ACHMENTS
Exhibit A - Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B - Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C - Application (distributed with first reading packet)
Exhibit D - Traffic Analysis
Exhibit E - Noise Report
Exhibit F - GMQS scores
Park Place Page 7
..,
Operations Prospectus ,",,'"
Page 1
Exhibit A to City Councii'uf'dinance No. 58, Series of2003.
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently ful! during the
mid-day hours, The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed,
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their spaces on and off the rental pool with little notice, The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking, There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they wil! earn
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand,
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing the operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility,
Components of the Facility
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. Subject to an audit, the employee housing units will fully mitigate for any
employee generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility,
Use of Spaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owner.
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
Exhibit A to City Council Urdinance No. 58, Series of2003.
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility, The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system. Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure, If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pooL Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrivaL However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management shall retain 19 spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking availability. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there Will only be a daily rate for
parking, During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell discounted single-day parking
in order to encourage persons to park and leave their vehicles all day, i,e" come in the
morning and leave it till the end of the day for one price so long as they exit only once.
Longer rentals to non-owners, such as weekly and monthly rentals, will not be permitted.
Such rentals would interfere with the daily parking function, and potentially obstruct
availability of spaces for owners,
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not sufficient to staffthe facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00
a,m, Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past
these hours of operation during high season, unless reviewed by the City to accommodate
some special need. Special longer hours may be established for event parking in
conjunction with City parking and traffic management activities, Examples of these
special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of July fireworks. Owners and users
will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles,
Parkin!!: TVDes
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the basic method of usage. Examples of this
include day skier parking, day business parking, and night dining/shopping parking,
Nineteen of the 99 total spaces shall be available at all times for daily parking, Other
spaces shall also be available when not in use by their owners,
. Off-season. During times of low and off seasons, the intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day, It will
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
, -<--.",-....,..-~-~.".- ,,,.~.- --.-,,, .._,<"-"_.~-......,-~.-,-~--"...~.,-
Operations Prospectus'
Page 3
Exhibit A to City Council urdinance No. 58, Series of2003.
and exit for a fixed price of up to 11 hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in the core.
. Longer-term. Owners and non-owners may occupy up to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed. However, this longer-term parking
may not be held empty for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public day perking when not actually in use by owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are sold, there will be an Owners' Association
created for owners who will pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and other
necessary expenses, It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the
space to the rental market even just occasionally, It is possible that some buyers would
buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding
current yields on other investments,
Manal!:ement of buildinl!: bv the development l!:roup
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business, It is expected that fees in the range of25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
The vast majority of the costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated, With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group,
Replacement of the development l!:roup
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation, At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility, Subsequent owners of the management group would
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
Exhibit A to City Council urdinance No. 58, Series of 2003.
assume any land use conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facility or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually,
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues, It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town,
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times, It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption,
Finally, there will be the investor/buyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 of the
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Operations Plan defined in this prospectus may be amended through the City of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process,
REVIEW CRITERIA - PARK PLACE
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Review Criteria & Staff Findings
Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Final PUD
Section 26.445.050 of the Regulations provides that development applications for Final
PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements.
A. General Requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with many objectives of the Aspen Area
Community Plan,
The 2000 AACP endorsed the following transportation policies and goals that have
applicability to this project:
. Limit traffic on Highway 82 into Aspen to 1993 levels,
. Reduce internal flow of traffic within Aspen.
. Hold the supply of public parking within the Aspen Community Growth
Boundary to 1998 levels, with the exception of affordable housing parking.
. Reduce automobile congestion in the downtown core, particularly in the evening
and on weekends so as to foster economic sustainability,
. Manage the supply of parking to limit adverse impacts of automobile use and to
conserve land in the Aspen area,
. Provide a wide range of flexible transportation management tools and techniques
to reduce single-occupant automobile use,
The Economic Sustainability Report (a follow-up to the AACP) recommended the City
"continue to reinvest in Aspen's infrastructure through collaboratively exploring
public/private and interagency partnerships for certain projects and moving forward on
other that have already been approved, These include: 1) The Entrance to Aspen as
approved in the CDOT Record of Decision; 2) Possible additional and more convenient
parking; and, 3) A gondola interconnect for the four ski areas."
Recent projects and planning efforts also affect this discussion. The Rio Grande Parking
Garage was originally planned for an additional level below grade. This unbuilt level
would have accommodated and additional 80 cars. The Independence Place Plaza project
("Superblock") was planned in this general area as an outgrowth of the 1986 parking
study referenced in the application. 228 parking spaces were contemplated for the IPP
project
Park Place Review Criteria Page I
The "hold public parking" statement in the AACP seems to not support this (or any)
additional parking. At the same time the "reduce congestion," "transportation
management," "add more parking," and recent planning activities seem to support this
concept of additional public parking. Staff believes parking, especially public parking, is
an infrastructure necessary to the downtown shopping district. Staff does believe the
parking garage proposal complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
The Applicant has appropriately proposed to develop affordable housing well within the
Urban Growth Boundary and in close proximity to the Commercial Core of the City as is
consistent with the housing policies that are set forth in the AACP, In addition, the
Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan states that citizen housing should be provided
within the metro area and in close proximity to public mass transit as the proposed
development is. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
The immediate vlclmty is comprised of commercial, mixed use, and multi-family
residential buildings, The proposed parking garage will support these uses and the uses
of the immediately adjacent downtown core, Staff finds this proposal consistent with the
character of the surrounding area,
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed development would adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is
exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the
proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with,
final PUD development plan review.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has obtained a passing score from the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth
Management Commission and City Council is authorized to award the allotments
necessary for this project. Staff believes this criterion is being met.
B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements:
The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements
for all properties within the PUD ...The dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate
dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional
requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing
development patterns shall be emphasized.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 2
~
1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are
appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property:
a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected
future land uses in the surrounding area.
b) Natural and man-made hazards.
c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding
area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant
vegetation and landforms.
d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and
the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian
circulation, parking, and historical resources.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed height is appropriate given the heights of the surrounding
structures. The parking garage facility is proposed at a height of thirty-five (35) feet to
the top of the flat roof The existing buildings that surround the site of the parking garage
are built to a height of between thirty (30) and thirty-five (35) feet talL Therefore, staff
believes that the proposed height is compatible with the surrounding buildings.
Additionally, the proposed FAR of 1,29: I is compatible with the neighboring buildings in
that both the neighboring Benedict Commons Building and the Aspen Athletic Club
Building that exists across the street contain greater than a I: I FAR, with the Aspen
Athletic Club Building containing a I: 1.82 FAR
2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and
quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the
character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed dimensional requirements for the parking facility
structure are compatible with the surrounding properties. Several of the surrounding
structures are built to a height similar to that of the thirty-five (35) feet proposed for the
parking facility. Additionally, the PUD that would consist of both the existing Hannah-
Dustin Building and the proposed commercial parking facility would provide a quantity
of open space comparable to that provided at the neighboring Benedict Commons PUD,
3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established
based on the following considerations:
a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed
development including any non-residential land uses.
b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking
is proposed
c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities,
including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize
automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development.
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and
general activity centers in the city.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 3
---
(
'",
Staff Finding
The Applicant has proposed to incorporate the required parking spaces for the affordable
housing units within the parking facility. Therefore, staff has proposed a condition of
approval that requires the Applicant to designate three (3) of the parking spaces within
the parking facility for the affordable housing units,
4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum
density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal,
and road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding
The infrastructure capabilities are sufficient to accommodate this proposal.
5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the
maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mudjlow, rock falls or avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural
watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water
pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in
the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or
causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site.
Staff Finding
No natural hazards or other conditions exist that would dictate such a reduction III
allowable density,
6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there
exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such
increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding
development patterns and with the site's physical constraints.
Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if:
a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as
expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area
plan to which the property is subject.
b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and
there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified
in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those
characteristics mitigated.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 4
'-_"-~"-~","--- ..... .,,~.. .,,,..,.- ..- ",-"~,,,.-,.-,,'.".'~'."'.'.-.~'-'~ -- ..-..... ,,-
c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern
compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and
expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics.
Staff Finding
Staff believes the proposed density is appropriate for the site and for the character of the
immediate vicinity. Sufficient transportation infrastructure is a community goal
expressed in the AACP and is necessary for continued economic health of the downtown,
None of the physical characteristics of the site limit the allowable density (criteria 4&5)
and the proposed density is compatible with the surrounding development pattern.
B. Site Design:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces,
is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the
adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The
proposed development shall comply with the following:
1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique,
provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to
the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate
manner.
Staff Finding
No such characteristics of the site exist such that a change in the site plan would be
necessary,
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open
spaces and vistas.
Staff Finding
No significant open space or vistas exist that would dictate a change in the proposed site
plan.
3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the
urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest
and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement.
Staff Finding
The sidewalk improvements are needed in the area and positively contribute to the urban
context in which this site is located,
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow
emergency and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Proper emergency access will be maintained with this proposal.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 5
Staff Finding
This criterion has been met
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a
practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact
surrounding properties.
Staff Finding
The City Engineer and the applicant have reviewed drainage requirements and believe
this criterion is satisfied.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are
appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions
associated with the use.
Staff Finding
No programmatic needs of the uses direct the design of spaces between the buildings,
C. Landscape Plan:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed
landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels,
and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The
proposed development shall comply with thefollowing:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces,
preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample
quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen
area climate.
Staff Finding
The proposed landscape improvements will significantly improve this site. The existing
surface parking along Hyman A venue detracts from the streetscape and provides no
pedestrian accommodation. The proposal will amend this situation and complete a
needed link in the pedestrian network.
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide
uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in
an appropriate manner.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other
landscape features is appropriate.
Staff Finding
No predominant site features or landscape features exist that would require preservation
through the construction phase,
D. Architectural Character:
It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the
City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is
based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the
Park Place Review Criteria Page 6
,,,-'....
'".. ~
building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale,
orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other
attributes, which may significantly represent the character of the proposed
development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan
and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of
the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development
shall:
1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city,
appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the
property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the
intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and
cultural resources.
Staff Finding
The architectural character of this proposal is adequate for the proposed use and for the
immediate vicinity, The residential uses along Hyman Avenue provide some relief and
architectural interest to the building,
2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by
taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation
and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems.
Staff Finding
The proposed mechanical system provides an extremely efficient method of car storage.
The system requires no internal ramping and no mechanical exhaust/venting. Staff
believes the proposal, even considering the mechanics of the system, will require less
energy and less land area than a conventional ramped and mechanically vented garage.
3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe
an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
Staff Finding
The flat roofs essentially mitigate this concern, Some minimal maintenance along the
north side of the garage will be necessary.
E. Lighting:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development
will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and
general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished:
I. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous
interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site
features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate
manner.
2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting
Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD
documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements,
and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for
residential development.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 7
Staff Finding
The applicant has indicated full compliance with the City's lighting code will be
achieved,
F. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area:
If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or
recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed
PUD, the following criteria shall be met:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the
property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the
various land uses and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation
areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or
dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a
similar manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future
residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
No such common space has been proposed.
G. Utilities and Public Facilities:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose
any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the
public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed
utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply
with the following:
1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the
development.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be
mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the
developer.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for
the additional improvement.
StatIFinding
The applicant will be required to provide service upgrades as necessary, An electrical
transformer may be necessary, No City or other utility agencies have requested
overslzmg,
Park Place Review Criteria Page 8
r
\..,.."
H. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1 & 2 apply to Minor PUD
applications):
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily
accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides
adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use
of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development
shall meet the following criteria:
1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate
access to a public street either directly or through and approved private
road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use.
Staff Finding
Proper access is maintained to all lots and structures with this proposal.
2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking
arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding
the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be
improved to accommodate the development.
3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or
connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access
to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated
public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and
maintenance.
4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted
specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate
manner.
5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained
under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to
ensure appropriate public and emergency access.
6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or
for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical.
Staff Finding
Staff does not foresee this proposal creating undue congestion on the eXlstmg road
network, The 165 expected additional daily trips is not expected to necessitate
infrastructure improvements. The ability to stage up to 4 cars should alleviate queuing
issues within Hyman A venue. Staff has included a condition requiring the operator not
allow cars to be left unattended within the right-of-way,
No trail/bike path recommendations of the AACP or historic use patterns affect this site,
This entryway has been properly designed. Staff believes these criteria have been met.
1. Phasing of Development Plan.
The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not
create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners
and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of
Park Place Review Criteria Page 9
"r.....
~.._-. ,.....
the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the
adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with
the following:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a
complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later
phases.
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-
lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the
PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any
mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective
impacts associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
No phasing has been proposed.
Subdivision
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for
Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements.
1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the area.
3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future
development of surrounding areas.
Staff Finding
See comments under PUD Section.
4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable
requirements of this Title.
Staff Finding
Staff finds this application in compliance with applicable regulations of the City,
considering the proposed conditions of approval.
B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision
Park Place Review Criteria Page 10
a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land
unsuitable for development because ofjlooding, drainage, rock or soil creep,
mudjlow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other
natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or
welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision.
b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed
to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature
extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs.
Staff Finding
The land is suitable for subdivision. No natural hazards exist that affect the division of
this land, The proposed subdivision provides an efficient use of land with no
unnecessary public costs,
C. Improvements. The improvements setforth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided
for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See,
Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met:
1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to
the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or
the goals of the community.
2. The Applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested
and provide justification for each variation request, providing design
recommendations by professional engineers as necessary.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has consented to install the required subdivision improvements that are
applicable to this proposal as is detailed in the application. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling
units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the
requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which
is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in
compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota
System.
Staff Finding
The new dwelling units are affordable according to the City's regulations and IS III
compliance with the City's growth management regulations,
E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication
Standards setforth at Chapter 26.630.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 11
Staff Finding
School Impact Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the unimproved land
divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis. The City of Aspen
verifies the unimproved land value of the lands underlying the Project to be $2,961,700
based on information from the Pitkin County Assessor. This represents $10,750,870 per
acre. One-third of this value divided by the proposed 2 units results in a $1,791,823 per acre
standard for calculating the impact fee, The subject subdivision is not conducive to locating
a school facility and a cash-in-lieu payment shall be accepted. School Impact Fees are as
follows, payable at building permit issuance:
1/3 land Land Per unit Number
value per Dedication Impact Fee of Units
unit per standard
acre (acres)
One bedroom $1,791,823 .0012 $2,150 I $2,150
Two Bedroom $1,791,823 .0095 $17,022 0 0
Three $1,791,823 ,0162 $29,028 I $29,028
Bedroom
Four Bedroom $1,791,823 .0248 $44,437 0 0
Total: $31,178
Amendments to the project shall include an adjustment to this impact fee according to the
above schedule.
F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to
applications for which all growth management development allotments have been
granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter
26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable
Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth
management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth
management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to
the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, S 2)
Staff Finding
The City/County Growth Management Commission scored the project with passing
scores (GMC resolution No. I, 2003) and the City Council may award the necessary
allotments concurrent with adoption of the subdivision ordinance. Staff believes this
criterion is met.
Conditional Use
26.425.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses.
When considering a development application for a conditional use, the appropriate
review board shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 12
1. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and
standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone
district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other
applicable requirements of this Title; and
Staff Finding
See comments under PUD Section. Staff believes this criterion is met.
2. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding
land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposedfor development; and
Staff Finding
The proposal compliments uses and activIties within the downtown VICllllty, The
proposed use and operating characteristics are compatible with the development pattern
and character of the immediate uses. Staff believes this criterion is met.
3. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed
conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise,
vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and
Staff Finding
Staff expects off-site impacts will be minimal. The proposal is not expected to generate
noise, trash, odors, vibrations, or service deliveries that would be unexpected in this
mixed-use area, Traffic and pedestrian circulation are improved with the proposal.
Visually, the parking garage use has been masked with residential development along the
Hyman Avenue fayade and will have appropriately-designed parking entrances along the
street. Staff believes this design is sensitive to the surrounding properties and more than
adequately minimizes the affects of the parking garage use,
4. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use
including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks,
police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical
services, drainage systems, and schools; and
Staff Finding
Sufficient infrastructure exists to accommodate the use. Staff believes this criterion is
met,
5. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental
needfor increased employees generated by the conditional use; and
Staff Finding
The applicant is providing employee housing to accommodate the use, The
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has reviewed the proposal with their Board
and has found the application providing employee housing in excess of the City's
Park Place Review Criteria Page 13
requirements, An audit condition has been included to ensure adequate housing is
provided in the case where current employee projections are exceeded. Staff
believes this criterion is met.
Rezoninl!:
Note: Requiredfor PUD Overlay. No change to underlying Office Zone is proposed
Section 26.310.040, Standards Applicable to Rezoning
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this title.
Staff Finding:
The proposed PUD Overlay is consistent with the Land Use Code and does not represent
any potential conflicts. The parking garage concept is unique and the PUD review
process allows a broader discussion on the merits of such a proposal. The PUD Overlay
also allows for the parcel to be split and the existing Hannah Dustin building to remain
unaltered, Staff believes the PUD Overlay is appropriate and desired and is
recommending approval,
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Please refer to comments related to the AACP under the PUD section. In summary, staff
believes this application is in compliance with the AACP.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and
neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Finding:
No change to the underlying zoning is being proposed, only a PUD overlay, The Overlay
provides for a greater discussion and involvement of neighboring property owners as to
the compatibility of the proposed development. Staff believes the proposal meets this
standard,
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety .
Staff Finding:
The PUD Overlay will not be increasing the allowable density of the parcel as the Office
Zone District provides for the density being contemplated. A parking garage is a
conditional use in this zone district and effects of traffic generation and safety are being
addressed through the conditional use review and the PUD review.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to
which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such
Park Place Review Criteria Page 14
,.....
"'./
/,.,
"" ,",
facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage
facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency
medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
The utility and infrastructure needs for the project have been addressed in the PUD
application, Because of the location of the development and existing capacities, no
significant up-grades are required to accommodate this development. Improved electrical
service will be required and the upgrades will be paid for by the applicant and are not
expected to be borne by the general public.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes the proposed zoning overlay and the proposed development do not
represent adverse impacts upon the natural environment. Sufficient criteria to evaluate
potential impacts on the natural environment are included as PUD criteria and the overlay
actually ensures the community a greater degree of scrutiny.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with
the community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
The overlay requires a greater degree of review than would otherwise be required and
compatibility issues regarding proposed heights, FAR, and the proposed parking garage
use can be more thoroughly evaluated with the PUD overlay,
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject
parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff Finding:
A change in conditions is not a prerequisite to rezoning. This criterion only requires that
any changed conditions be considered upon requests for rezoning.
This block of East Hyman is developed with a mix of commercial, office, and residential
uses, The parcel to the south was developed with a lodge and was recently redeveloped
with residences and below-grade parking. The most-recent developments have been
residential, including an affordable housing project with below-grade parking developed
with a density of approximately 80 residential units per acre, one of the highest density
developments in Aspen.
The City has been had philosophical discussion in the past several years with respect to
growth, affordable housing, preservation of rural lands, and the advantages of density and
compact communities, Generally, the concept encourages higher densities within
traditional townsites and preservation open and rural lands between city centers. This
shift in philosophy can be seen in the Interim Citizen Housing Plan, the 2000 AACP, and
in the reports and discussion of the City's lnfill Program. This shift requires
consideration on how to use urban land more intensely. At the same time, significant
anxiety exists concerning increased building mass and intensity ofland uses,
Park Place Review Criteria Page 15
"""
\.,.......
The Planned Unit Development Overlay permits a complete discussion and consideration
on how to use a parcel of land more intensely while addressing the impacts of such
intensity on surrounding properties. In this case, staff believes the PUD Overlay is
preferable in moderating the interests of the community, surrounding property owners,
and the applicant Staff believes this criterion has been met and supports the zoning of
the property to include a PUD Overlay,
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe the additional review and involvement of the community required
by the PUD Overlay is in conflict with the public interest The overlay does not grant the
applicant any additional development rights or reliance, Staff believes this standard is
met
Residential Desil!:n Standards
This application fails to meet several of the Residential Design Standards. The
practicability of applying these standards to such as development is difficult and staff
believes the proposed development creates constraints and conditions not favorable to
reaching compliance with all the standards,
The following standards are not being adequately addressed:
Secondary Mass
- Requires a portion of the FAR be detached from the mam
building.
- Requires a porch be developed on the front fayade.
- Requires 20% of the front fayade to be one story in height
Porch
One Story Element
Staff believes that compliance with these standards would detract from the project and
that the combination of uses within the project dictates the architecture of the building,
Staff believes the proposed architecture is appropriate and adequately provides a
residential aesthetic on Hyman Avenue fayade on the upper levels of the building.
Staff recommends the residential design standards be waived for this project and the
architecture of the building be guided by the PUD standards,
GMOS Exemption for AH
Section 26.470.070(J), Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption
Section 26.470,070(1) ofthe Regulations provides that, "All affordable housing deed
restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing
designee shall be exempt [from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures],"
Review is by City CounciL The section goes on to state that,
Park Place Review Criteria Page 16
'~."",
'".....
The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this Section shall
include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the
proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of
dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed,
specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the
dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed
price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing a total of two (2) affordable housing units that are to be deed
restricted as a Category I-one bedroom rental unit and a Category 3- three bedroom
rental units. Staff feels that there certainly still is a need for the development of
affordable housing in that we are still under the projected need of 800 to 1300 additional
affordable housing units that is set forth in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan's
Housing Policies. Staff believes the proposed site is located in an appropriate location
for the development of affordable housing in close proximity to the commercial core and
well within the Urban Growth Boundary as is mandated by the AACP, Additionally, the
Housing Authority has reviewed the proposal and has indicated that units are consistent
with the requirements of the affordable housing guidelines with respect to the size,
layouts, and Categories proposed,
Staff has included a condition requiring the developer to provide sufficient assurance to
the City that these rental units will remain affordable considering the State Supreme
Court's ruling in the Telluride affordable housing case, This has been accomplished in
the past with other developments proposing rental affordable housing and is expected to
be satisfied in this instance. Staff finds this criterion to be met
Park Place Review Criteria Page 17
MEMORANDUM
To: Development Review Committee
From: John Niewoehner, Community Development Engineer,
DRC Case load Coordinator
fij\{tv f(~((;
~(~~~ 1?
Vete<<~\ CM~~
Date: July 14, 2003
Re: Park Place Private Parkina Facilitv
Attendees:
James Lindt, Community Development Department
Chris Bendon,Community Development Department
Nick Adeh, Engineering Department
Denis Murray, Building Department
Brian Flynn, Parks Department
John Niewoehner, Community Development Department
Tim Ware, Parking Department
Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer
Jannette Whitcomb, Environmental Health
Stan Clauson, Planner Representing Applicant
Brain Pawl, Planner Representing Applicant
Peter Fornell, Applicant
Jeff Halferty, Architect for Applicant
At the July 9, 2003 meeting, the Development Review Committee reviewed the following project:
Park Place Private Parkina Facilitv: A private parking facility is proposed for 300 South Spring
Street near the intersection of Spring St and East Hyman Ave, The proposed garage will
accommodate approximately 99 parking spaces and will have seven levels including three below
grade, Besides the parking area and garage office, two apartments are planned for the second
and third floors,
This was the second DRC meeting for this project The first DRC meeting was October 9, 2002,
These minutes are not meant to duplicate comments from the October DRC,
DRC COMMENTS
1 , Enaineerina Department:
. Due to past bad experiences, the City does not allow soil nails to extend into ROW or
utility easements, Investigating the use of soil hardening techniques is recommended,
. Street Impact Fee: At the time of the building permit application, a street impact fee will
be accessed that accounts for the construction wear and tear on the streets,
. The Engineering Department supports the Applicants plan to pave the alley as long as
the alley improvements are engineered to accommodate drainage,
. Traffic Management Plan: At the time of building permit application, a traffic
management plan needs to be submitted that defines the construction hauling routes
and methods to shuttle workers to the construction site,
. Are there ground water issues? Groundwater could potentially increase the cost of
construction and operation, Dewatering operations cannot pump groundwater out of
the aquifer unless adequate water rights are obtained,
. Extensive geologic and soils are required to determine to determine whether
groundwater issues exist and how the building can be constructed without adversely
affecting adjacent properties and the ROW.
. Building foundation footers cannot extend into the ROW,
. Vehicles and material storage cannot block the use of the alley by emergency vehicles,
"
,.-"'"
Page 2 of 3
July 7, 2003
Park Place
","-,. ",
2, Zonino
. There are questions regarding the floor area of the structure, The racks that support
the cars are not real building floors but neither is the building an open shell. This is a
question for P&Z to settle, The PUD can be used to define the floor area,
. The applicant should use the PUD to request that the project be exempted from the
City's residential design standards,
. Parks and school impact fees will need to be paid for the affordable housing units,
. The project needs to be renamed, There are too many places in Aspen with a similar
name,
3, Parkino Department:
. Prior to the start of the project the City needs to know the frequency and duration of
street and alley closings, How will the project construction adversely affect the
neighboring properties' access and parking,
. The traffic management plan must describe how emergency vehicles will have
continual access to the construction site and adjacent properties, In addition, parking
spots on the street must be purchased for construction vehicles including worker's
vehicles,
4, Fire Protection District:
. The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system throughout the building that complies
with NFPA-13,
. The Applicant shall install a fire alarm system throughout the building that complies with
NFPA-72.
. The Applicant shall install standpipes,
. The Applicant shall prepare an emergency access plan and meet with the Fire Marshal
prior to the public hearing,
. The Applicant shall prepare a ventilation plan and meet with the Fire Marshal prior to
the public hearing,
5, Parks Department:
. Root barriers are to be placed around new trees to prevent future buckling of the
sidewalk,
. Parks Dept recommends that the spruce tree be cut down instead of trying to
transplant it
7, Buildino Department:
. Structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and for the
residential area (res-check),
. No access Is shown to the mechanical room,
. Must fulfill the requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units,
. Disability access to the bathroom and the vehicle pickup area must be defined,
. One fire sprinkler system is needed for the entire building,
. As part of the lot split, it is advisable that the parking garage have the zero lot line
setback instead of the neighboring building,
8, City Water Department: no comments at this time
9, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: (by phone)
Page 3 of 3
July 7, 2003
Park Place
;-
" ,
. Will there be a back-up generator? If so, there will be fuel tank issues,
. There will need to be containment for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handiing
system,
. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
. Will the garage be broom cleaned or cleaned with water? If water is used, there will
need to be floor drains, Floor drains will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will
require an oil/sand separator. In case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must
be sized to accommodate fire flows,
. Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay applicable fees,
10, Environmental Health:
. The applicant needs to provide a construction noise suppression plan,
. The Environmental Health needs to refine the expected trip generation numbers based
on an improved understanding of the project Preliminary estimates determined that
garage would generate 952 trips per day, Vehicles trips cause air pollution,
. The paving of the alley and the construction of sidewalks will help mitigate for the
impacts of the vehicle trips resulting form the project
/DRC/ParkPlaceDRC#2
f......
V
~
engineering paths to transportation solutions
~(V flWiJ
~1tI\~\l D
\ \eA...f~~ ~ \'fvlS
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
August 28,2003
Mr. Stan Clauson, AICP, ALSA
Stan Clauson Associates, LLC
200E. Main Street
Aspen CO 81611
RE: Traffic Analysis
Park Place Parking Garage
FHU Reference No, 03-169
Dear Mr. Clauson:
Felsburg Holt & Ullevig has prepared this letter to summarize the traffic impacts associated with
the proposed 99-space Park Place Commercial Parking Facility (Park Place garage) to be
located at 707 East Hyman Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. This letter summarizes the existing
land use and traffic impacts associated with the small office building and parking area currently
on the site, the existing traffic volumes on Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site, the number
of trips forecasted for the proposed garage, and the traffic impacts to the adjacent streets
associated with those trips.
Existing land Use
Currently, the site consists of a 927 square foot A-frame office building and small surface
parking lot that can accommodate approximately 15 vehicles. On a typical day, this lot is used
to capacity. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trio Generation, Sixth Edition was
used to forecast the existing daily and peak hour trips associated with the office building, The
existing parking lot trips were estimated based on information provided by the City of Aspen for
the Rio Grande Parking Garage, In that garage during peak times of the year, each space is
used approximately 1,5 each day, with the peak demand occurring between 11 AM and 2 PM,
which is outside of the morning and afternoon peak hours of adjacent street traffic (one hour
between 7 and 9 AM and 4 and 6 PM). Since traffic impacts are typically measured during the
peak hour of street traffic, it was estimated that approximately 15 percent of the total daily traffic
would occur during those morning and afternoon peak periods. These characteristics were
applied to the existing surface lot on the site,
Table 1 shows the number of daily and peak hour trips currently associated with the site. As the
table indicates, the existing land uses on the site generate approximately 105 daily trips, 12 AM
peak hour trips, and 12 PM peak hour trips,
303,721.1440
fax 303,721.0832
fhu@fuueng.com
Greenwood Corporate Plaza
7951 E, Maplewood Ave, See, 200
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
"""
v
,.......,"
~
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 2
Table 1
Existing Trips Generated by the Site
Existing Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes on East Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site were obtained from the City.
Summer counts were conduced in 1997 and winter counts were conducted in 1994. These
counts were factored to 2003 conditions based on the traffic growth factor calculated by the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for Original Street (SH 82) immediately east of
the site. Based on this factor, Hyman Avenue currently experiences approximately 3,500
vehicles per day (vpd) in the summer and approximately 2,300 vpd during winter. The summer
volume on Hyman is1,700 to 1,900 vpd lower than the summer volume on either Cooper
Avenue (4,900 vpd) or Hopkins Avenue (4,700), one block north and south of the site,
respectively, and is approximately 3,000 vpd lower than the volume on Durant Avenue (6,500
vpd), two blocks north of the site, All four streets appear to have similar mixes of commercial
and residential land use. Thus, it appears that Hyman currently experiences traffic volumes that
are somewhat lower that the typical volumes on other local streets in the downtown area.
Proposed Land Use
As proposed, the site would be developed as a 99-space garage, with two affordable housing
units. The garage is consistent with the land use identified for the site in the Aspen/Pitkin
County TransitfTransportation Development Program, 1986-2000 (Leigh, Scott & Cleary, 1986),
which identified a 300-space parking garage for the site. To maximize space usage, a
mechanical system would be used to park cars. Drivers would park their car on one of two
mechanical lifts, exit the car, and the lift would move the car into an available spot
Table 2 summarizes the trip forecast with the proposed land uses. ITE Trio Generation, 6th
edition was used to forecast trips associated with the affordable housing. As for the garage,
based on our understanding of the operation, all of the garage spaces would be available for
purchase or long-term rental by local residents. It was assumed that approximately 20 percent
of the spaces would be used by part-time local residents to store their vehicles when out of town
and thus would generally be unavailable for use on a daily basis. The remaining 80 percent (80
spaces) would be used on a daily basis by local residents, merchants, employees, and visitors.
These daily spaces would be in a manner similar to the Rio Grande garage; Le,. each space
used approximately 1,5 time each day, with approximately 15 percent of the daily demand
occurring during the morning and afternoon peak hours of the adjacent streets. Based on these
,-.,
'......,#
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 3
assumptions, the proposed land uses would generate approximately 250 daily trips, 37 AM peak
hour trips, and 37 PM peak hour trips.
Table 2
Proposed Park Place Trip Generation
M':ge~J~~ft,iuj~~~~~~:ttm~~
~,~mtO'_'(~~@p{maI'
110
36 11 25
37 12 25
Traffic Impacts
Table 3 summarizes the net trips generated by construction of the Park Place Garage. These
trips represent the trips generated by the garage, minus the existing trips from the site. The
total represents the new trips that would be added to Hyman Street. However, it should be
noted that these trips are not new trips to the downtown Aspen area, but rather represent
existing traffic that currently uses other parking locations, In fact, construction of the garage
may result in a minor reduction in overall traffic in the downtown area, because some of the
vehicles that would use the garage currently circle the area in search of on-street parking, With
the new facility, these vehicles would drive directly to the lot and be removed from circulation.
Table 3
Net Trip Generation from the Park Place Site
Pro osed Park Place Gara e
Existin Site Land Uses
Net Total Tri s
250
105
145
37
12
25
12
3
9
As the table indicates, Hyman Street in the vicinity of the site would experience approximately
145 additional daily trips as a result of the Park Place Garage, This represents a three percent
increase over the existing daily traffic volume on that block. The total daily traffic volume of
3,645 vpd on Hyman Street would still be approximately 1,250 vpd less than the daily volume on
Cooper Avenue and 1,050 vpd less than the daily volume Hopkins Avenue, one block north and
south of the site, respectively. Therefore, the parking garage would not change Hyman Street's
character as a lower volume local street in downtown Aspen.
",....
v
~'.
"""
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 4
Queuing
The estimated total time required to park each car using the lift system would be approximately
90 seconds (from the time the vehicle drives onto the lift to the time the lift returns for the next
vehicle); thus, with two lifts a total of 80 vehicles could be parked each hour (3600 seconds/hour
/ 90 seconds/vehicle * 2 lifts = 80 vehicles/hour), A waiting area with room for four vehicles
would be provided on the site for vehicles entering the garage and waiting for the lift. To
minimize queuing, these entering vehicles would be given priority with the lifts, and drivers
would pay upon exiting.
Based on projected peak period arrival rates and the lift processing time, during the morning
and evening peak hours of adjacent street traffic the maximum queue at the lifts would be two
vehicles, which would be contained within the four-car storage area, During the busiest hour of
the day (mid-day peak) during the busiest time of year, it is estimated that a maximum of half of
the daily spaces (40 spaces) would turn-over (40 trips in, 40 trips out). During these periods,
the maximum queue would be 4 vehicles, which also would be contained within the site.
Conclusions
Based on the results of the analysis, the proposed Park Place garage would generate
approximately 145 net daily trips from the site. This represents a three percent increase over
existing daily traffic volumes on that block of Hyman Avenue, but still would result in total daily
traffic volumes there that are significantly lower than the adjacent local streets. The garage
could also result in a lowering of overall downtown Aspen traffic by reducing the number of
vehicles circulating for on-street parking spaces. Peak period queuing by vehicles entering the
site would be contained within the waiting area provided on site,
I trust this information is sufficient for you to make an informed decision on traffic impacts
associated with the project If you have any further questions, please call,
Sincerely
;;)laLT ULL""G
~e~~E.
Senior Transportation Engineer
eoJDept.
MIDAMERICAN El
7030
~UtA'~ ~(~ f~
-r"K~-I~tr E
Noise- ~
71
08/28/2003 11:13 177348G~~8
Aur; 27 03 11, Dip Ga~,j Eh,..llch
Post-it" Fax Nole
~
To
Phonli" .
August 27, 2003
Mr. Jack Litschewskl
Mid-American elevator Company
5101 General Washington Drive
Alell;llndria. Virginia 22312
Keference: Summit (;;ran(l pare - p<lrKing Machine Noise
F"''>'7C
'20 <6"7
This Jetter summarizes the noise level measurements performed by Wyle
Laboratories at the Summit Grand Pare building in Washington, D,C,
This building has a parking mal:hiflB. The resident drives t1leir vehicle into .roorn
#2.w The parking machine is then engaged. The platfonn in the room rotates
slightlv and the vehicle is lowered to the appropriate level of the garage. Upon
exit, the resident calls for the vehicle. The parking machine uses a crane to
retrieve the vehicle and place it on a different platform. That platfonn is then
r.llsed up to "room #1", and the t'e5ident drives out.
Overall A-weighted and one-third octave band SOund levels were measured twice
each second in the lobby and in the garage as the parking machine was operated.
Sound levels are olten expressed in one-third oct:c\ve bands. The range of human
hearing is approximately from 20 to 20,000 Hz. The A-weighted sound level is the
most commonly used noise metric. The A-weighting filter was designed to
simulate the frequency sensitivity of the human ear at low to moderate loudness,
Two sounds with the same A-weighted sound level Should be judgeCl equally lOud
by most people.
Sound levels were measured during brief periods between ;1.0:30 and 11:30 a.m.
on AUgust 27, 2003. The measuremenl!i were not performed when people were
using the elt:vaturs or lobby, OccasIonally, there was some noise from the
reception desk and office area on the opposite side of the lobby. Ambient noise
was generally attributable to street traffic. ventilation systemll, end the distant
office workers.
The garage moasurements were performed in the pllrking garage i1ppl"oximately
ten feet from the overhead dool' at the entrance to room #2 (the room thOlt drivers
enter first before parking). Sound levels were measured in the garaqe as the
machine was operated in the exit and entrance cycles. No vehicle was on !:he
platform during the tests.
The lobby measurements were performed in the hallway between the reception
desk and the elevators. The C100r between that hallway and the garage was
c:losed. Sound levelS were measured in each location during different cycles, not
simultaneously.
Wyl. LatlOr.!ID_.Ine. lIfl<I1 J.rru..... D.... Hlg....., 5ul"'701, AnlnglDrl, VII _5Dol Tet 7_15-45llO, T'IlI-= 703/1115-0.
Aue 27 03 11.01p
G.....>t EI1I" 1 i cl1
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
,..,
703" A<l-27S0
PAGE 02
p.'!
08/28/2003 11:13
17734852438
,,,",,,
Mr. Lltschewski
August 27, 2003
Page 2
Figure 1 shows the A-weighted SOI,md level eadl half-second, It can be seen from
Figure 1 that sound levels were essentially the same In the rooby witl'l the parKing
machine operating as without. It can also be seen that the sound level in the
garage was typiC!'lIy betwe.!Pn 50 and !'.!'; dBA, and occasionally reached 70 ':0
SO dBA.
figure z shows the frequency speara averaged over the entire test ptlriud, amI
Figure 3 shows the frequency spectra averaged over the loudest five-second
p/!!r1od. Again, it can be seen that sound levels were nearly identical with the
parking machine and without it in the lobby.
Subjectively, the jJllrking ma.:;llhltl was barely audible in tile lobby.
Please call me at 703/415-4550 ext. 18 If you require any additional information.
Sincerely,
~~hr~
Senior Acoustical Engineer
1I1YI!-
08/28/2003 11:13
1
16 :
31 -
46
61
76 '
91
106
121 _
136
151 0
166
CR
; 181 :
'!2. 196
CD
~ 211
i
0226
..
241 "
256
271
286
301
316,
331
346
361 ~
376 -
391
1 7734852~.s
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
, ....
PAGE 03
~
10
u
,
"II
O'
c
..,
CD
~
.
;p
E
!!.
lllI
i:
CD
0.
CD
o
C
=
c:<.
:;
Gj
of
m
t!l
=r
p
01
'"
CD
n
o
~
I:l.
o
-
o
Nt
C
Overall Sound Level, dBA
B
2l
t.l
<:>
rn
<:>
...
c
I I + +
bbG)G).
rTa"! III
~Su:>rl!l
I t CD (P
C ~ ' c
c: cc:
~. c ,S....
:::J -. -
G:I ~::;. ,
m'" G:I m
;;l m~
,-< a
I -<
L-
I
"
-.... . - . -- ~......
IJ~T. l' .JU";I ~.n~"
dnn:TI ~n /.~ llnll -
08/28/2003 11:13
1 7734862j~8
,
,
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
, ,
.
PAGE 05
....,.....,._....C"c.cnl
L1cq.lLf3 f;.Ii!e
dOD : t[ EO .:.~ ~1'I1:l
I Sound Level, dB
~ ", ,.:> ~ !9 m --J co
0 0 0 <=> 0 0
dBA
20Hz
25Hz
32H:it I 1 + ,
40Hz r-r"(;)(j)
o 0 III III
tr tF iil ..,
t:r"" III
50Hz '< '< (Q IC
I , III CD
63Hz I;J )> I C
0 'i '3 0 t: :!!
tT c: ~.~
::l :i" -. ;! ::l' 11:I
III 80Hz 10 CD ::I' a::I C
, m a ~ ~1 ..,
-l CD
:r 100 Hz a. ~ =J r>'
a -< ,3_
0 125 Hz ~
0 CD
;Df 160 Hz ...
.< i
CD
tD 200 Hz "ft
III ii1
::I
g. 250 Hz i
n III
! 315 Hz ::l
n
~- ...
II> 400 Hz fn
...
" 'a
Cl 500 Hz CD
C'l
.tI ~
s:: El30 Hz
CD
::I C
" C
::<: BOO Hz ::s.
::J: ::I
11:I
... 1kHz -l
CD
1 k25 Hz !4.
1kS Hz
2kHz
21<5 Hz
3k15 Hz
4KHz
08/28/2003 11:13
L_..-
.,..J
1 7734862,~,8
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
..,
PAGE 04
"
~
-.............."......-.'
n",,:;__F:<:;-F:OL
4o,t-'43 R-'e~
0100: It EO l.a llnL,l
'"""
,"".,.,1
.......... """''V-.:::t """..;;t-.:::t-.:::t
......................................................
CO......Q)LOLOO\'-.L!)(O
......N..................N..................
tDCOt---f'-.LOCOt-f'--.f'--.
~~~COO~~COQ)
"""v"'d"..q-",,,"-.:::tvv-.;t
............................................-......
COCO...... f'-.LOLOQ)(() LOC,O
............N..--...--..............................
l'-(()(x)IDI'-LOCOI'-t---f'-.
...- N M......
~ ~
co~~mooO'.l
,,'0
~ 0 "
Q)OO]';!
"
o '" '0
L... C.Q rn l...
'Ooea;Ero
~ rn CJ~ ~
:::;~I-I
OJ ~ ~
a>2~2.E
U5~~~-Q
0
d
l/)
C!o l/)
o:t . ns
~Q)
D.
l/)
11)00 l/)
r--:cD ns
~ ~ D.
l/)
Q) 0 l/)
..; .. ns
D.
l/)
"!N l/)
o . ns
~....
D.
C!
o
C!o
o:t .
~Q)
000
"':cD
~~
00 0
cD-.:t
NN
0"':
~
~:E
00
".<:
rn III
Q) E
Cl.<:
[!!I-
Q)
>
<C
l/)
l/)
ns
D.
l/)
l/)
ns
D.
l/)
l/)
ns
D.
l/)
l/)
ns
D.
'..
LL.
Iii
'"
..
c.
<Ii
Li
.!!!
ro
>
ro
'"
C OJ
00 ::a
a.rn
o~
~ >
,ro
~2
u "
1: '6
.,giQ>Q.
::9cnLO
.~ "0...... .
rn c: . Q)
> co ~::a
co f/l .- rn
f/JQ)~:=
~;go~
0.0 J: ctl
Q.cuQ)U)
coLL::cc
..-- .~ ctl .0
Cl)c:o"Ea.
.S:! .2> 6: ~ oq-
a en - <( U)
t:n~ 0 - c
CD >; 0
-o~ c:"o
QJ ==00-
(J~~jQ (f)
tn(ijro > ~
.S :J > e 0
aO<(tLlIl
", ,
CI)<(IIlOO
,
~v~~
~~\bit- F
(d1v ~e6
~
- '"
o C
~ (f) (/)"02
IV ~ ~ a. c:
lr.;" 0 0 CD .0
.:;a.a.:oQ.
Q)..Q:!]';!w
tn::a .0 .- ::c
.S CtJ m ~..rn
Cirorocu'ffiE
u>>-o>::J
CI) ro ro ro,~
_ _.......0_
Eoog;oC
:=3 cfi. "# (0 "# 'E
eooloo
"- .q- 'V (() c.o c
.5: I I + I I
:;; <(1Il <(00
r.....
\'ol.....
/
,- "'Ie
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor Klanderud and City Council
FROM:
John Worcester, City Attorney --IA,A.
Joyce Allgaier, Community Development Deputy Director
Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner ~
"Park Place" - 707 E. Hyman Avenue
First Reading of Ordinance No.~, Series of 2003.
(Second Reading scheduled for December 8, 2003.)
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
November 10,2003
PROJECT: "PARK PLACE" COMMERCIAL PARKING GARAGE
REQUEST: Approvals to subdivide the parcel and construct a 99 space
Commercial Parking Facility with two (2) affordable housing
units on the eastern parcel currently developed with an "A-
Frame" structure.
ZONING: Office (0) Zone District
LAND USE ACTIONS: Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, Conditional Use,
Subdivision, Rezoning to include a PUD Overlay, and
GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing.
(A GMQS scoring will occur on November 11th,)
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION Denial (4-3 vote)
RECOMMENDATION
STAFF Approval with Conditions
RECOMMENDATION:
SUMMARY:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is
requesting land use approvals to construct a 99 parking space commercial parking facility
with an accessory office and two (2) affordable housing units,
The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B, C,and D of Block 105, City and
Townsite of Aspen, and is located in the Office (0) Zone District. The property is
currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707 East Hyman, and the "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring. Both are currently office buildings. No changes are
proposed for the Hannah-Dustin Building, The commercial parking facility is proposed to
replace the A-Frame,
Park Place Page I
l/l~'"
,-.
"'- 1
The parking operation is proposed as an entirely automated system. Cars are placed on
"pallets" and then mechanically moved within the building. No internal ramping is
involved and patrons do not actually enter the parking area. A small office houses an
attendant who aids patrons with the system. Two affordable housing units are proposed
on the Hyman Avenue side ofthe building.
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application over a series of four
meetings and recommended City Council not approve the project (by a 4-3 vote). The
reasons for recommending denial varied between each commissioner, although several
noted an insecure feeling about the queuing of cars on Hyman Avenue. The Growth
Management Commission will be "scoring" the project on November 11th Scoring
results will be presented at second reading.
A CD has been included in the application and can be run on any computer with a CD
drive. City staff can play the CD for Council members or the public, This will also be
played at the public hearing on December 8th,
Staff has reviewed this application against the applicable criteria and believes all criteria
have been met. Staff is recommending approval, subject to conditions outlined in
proposed Ordinance No. _, Series of 2003.
MAIN ISSUES:
Sketch Plan Review: A parking garage concept (on the A-Frame property only) was the
subject of a "sketch plan review" with City Council and the Planning and Zoning
Commission October 21, 2002. This review process allows a potential applicant to
identify planning issues with the City's boards and neighbors of the site in a public
hearing format. The proposed operation has significantly changed since the sketch plan
reView,
The planning issues identified were: Compatibility of the use with surrounding uses and
properties, lighting of the facility, height and aesthetics of the building, hours of
operation, noise, traffic generation and air pollution, employee generation, and potential
future uses of the building. The two boards expressed concerns over these issues on "first
blush" and indicated to the applicant that these issues would need to be addressed in an
application. The two boards indicated acceptance of the project being reviewed as a
PUD, potential flexibility with employee generation calculations, and potential ability for
the project to gain multi-year allotments in growth management.
Aspen Area Community Plan: The 2000 AACP endorsed the following policies and
goals that have applicability to this project:
. Limit traffic on Highway 82 into Aspen to 1993 levels.
. Reduce internal flow of traffic within Aspen,
Park Place Page 2
t"'''
'......'
-""".".
...."..,
. Hold the supply of public parking within the Aspen Community Growth
Boundary to 1998 levels, with the exception of affordable housing parking.
. Reduce automobile congestion in the downtown core, particularly in the evening
and on weekends so as to foster economic sustainability.
. Manage the supply of parking to limit adverse impacts of automobile use and to
conserve land in the Aspen area,
. Provide a wide range of flexible transportation management tools and techniques
to reduce single-occupant automobile use.
The Economic Sustainability Report (a follow-up to the AACP) recommended the City
"continue to reinvest in Aspen's infrastructure through collaboratively exploring
public/private and interagency partnerships for certain projects and moving forward on
other that have already been approved, These include: I) The Entrance to Aspen as
approved in the CDOT Record of Decision; 2) Possible additional and more convenient
parking; and, 3) A gondola interconnect for the four ski areas."
Recent projects and planning efforts also affect this discussion. The Rio Grande Parking
Garage was originally planned for an additional level below grade. This unbuiJt level
would have accommodated an additional 80 cars, The Independence Place Plaza project
("Superblock") was planned in this general area as an outgrowth of the 1986 parking
study referenced in the application. 228 parking spaces were contemplated for the IPP
project
The "hold public parking" statement in the AACP seems to not support this (or any)
additional parking. At the same time the "reduce congestion," "transportation
management," "add more parking," and recent planning activities seem to support this
concept of additional public parking.
Staff believes parking, especially public parking, is an infrastructure necessary for the
success of the downtown shopping district This parking garage will add capacity and
relieve some of the demand for on street parking, valet parking, and the Rio Grande
facility, Staff believes the proposal complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan,
Traffic Generation: There is a question of whether this facility will attract more auto
trips to town ("build it and they will come") or will this project ease parking frustration of
people already coming to town. Staff suggests its likely a little of both - this facility will
add to the inventory of parking and provide some relief to the "circling phenomenon."
Parking demand is primarily a function of downtown destinations (restaurants, shopping,
skiing, etc,) and parking serves that demand. At the same time, additional capacity may
attract some additional auto trips that would otherwise be either discouraged from
downtown or be handled by other transit modes,
Park Place Page 3
"'""
~"/
,
This section of Hyman Avenue is one of the least traveled streets downtown and no
physical improvement are necessary to accommodate the additional trips,
Traffic Queuing. The proposed project has two parking bays and can queue up to four
cars at a time. Parking each car takes approximately 90 seconds - the average time for
the system's mechanics to complete a full cycle. It is suggested that during peak periods,
both bays will accept vehicles and patrons wanting to retrieve their cars will be required
to wait. With the two bays in operation, a minimum ofthree minutes will be available for
exiting the vehicle, collecting belongings, etc. With a parking space behind each bay,
additional time is available for patrons. The 90-second cycle time of the mechanical
system permits the facility to process up to 40 cars per hour, the expected peak-hour
demand. (See Exhibit D - traffic report.)
Noise: Compliance with the City's noise limitations was raised during the P&Z review.
A system of the same manufacturer located in Washington D.C. was analyzed by an
acoustical engineer. (See exhibit E - noise report.) Sound readings within the lobby of
this system reported an overall sound level of approximately 43 to 48 dBA. It is this "A-
weighted" scale that the City's noise ordinance specifies as the method of measuring
noise, (The second two charts of the noise report describe the "profile" of the noise, or
what it sounds like,)
The City's noise limitation for this commercial zone district is 65 dBA during the day (7
am to 9 pm) and 60 dBA during the night (9 pm to 7 am) measured at the property line,
The lobby readings of the Washington D,C. facility indicate that this facility will be well
within the City's requirement at the property line. In fact, the facility should be within
the City's more-strict residential noise limitations of 55 dBA during the day and 50 dBA
at night.
Sound readings were also taken within the mechanical area of the Washington D,C
facility. These readings aren't pertinent to the noise issue because: one of the overhead
doors will remain closed during mechanical operation; patrons do not enter the
mechanical area; and, the City does not regulate noise levels within buildings.
Staff believes the facility will be in compliance with the City's noise regulations, The
proposed ordinance requires a "noise check" prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy (CO,). This test will be performed by the City of Aspen and will be done
under a variety of operating conditions.
Public Parking: The level of public access was discussed at P&Z and the applicant
specified 19 parking spaces as permanently available to the public. The public access
element of the project was important to several P&Z members wanting the facility to
remain actively serving parking needs and not storage of vehicles or remaining unused,
The 19-space requirement is specified in the proposed ordinance,
Park Place Page 4
Operations Prospectus: During their review, the Planning and Zoning Commission
requested an operations plan detailing the day-to-day operation of the facility and
documenting representations of the applicant. This plan contains hours of operation, a
description of how the operator will use unused spaces for public parking, and a yearly
report to the City, The operations prospectus is appended to the proposed ordinance.
Pedestrian Improvements: The site currently provides a sidewalk along Spring Street
and essentially no pedestrian provision along Hyman Avenue, The proposal would
complete the sidewalk provided along the Benedict Commons for the remainder of the
block.
Sidewalk along
Benedict
Commons and
existing
condition along
subject property,
Dimensional Requirements: The dimensions of this project are proposed to be
established through adoption of a PUD (Planned Unit Development), Following is a
comparison of the propOosed dimensions and those allowed in the Office Zone District.
Dimension: Proposed Proposed Hannah Office Zone
Park Place Dustin Lot: District:
Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft. 60 ft. 60 ft.
Front Yard Setback 6.5 ft, O-IOft. (varies) (west = lOft. (secondary front
primary) yard is 2/3 of primary
6,5 ft, (north = front yard)
secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east) 5 ft,
5 ft. (east)
Rear Yard Setback Oft, lOft (existing) 15 ft.
Maximum Height 35 ft, 28 ft. (existing) 25 ft,
Percent of Open No No Requirement No Requirement
Space Requirement
Allowable FAR 1.29:1 Same as Office zone .75:1. May be
requirement increased to 1:1
through Special
Review
Residential Off- 3 total N/A Minimum: Lesser of I
Street Parking Ibedroom or 2/unit.
Park Place Page 5
--
....""
Commercial Off- 99 spaces 3 along alley (Joss of 3 311 ,000 s.f. net leasable
Street Parking surface spaces on space.
north side)
Distance between 10 fi. 10 fi. 10 fi,
Buildings on the lot
Staff believes the proposed dimensions are appropriate. Both the neighboring Benedict
Commons Building and the Aspen Athletic Club building across the street exceed a I: I
FAR with the Aspen Athletic Club Building
having an FAR of approximately 1.82: L The
Benedict Commons building has a 6.5-foot
setback along the Hyman Avenue property line.
The proposed west side yard setback (between the
proposed parking garage and the Hannah Dustin
building) of 3 feet is less than the Office Zone
requirement The proposed setback for the
Hannah Dustin building is 0 feet The City's
Building Department has suggested the proposed
property line be repositioned such that the parking
garage has a 0- foot setback, This would prevent
the east facing walls of the Hannah Dustin
Building from having to be retrofit as "fire walls," If this route were pursued,
minimum lot size of the parking garage structure would need to be varied.
The 35-foot proposed height of the parking
facility is measured to the top of the flat roof. The
adjacent Benedict Commons building was
approved for a 3D-foot height limit and certain
ridgelines are developed to approximately 34 feet
(measured at the midpoint of the sloped roof).
The portion of the building closest to Hyman
Avenue has been restricted to 26 feet, reducing
the appearance of massing on the front fayade.
The proposed east side yard setback of 5 feet
meets the requirement of the Office Zone Districts
and mirrors the 5-foot setback of the Benedict
Commons building.
Neighboring Benedict Commons Building
Bell Mountain Townhomes across the
alley from subject site,
the
The Hannah-Dustin building is not proposed to be altered. The dimensional requirements
that are proposed to be established through the PUD reflect the existing dimensional
conditions ofthe building.
Employee Generation & Affordable Housing: According to the applicant, this project
will generate approximately 5 FTE (full-time equivalents) plus a potential part-time
Park Place Page 6
bookkeeper/manager. The City requires mitigation for 60% of the employees generated.
The applicant has proposed two affordable units - a Category lone-bedroom unit and a
Category 3 three-bedroom unit. These units house 4.75 employees, in excess of the
City's requirement. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has reviewed this
proposal and has recommended approval with a series of conditions, These conditions
require an audit of the operation to determine actual employee generation and a legal
mechanism to guarantee the rental units remain affordable (considering the Telluride
decision).
Subdivision: The subdivision request is to divide the lot into two properties and is also
necessary for the creation of multi-family housing, The site is flat and contains no
geologic hazards or other reasons to recommend denial is suitable for subdivision. Staff
believes that the proposed subdivision application complies with all of the standards,
Growth Management: The proposed parking garage requires a GMQS scoring approval.
A scoring of this application by the Growth Management Commission is scheduled for
November II II" and the results of the scoring with be reported at City Council's second
reading.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No.55' Series of 2003, upon first reading.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: / / .A
P.i5 ~"0'-..-r -4 be, e. ve..-7 a.a;/?~~/oj~ .l.€
Crlr C~c.-r deri.-e5 ,,~..fr.f-"~ ~<:trk'7 5.-.-.e..s,
r ,
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No,$" Series of 2003, upon first reading."
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A - Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B - Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C - Application
Exhibit D - Traffic Analysis
Exhibit E - Noise Report
Park Place Page 7
.,-,
ORDINANCE NO. ~
(SERIES OF 2003)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING
CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) REVIEW,
CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
WAIVERS, SUBDIVISION REVIEW, REZONING TO INCLUDE A PUD
OVERLAY, AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING GROWTH MANAGEMENT
EXEMPTION REVIEW FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY AND
OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED ON LOTS A, B, C, AND D, BLOCK 105, CITY
AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
(the Project) from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, John Cooper Managing Partner, owner
and applicant, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, for combined Conceptual
and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval, Rezoning for a PUD Overlay,
Subdivision approval, Conditional Use approval, Residential Design Standards waivers,
and Growth Management Exemption approval for affordable housing for a proposed
commercial parking facility housing ninety-nine cars, two affordable housing units, and
an accessory parking attendant office, and an existing office building; and,
WHEREAS, the parcel of land is described as Lot A, B, C, and D, Block 105,
City and Towntsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, also described as the Hannah-
Dustin Condominiums according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 78
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, and is currently developed with an "A-Frame"
structure, 707 East Hyman Avenue, generally located on Lots C and D, and the "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So, Spring Street, generally located on Lots A and B. Both are
currently office buildings, Minimal changes are proposed for the Hannah Dustin
Building and site, The commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the A-Frame;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304, 26.310, 26.410, 26.425, 26.445,
26.480, and 26,710 of the Land Use Code, land use applications requesting land use
review for Rezoning for Planned Unit Development Overlay designation, Conditional
Use, Planned Unit Development Conceptual and Final plan adoption, Residential Design
Standards waivers, and Subdivision approval, may be approved, approved with
conditions, or denied by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after
considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, the Planning
and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, the appropriate referral
agencies, and members of the general public; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(l) and for the purpose of
providing clarity and reducing duplication the Community Development Director, in
consultation with the applicant, has modified the Conditional Use Review and Residential
Design Standards variance procedures for this project such that the Planning and Zoning
Ordinance No. ,
Series of2003, Page I
Commission, at a public hearing, shall make a recommendation to City Council and City
Council, at a public hearing, shall be the final decision-making body; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445.020 and notwithstanding the parcel
being less than 27,000 square feet in size the Community Development Director has
allowed this project to be reviewed according to the City's Planned Unit Development
process considering that this project may have the ability to further goals of the Aspen
Area Community Plan and that the procedures and review standards ofthe City's Planned
Unit Development process best serve the interests of the community in reviewing the
project; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445.030(B)(2) the Community Development
Director has permitted the consolidation of Conceptual and Final Planned Unit
Development review considering the limited extent of issue involved; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, the City Parking Department, the City
Transportation Department, the City Zoning Officer, City Parks Department, the Aspen
Building Department, the Environmental Health Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 19, 2003, continued
to September 2, 2003, October 7, 2003, and October 21, 2003, the Planning and Zoning
Commission considered the noted recommendations and comments from the general
public and recommended, by a four to three (4-3) vote, the City Council not grant
approval for the Rezoning for PUD Overlay designation, Conceptual and Final PUD
Development Plan approval, Conditional Use approval, Subdivision approval, and growth
management exemption approval for affordable housing for the proposed commercial
parking facility and existing office building.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the application
according to the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the
Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a
public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the application meeting or exceeding all
applicable standards of the land use code of the City of Aspen Municipal Code and that the
approval of the proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows:
Ordinance No,
Series of2003, Page 2
Section 1: Rezonine:
The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be, upon filing of the
Subdivision plat and Final PUD Plans, amended by the Community Development
Director to reflect the following property as designated with a Planned Unit Development
Overlay zoning designation, No change to the underlying "Office" designation shall
occur.
Lots A, B, C, and D, Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Colorado.
Section 2: Growth Manae:ement Approval Contine:encv
The Subdivision and Planned Unit Development approvals granted by the City shall not
be considered valid until the project obtains all growth management allotments and
approvals. The City shall not accept or approve final Subdivision/PUD plats, plans, and
agreements unless all growth management allotments have been awarded by the City of
Aspen.
Section 3: Residential Desie:n Standards
The project, as depicted in the Final PUD Plans, shall be exempt from the City's
Residential Design Standards.
Section 4: Approved Proiect Dimensions
The following approved dimensions of the project shall be reflected in the Final PUD Plans:
Dimension: Parking Garage Lot: Hannah Dustin Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft, 60 ft.
Front Yard Setback 6,5 ft. O-lOft, (as shown on final PUD
Plan) (west = primary)
6.5 ft. (north = secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east)
5 ft, (east)
Rear Yard Setback o ,ft. 10ft
Maximum Height 35 ft. 28 ft.
Percent of Open No Requirement No Requirement
Space
Allowable FAR 1.29: I (The parking Same as Office zone requirement
"shelves" shall not be
counted as FAR, only the
building shell and
traditional floors,)
Ordinance No.
Series of2003, Page 3
r-.
",...
Residential Off- 3 total N/A
Street Parking
Commercial Off- 96 spaces 3 along alley
Street Parking
Distance between 10 ft, 10 ft,
Buildings on the lot.
Section 5: Parkin!!: Spaces and Parkin!!: Gara!!:e
Parking spaces within the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and not used
for storage or other similar non-automobile related purposes.
Three (3) total parking spaces shall be allocated to the two on-site affordable housing
units, (One space for the one-bedroom unit and two spaces for the three-bedroom unit.) If
the residential units are transferred separate from the remaining property interests, the
parking space allocated to the residential unit shall be conveyed in fee as part of the
ownership interest in the residential unit.
A minimum of nineteen (19) spaces shall remain available to the general public for public
parking. General public shall be persons with no ownership interest in the Project. These
spaces may be individually transferred as long as they remain available to the general
public,
The remaining seventy-seven (77) parking spaces may be sold, transferred, or leased by
the owners thereof on a daily or long-term basis. These parking spaces may be used to
satisfy parking needs of future commercial expansions on- or off-site and may be sold or
leased to third parties for use as remote residential parking,
The parking garage and parking spaces shall be considered an approved commercial
parking facility and an approved remote parking facility as such terms are used in the
City's Land Use Code, Parking spaces may be physically reconfigured, with approval
from the Community Development Director, to accommodate additional or fewer parking
spaces such that a total change of no greater than five (5) parking spaces, from that
depicted on the Final PUD Plans, occurs, Physical reconfigurations reducing parking by
more than five (5) spaces shall require a PUD amendment. Conversion of parking spaces
to non-parking uses shall require a PUD amendment.
Section 6: Affordable Housin!!: Units
The Project shall include one (I) one-bedroom Category One affordable housing unit and
one (I) three-bedroom Category 3 affordable housing unit as described on the Final PUD
Plans, The one-bedroom unit shall have one (I) associated parking space within the
parking garage, The three-bedroom unit shall have two (2) associated parking spaces
within the parking garage,
Ordinance No, _'
Series of2003, Page 4
The two affordable units shall be exempted from the Growth Management Quota System
and counted towards the growth ceiling for affordable housing,
The affordable housing units shall be either transferred as "for-sale units" to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
Guidelines or, if the units are to be rented, a legal instrument permanently ensuring their
affordable status acceptable to the City Attorney shall be provided, The City shall accept
a nominal property interest (1/10 of 1 percent undivided interest) or other reasonable
means of assurance.
Residents of the affordable housing units shall meet the minimum occupancy and all
other qualification criteria in the APCHA Guidelines, as amended. The rental structure of
the affordable units shall not exceed a maximum rental rate of Category 2 for the one-
bedroom unit and Category 3 for the three-bedroom unit as such rates are defined in the
APCHA Guidelines, as amended from time to time, Rental tenants shall be qualified by
APCHA.
Section 7: Impact Fees
Park Imvact Fees of $5,754 shall be assessed. Amendments to the Project shall include
an adjustment to this impact fee according to the following schedule:
Park Fees:
lone-bedroom @ $2,120 per unit =
I three-bedroom unit @ 3,634 per unit =
$2,120
$3,634
$5,754
School Imvact Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the unimproved land
divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis. The City of
Aspen verifies the unimproved land value of the lands underlying the Project to be
2,961,700 based on information from the Pitkin County Assessor. This represents
$10,750,870 per acre. One-third of this value divided by the proposed 2 units results in a
$1,791,823 per acre standard for calculating the impact fee. The subject subdivision is not
conducive to locating a school facility and a cash-in-lieu payment shall be accepted.
School Impact Fees are follows, payable at building permit issuance:
113 land Land Per unit Number
value per Dedication Impact Fee of Units
unit per standard
acre (acres)
One bedroom $1,791,823 ,0012 $2,150 I $2,150
Two Bedroom $1,791,823 ,0095 $17,022 0 0
Three Bedroom $1,791,823 ,0162 $29,028 I $29,028
Four Bedroom $1. 791.823 .0248 $44,437 0 0
Total: $31,178
Ordinance No,
Series of 2003, Page 5
-
........
Amendments to the project shall include an adjustment to this impact fee according to the
above schedule.
Section 8: Landscape Plan
The proposed landscape plan shall provide a number, type, and quality of plant material
acceptable to the City Parks Department. Sufficient mitigation shall be provided, in a
form acceptable to the City Parks Department, to offset the removal of existing trees on
the site. The Landscape Plan sheet(s) of the Final PUD Plans shall include an acceptable
tree replacement and mitigation plan with a signature line for approval by the City Parks
Department.
Tree removal mitigation shall be based on the valuation of existing trees to be removed.
Tree Removal permits shall be obtained. New trees to be established within the Project
shall be credited towards this valuation. The Parks Department recommends removal of
the Spruce tree rather than relocation,
The SubdivisionlPUD agreement shall include provisions guaranteeing the successful
implementation of the landscape and ongoing maintenance,
Section 9: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
The building permit application shall comply wit all requirements of the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District. Following are specific requirements applicable to this
project:
l. If a back -up generator is used, compliance with fuel tank requirements will be
necessary.
2. Containment systems for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system are necessary.
3, ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
4. If water is used to clean the garage, there will need to be floor drains. Floor drains
will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will require an oil/sand separator. In
case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must be sized to accommodate fire
flows.
5, The Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay
applicable fees.
Section 10: Proiect Name
The Project shall be renamed to avoid emergency service confusion, A new name shall
be reflected on the SubdivisionlPUD plans and agreements.
Section 11: Subdivision & Final pun Plans
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision and a Final PUD Development Plan.
Ordinance No, _,
Series of2003, Page 6
-
,,,'
The Subdivision Plat shall comply with current requirements of the City Community
Development Engineer and also shall include the following items:
I, The final property boundaries and disposition of lands with appropriate property
descriptions.
2, Easements and signature blocks for utility mains and transformers with signature
blocks for utilities not provided by the City of Aspen. Easements for electric
transformers, Transformers shall be located outside of the public right-of-way, An
easement to access the mechanical equipment on the east side of the Hannah Dustin
building may be necessary,
3. The applicant shall provide the final approved Subdivision line data or survey
description data describing the revised parcel boundaries to the Geographic
Information Systems Department prior to applying for a building permit. The final
building location data, including any amendments, shall be provided to the GIS
Department prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The Final PUD Plans shall include:
L An illustrative site plan with dimensioned building locations. Adequate snow
storage areas shall be depicted.
2. A landscape plan showing location, amount, and species oflandscape improvements
with an irrigation plan,
3, Design specifications for any improvements to public rights-of-way with profiles
and drainage designs for any road/alley improvements.
4, An architectural character plan demonstrating the general architectural character of
each building depicting materials, fenestration, projections, and dimensions and
locations of elevator shaft heads, skylights, mechanical equipment, etc. Mechanical
equipment shall be screened from pedestrian view.
5, A utility plan meeting the standards of the City Engineer and City utility agencies,
The City Water Department prefers one fire tap and one domestic service tap.
6, A grading/drainage plan with any off-site improvements specified, Any off-site
improvements done in coordination with the City Engineering Department and costs
shall be prorated with other properties receiving such benefit.
7. An exterior lighting plan meeting the requirements of Section 26.575.150, On
building facades other than the Hyman Avenue fayade, lighting shall be limited to
that required by the building code.
Section 12: Subdivision/PUn Al!:reement
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building
Permit, the applicant shaH record a SubdivisionlPUD Agreement binding this property to
this development approval. The Agreement shall include the necessary items detailed in
Section 26.445,070, in addition to the following:
Ordinance No,_,
Series of 2003, Page 7
~~
I, A methodology of determining actual employee generation of the Project after one
complete year of operation and the manner of providing mitigation of any additional
employee generation. The project is providing housing for 4,75 employees.
According to the City's requirement of providing mitigation for 60% of the
employees generated, this housing mitigates a total generation of 7.9 employees,
Additional mitigation shall be required for any actual employee generation in excess
of 7,9 employees. The methodology shall include an audit process and timeline, a
method of selecting an auditor, the method of determining acceptable mitigation if
additional employees are generated, and be acceptable to the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority,
2, A traffic management plan describing construction hauling routes and methods to
shuttle workers to the construction site. The City prefers the applicant use East
Hyman Avenue to Original Street as the primary hauling route.
3, Geologic and soils report describing ground water issues and methods of
construction to be used to avoid adversely affecting neighboring properties and
rights-of-way, Water rights may need to be obtained if dewatering operations
remove groundwater.
4, In addition to the financial securities for improvements required by Section
26.445.070, the applicant shall provide to the City of Aspen a letter of credit, cash to
be held in a City account, or other financial security executable through the period
of construction and acceptable to the City of Aspen, to recover the construction site
to a safe condition, including but not limited to, filling-in excavated areas if
construction is discontinued. The securities shall be specified in the
SubdivisionIPUD agreement and payable upon building permit application,
5, An agreement to return the section of East Hyman Avenue to its intersection with
Original Street, or other primary hauling route, to an acceptable condition after
construction, as determined by the City Engineer. Subsurface work may be
necessary, Curb and gutter work may be necessary. A final two-inch overlay may
be necessary,
Section 13: Buildinl! Permit Requirements
The building permit application shall include/depict:
I, A letter from the primary contractor stating that the approving Ordinance has been
read and understood.
2, A signed copy of the Ordinance granting final land use approval.
3, Payment for Parks and School impacts fees as specified herein, Financial securities
as required in the Subdivision/PUD agreement.
4, A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Health Department
which addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads, perimeter silt
fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent rights-of-way, and the ability for the
Environmental Health Department to request additional measures to prevent a
Ordinance No,
Series of2003, Page 8
...........
~
nuisance during construction. The applicant shall wash tracked mud and debris
from the street as necessary, and as requested by the City, during construction.
The applicant shall provide phone contact information for on-site project
management to address construction impacts.
5. A construction noise suppression plan approved by the Environmental Health
Department which includes the ability for the City to request additional measures
to prevent a nuisance during construction, The applicant shall provide phone
contact information for on-site project management to address construction
impacts,
6, An estimated construction schedule with estimated schedules for construction
phases affecting city streets and infrastructure, Street and alley closures shall be
specified with provisions to maintain access to neighboring properties, Any street
or alley closures shall require noticing emergency service providers, neighbors, the
City Streets Department, the Transportation Department, City Parking Department,
and the City Engineering Department (Estimated schedule to be distributed to
above agencies.)
7, A construction management and parking plan meeting the specifications of the City
Building Department The plan shall demonstrate continuous emergency access to
the site and neighboring properties and requires payment for street parking used
during construction,
8. Tree removal permits for any regulated trees to be removed. The Parks Department
recommends the Spruce tree be removed rather than relocated.
9. Structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and for
the residential area (res-check).
10, Adequate access to the mechanical room must be shown.
II. The requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units shall
be fulfiJled,
12. Disability access to the bathroom and the vehicle pickup area must be defined,
13, The plans shall include a fire sprinkler system that complies with NFP A-13 and
NFPA-72, The plans shall include standpipes.
14, The building permit plans shaJl include an emergency access plan acceptable to
the Fire Marshall and a ventilation plan acceptable to the Fire MarshalL
15. The building permit plans shall be reviewed by an independent consultant for
compliance with applicable fire protection codes and regulations. The applicant
shall coordinate this review and determination of an independent consultant with
the Fire MarshalL Review fees may be assessed.
Ordinance No,
Series of 2003, Page 9
,.-..
.". .<'
Section 14: Construction
I, No soil nails shall be used within public rights-of-way or utility easements, The
City recommends soil hardening for these areas,
2. Building foundation footers shall not extend into the right-of-way,
3, Vehicles and material storage shall not block the alleyway,
4. Root barriers shall be installed around new trees to prevent future buckling of the
sidewalk.
5. The design and construction of the Project shall take into consideration the
concerns and requirements of noises exceeding the City's noise ordinance,
including proper noise mitigation methods and adequate provision for necessary
modifications of the building to meet the City's noise limitations.
Section 15: Noise Ordinance Compliance
The project shall comply with the City of Aspen noise ordinance, as amended from time
to time, Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Project shall be checked by
the City's Environmental Health Department for compliance under a range of expected
operating conditions. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued if the Project
exceeds the City's noise limitations, The Project shall not operate without a Certificate of
Occupancy.
Section 16: Queuinl!: Vehicles alonl!: Hvman Avenue
The parking garage operator shall not permit or encourage patrons to vacate their cars
until those cars are fully located on-site within the designated entry/exit parking bays.
Queuing cars shall remain occupied.
Section 17: Operations Plan and Annual Report
The Project shall operate according to the approved Operations Plan, attached as Exhibit A.
The Operations Plan may be amended from time to time according to the procedures for
amending a Conditional Use, Chapter 26.425 of the Land Use Code,
The Project operator shall submit to the City an annual operations report containing:
. A profile of the past year's use of the parking spaces, including how many spaces
were available to the public per day (a minimum of 19 spaces are required to be
available to the public) and typical day and evening capacity rates during "on"
seasons, "off' seasons, and during significant events.
. A report on the scanning system or other system used to determine owner usage,
. Typical peak hour and typical activity during peak hour,
. Top 20 peak usage days and a report on what operating issues were associated with
those days and how those issues were addressed.
. A summary of any complaints received and how those complaints were addressed.
The annual operations report shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission as
an information item (not for any specific action), As a result of the City reviewing the
annual report, or at any other time, the City may request the operator and property owner
Ordinance No._,
Series of2003, Page 10
improve certain operational Issues to conform to the requirements of the approved
Operations Plan,
Interpretation matters or disagreements between City staff and the Project owner regarding
the intent, wording, or enforcement of the Operations Plan shall be resolved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission, The Project owner may appeal an adverse determination made by
the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the intent, wording, or enforcement of the
Operations Plan to City Council, pursuant to the procedures of Chapter 26.316, Appeals, of
the City Land Use Code.
Section 18: Condominiumization
Condominiumization of the Project (after redevelopment) to define and redefine separate
ownership interests of the Project is hereby approved by the City of Aspen, subject to
recordation of a condominiumization plat in compliance with the current (at the time of
condo plat submission) plat requirements of the City Community Development Engineer.
The Project developer shall have the right to condominiumize the affordable residential
units under a separate condominium regime independent of other portions of the Project
Section 19: Enforcement
The City may enforce the provisions of this approval, including the provisions of the
approved Operations Plan as may be amended from time to time, by appropriate means
including, but not limited to, temporary or permanent revocation of the conditional use
approvaL
Section 20:
All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Planning
and Zoning Commission, or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein,
unless amended by other specific conditions.
The approvals granted herein shall run with the land and all conditions and limitations of
this approval shall apply to the property owner, or his successors or assigns, and any
property management company or independent operations company acting on behalf of the
property owner,
Section 21:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an
abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the
ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted
and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Ordinance No, _,
Series of 2003, Page 11
Section 22:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for
any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 23:
That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy
of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 24:
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 8th day of December, 2003, at
5:00 p,m, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen
(15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a
newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 10th day of November, 2003.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of
,2003.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen K. K1anderud, Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Attachment A - Operational Prospectus
C:\homeICurrent PlanninglCASESIPark _PlaceIOrdinance,doc
Ordinance No. ,
Series of2003, Page 12
,...-'
Operations Prospectus.....oI
Page I
Exhibit A to urd1nance No. _, Series of 2003.
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible, Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs,
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their spaces on and offthe rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking, There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing the operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility,
Components of the Facility
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc, Subject to an audit, the employee housing units will fully mitigate for any
employee generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility,
Use of Spaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time, During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owneL
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
Exhibit A to O'rdl'nance No. _, Series of2003.
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system, Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pooL Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrivaL However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times, It is also
important to note that the management shall retain 19 spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking availability. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will only be a daily rate for
parking. During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell discounted single-day parking
in order to encourage persons to park and leave their vehicles all day, i.e., come in the
morning and leave it till the end of the day for one price so long as they exit only once.
Longer rentals to non-owners, such as weekly and monthly rentals, will not be permitted,
Such rentals would interfere with the daily parking function, and potentially obstruct
availability of spaces for owners.
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners, However, when
demand is not sufficient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m. Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past
these hours of operation during high season, unless reviewed by the City to accommodate
some special need. Special longer hours may be established for event parking in
conjunction with City parking and traffic management activities. Examples of these
special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of July fireworks. Owners and users
will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles,
Parkin!!: Tvues
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the basic method of usage, Examples of this
include day skier parking, day business parking, and night dining/shopping parking.
Nineteen of the 99 total spaces shall be available at all times for daily parking, Other
spaces shall also be available when not in use by their owners.
· Off-season. During times of low and off seasons, the intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day, It will
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
,"'
Operations Prospectus"""
Page 3
Exhibit A to ~nance No. . Series of 2003.
and exit for a fixed price of up to II hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in the core,
. Longer-term. Owners and non-owners may occupy up to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed, However, this longer-term parking
may not be held empty for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public day perking when not actually in use by owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are sold, there will be an Owners' Association
created for owners who will pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and other
necessary expenses, It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the
space to the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible that some buyers would
buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding
current yields on other investments,
Manal!:ement of buildinl!: bv the development l!:roup
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business, It is expected that fees in the range of 25% of income would be appropriate,
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project
The vast majority of the costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated, With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group,
Replacement of the development l!:roup
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility, Subsequent owners of the management group would
~".......,
Operations Prospectus' ,
Page 4
Exhibit A to O~dU;ance No. , Series of200J.
assume any land use conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facility or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective ofreturn
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, there will be the investorlbuyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion,
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 ofthe expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 of the
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Operations Plan defined in this prospectus may be amended through the City of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process.
,
~
REVIEW CRITERIA - PARK PLACE
Planned Unit Develooment (PUD)
Review Criteria & Staff Findings
Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Final PUD
Section 26.445.050 of the Regulations provides that development applications for Final
PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements.
A. General Requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with many objectives of the Aspen Area
Community Plan,
The 2000 AACP endorsed the following transportation policies and goals that have
applicability to this project:
. Limit traffic on Highway 82 into Aspen to 1993 levels.
. Reduce internal flow of traffic within Aspen.
. Hold the supply of public parking within the Aspen Community Growth
Boundary to 1998 levels, with the exception of affordable housing parking,
. Reduce automobile congestion in the downtown core, particularly in the evening
and on weekends so as to foster economic sustainability.
. Manage the supply of parking to limit adverse impacts of automobile use and to
conserve land in the Aspen area.
. Provide a wide range of flexible transportation management tools and techniques
to reduce single-occupant automobile use,
The Economic Sustainability Report (a follow-up to the AACP) recommended the City
"continue to reinvest in Aspen's infrastructure through collaboratively exploring
public/private and interagency partnerships for certain projects and moving forward on
other that have already been approved. These include: 1) The Entrance to Aspen as
approved in the CDOT Record of Decision; 2) Possible additional and more convenient
parking; and, 3) A gondola interconnect for the four ski areas."
Recent projects and planning efforts also affect this discussion, The Rio Grande Parking
Garage was originally planned for an additional level below grade. This unbuilt level
would have accommodated and additional 80 cars. The Independence Place Plaza project
("Superblock") was planned in this general area as an outgrowth of the 1986 parking
study referenced in the application. 228 parking spaces were contemplated for the IPP
project.
Park Place Review Criteria Page I
,r""'"
'...."'"
The "hold public parking" statement in the AACP seems to not support this (or any)
additional parking, At the same time the "reduce congestion," "transportation
management," "add more parking," and recent planning activities seem to support this
concept of additional public parking, Staff believes parking, especially public parking, is
an infrastructure necessary to the downtown shopping district. Staff does believe the
parking garage proposal complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan,
The Applicant has appropriately proposed to develop affordable housing well within the
Urban Growth Boundary and in close proximity to the Commercial Core of the City as is
consistent with the housing policies that are set forth in the AACP, In addition, the
Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan states that citizen housing should be provided
within the metro area and in close proximity to public mass transit as the proposed
development is, Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
The immediate vicinity is comprised of commercial, mixed use, and multi-family
residential buildings, The proposed parking garage will support these uses and the uses
of the immediately adjacent downtown core, Staff finds this proposal consistent with the
character of the surrounding area.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed development would adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is
exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the
proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with,
final PUD development plan review.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has concurrently applied for a commercial GMQS allotment to construct
the proposed commercial square footage, This request cannot be reviewed until after the
application deadline of September 15th This will occur prior to or as a condition of final
PUD approvaL Additionally, the Applicant has requested a GMQS exemption to
construct the affordable housing units proposed within the development. Staff believes
this criterion is being met.
B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements:
The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements
for all properties within the PUD ...The dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate
dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional
Park Place Review Criteria Page 2
....."'''"'
'..""
" .."
requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing
development patterns shall be emphasized.
1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are
appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property:
a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected
future land uses in the surrounding area.
b) Natural and man-made hazards.
c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding
area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant
vegetation and landforms.
d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and
the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian
circulation, parking, and historical resources.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed height is appropriate given the heights of the surrounding
structures. The parking garage facility is proposed at a height of thirty-five (35) feet to
the top of the flat roof. The existing buildings that surround the site of the parking garage
are built to a height of between thirty (30) and thirty-five (35) feet tall. Therefore, staff
believes that the proposed height is compatible with the surrounding buildings.
Additionally, the proposed FAR of 1.29: I is compatible with the neighboring buildings in
that both the neighboring Benedict Commons Building and the Aspen Athletic Club
Building that exists across the street contain greater than a I: I FAR, with the Aspen
Athletic Club Building containing a I: 1.82 FAR,
2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and
quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the
character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed dimensional requirements for the parking facility
structure are compatible with the surrounding properties. Several of the surrounding
structures are built to a height similar to that of the thirty-five (35) feet proposed for the
parking facility. Additionally, the PUD that would consist of both the existing Hannah-
Dustin Building and the proposed commercial parking facility would provide a quantity
of open space equal to that of the neighboring Benedict Commons PUD,
3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established
based on the following considerations:
a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed
development including any non-residential land uses.
b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking
is proposed
c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities,
including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize
automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development.
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and
general activity centers in the city.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 3
Staff Finding
The Applicant has proposed to incorporate the required parking spaces for the affordable
housing units within the parking facility. Therefore, staff has proposed a condition of
approval that requires the Applicant to designate three (3) of the parking spaces within
the parking facility for the affordable housing units,
4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum
density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal,
and road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding
The infrastructure capabilities are sufficient to accommodate this proposal.
5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the
maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural
watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water
pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in
the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or
causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site.
Staff Finding
No natural hazards or other conditions exist that would dictate such a reduction III
allowable density.
6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there
exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such
increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding
development patterns and with the site's physical constraints.
Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if:
a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as
expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area
plan to which the property is subject.
b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and
there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified
Park Place Review Criteria Page 4
-
......
",-J
in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those
characteristics mitigated.
c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern
compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and
expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics.
Staff Finding
Staff believes the proposed density is appropriate for the site and for the character of the
immediate vicinity. Sufficient transportation infrastructure is a community goal
expressed in the AACP and is necessary for continued economic health of the downtown,
None of the physical characteristics of the site limit the allowable density (criteria 4&5)
and the proposed density of compatible with the surrounding development pattern,
B. Site Design:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces,
is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the
adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The
proposed development shall comply with the following:
1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique,
provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to
the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate
manner.
Staff Finding
No such characteristics of the site exist such that a change in the site plan would be
necessary.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open
spaces and vistas.
Staff Finding
No significant open space or vistas exist that would dictate a change in the proposed site
plan,
3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the
urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest
and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement.
Staff Finding
The sidewalk improvements are needed in the area and positively contribute to the urban
context in which this site is located,
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow
emergency and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Proper emergency access will be maintained with this proposaL
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 5
~
".
\",.j
Staff Finding
This criterion has been met.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a
practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact
su"oundmgpropertie~
Staff Finding
The City Engineer and the applicant have reviewed drainage requirements and believe
this criterion is satisfied.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are
appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions
associated with the use.
Staff Finding
No programmatic needs of the uses direct the design of spaces between the buildings,
C. Landscape Plan:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed
landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels,
and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The
proposed development shall comply with thefollowing:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces,
preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample
quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen
area climate.
Staff Finding
The proposed landscape improvements will significantly improve this site, The existing
surface parking along Hyman Avenue detracts from the streetscape and provides no
pedestrian accommodation. The proposal will amend this situation and complete a
needed link in the pedestrian network,
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide
uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in
an appropriate manner.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other
landscape features is appropriate.
Staff Finding
No predominant site features or landscape features exist that would require preservation
through the construction phase.
D. Architectural Character:
It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the
City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is
Park Place Review Criteria Page 6
/
based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the
building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale,
orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other
attributes, which may significantly represent the character of the proposed
development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan
and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of
the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development
shall:
1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city,
appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the
property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the
intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and
cultural resources.
Staff Finding
The architectural character of this proposal is adequate for the proposed use and for the
immediate vicinity, The residential uses along Hyman Avenue provide some relief and
architectural interest to the building.
2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by
taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation
and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems.
Staff Finding
The proposed mechanical system provides an extremely efficient method of car storage,
The system requires no internal ramping and no mechanical exhaust/venting. Staff
believes the proposal, even considering the mechanics of the system, will require less
energy and less land area than a conventional ramped and mechanically vented garage.
3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe
an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
Staff Finding
The flat roofs essentially mitigate this concern. Some maintenance along the north side
of the garage will be necessary, but within reason,
E. Lighting:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development
will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and
general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished:
1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous
interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site
features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate
manner.
2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting
Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD
documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements,
and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for
residential development.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 7
"'
Staff Finding
The applicant has indicated full compliance with the City's lighting code will be
achieved.
F. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area:
If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or
recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed
PUD, the following criteria shall be met:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the
property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the
various land uses and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation
areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or
dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a
similar manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future
residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
No such common space has been proposed,
G. Utilities and Public Facilities:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose
any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the
public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed
utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply
with thefollowing:
1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the
development.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be
mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the
developer.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for
the additional improvement.
Staff Finding
The applicant will be required to provide service upgrades as necessary, An electrical
transformer may be necessary. No City utility agencies have requested oversizing.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 8
r,
""
H. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1 & 2 apply to Minor PUD
applications):
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily
accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides
adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use
of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development
shall meet the following criteria:
1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate
access to a public street either directly or through and approved private
road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use.
Staff Finding
Proper access is maintained to all lots and structures with this proposal.
2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking
arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding
the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be
improved to accommodate the development.
3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or
connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access
to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated
public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and
maintenance.
4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted
specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate
manner.
5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained
under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to
ensure appropriate public and emergency access.
6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or
for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical.
Staff Finding
Staff does not foresee this proposal creating undue congestion on the existing road
network. The number of expected trips is not expected to necessitate infrastructure
improvements, The ability to stage up to 4 cars should alleviate queuing issues within
Hyman Avenue, Staff has included a condition requiring the operator to not allow cars to
be left unattended within the right-of-way.
No traillbike path recommendations of the AACP or historic use patterns affect this site.
This entryway has been properly designed, Staff believes these criteria have been met
1. Phasing of Development Plan.
The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not
create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners
and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of
Park Place Review Criteria Page 9
j
the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the
adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with
the following:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a
complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
2, The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later
phases.
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-
lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the
PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any
mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective
impacts associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
No phasing has been proposed,
Subdivision
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for
Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements.
1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the area.
3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future
development of surrounding areas.
Staff Finding
See comments under PUD Section.
4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable
requirements of this Title.
Staff Finding
Staff finds this application in compliance with applicable regulations of the City,
considering the proposed conditions of approval.
B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision
Park Place Review Criteria Page 10
.'....,
"'."
,
a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land
unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep,
mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other
natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or
welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision.
b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed
to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature
extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs.
Staff Finding
The land is suitable for subdivision. No natural hazards exist that affect the division of
this land. The proposed subdivision provides an efficient use of land with no
unnecessary public costs,
C. Improvements. The improvements setforth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided
for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See,
Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met:
1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to
the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or
the goals of the community.
2. The Applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested
and provide justification for each variation request, providing design
recommendations by professional engineers as necessary.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has consented to install the required subdivision improvements that are
applicable to this proposal as is detailed in the application. Staff finds this criterion to be
met
D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling
units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the
requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which
is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in
compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota
System.
Staff Finding
The new dwelling units are affordable according to the City's regulations and IS In
compliance with the Citys growth management regulations,
E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication
Standards setforth at Chapter 26.630.
Park Place Review Criteria Page II
Staff Finding
School Impact Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the unimproved land
divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis. The City of Aspen
verifies the unimproved land value of the lands underlying the Project to be 2,961,700 based
on information from the Pitkin County Assessor. This represents $10,750,870 per acre,
One-third of this value divided by the proposed 2 units results in a $1,791,823 per acre
standard for calculating the impact fee. The subject subdivision is not conducive to locating
a school facility and a cash-in-lieu payment shall be accepted, School Impact Fees are as
follows, payable at building permit issuance:
1/3 land Land Per unit Number
value per Dedication Impact Fee of Units
unit per standard
acre (acres)
One bedroom $1,791,823 ,0012 $2,150 I $2,150
Two Bedroom $1,791,823 ,0095 $17,022 0 0
Three $1,791,823 ,0162 $29,028 I $29,028
Bedroom
Four Bedroom $1,791,823 ,0248 $44,437 0 0
Total: $31,178
Amendments to the project shall include an adjustment to this impact fee according to the
above schedule,
F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to
applications for which all growth management development allotments have been
granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter
26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable
Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth
management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth
management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to
the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001,92)
Staff Finding
The City cannot review the GMQS application until the September 15,2003, application
deadline has passed, This is to ensure all applications for the year's allotment are
reviewed and scored concurrently. The subdivision review is subject to successful
GMQS review and the entitlement cannot be perfected without growth management
allotments, Conditions of approval have been included to address this issue and staff
believes the criterion has been met
Conditional Use
26.425.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses.
When considering a development application for a conditional use, the appropriate
review board shall consider whether all ofthe following standards are met, as applicable,
Park Place Review Criteria Page 12
1. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and
standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone
district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other
applicable requirements of this Title; and
Staff Finding
See comments under PUD Section.
2. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding
land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposedfor development; and
Staff Finding
The proposal is expected to compliment uses and activities within the downtown vicinity.
The proposed use and operating characteristics are compatible with the development
pattern and character of the immediate surrounding uses.
3. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed
conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise,
vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and
Staff Finding
Staff expects off-site impacts will be minimal. The proposal is not expected to generate
noise, trash, odors, vibrations, or have service deliveries that would be unexpected in this
mixed-use area. Traffic and pedestrian circulation are improved with the proposal.
Visually, the parking garage use has been masked with residential development along the
Hyman Avenue fa9ade and will have appropriately-designed parking entrances along the
street. Staff believes this design is sensitive to the surrounding properties and more than
adequately minimizes the affects of the parking garage use.
4. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use
including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks,
police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical
services, drainage systems, and schools; and
Staff Finding
Sufficient infrastructure exists to accommodate the use.
5. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental
need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and
Staff Finding
The applicant is providing employee housing to accommodate the use. The
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has reviewed the proposal with their Board
and has found the application providing employee housing in excess of the City's
Park Place Review Criteria Page 13
requirements. An audit condition has been included to ensure adequate housing is
provided in the case where current employee projections are exceeded.
Rezoning
Note: Requiredfor PUD Overlay. No change to underlying Office Zone is proposed.
Section 26.310.040, Standards Applicable to Rezoning
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions ofthis title.
Staff Finding;
The proposed PUD Overlay is consistent with the Land Use Code and does not represent
any potential conflicts. The parking garage concept is unique and the PUD review
process allows a broader discussion on the merits of such a proposal. The PUD Overlay
also allows for the parcel to be split and the existing Hannah Dustin building to remain
unaltered. Staff believes the PUD Overlay is appropriate and desired and is
recommending approval.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Please refer to comments related to the AACP under the PUD section. In summary, staff
believes this application is in compliance with the AACP.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and
neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Finding:
No change to the underlying zoning is being proposed, only a PUD overlay. The Overlay
provides for a greater discussion and involvement of neighboring property owners as to
the compatibility of the proposed development. Staff believes the proposal meets this
standard.
D. . The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety.
Staff Finding;
The PUD Overlay will not be increasing the allowable density of the parcel as the Office
Zone District provides for the density being contemplated. A parking garage is a
conditional use in this zone district and effects of traffic generation and safety are being
addressed through the conditional use review and the PUD review.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to
which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such
facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage
Park Place Review Criteria Page 14
facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency
medical facilities.
Staff Finding;
The utility and infrastructure needs for the project have been addressed in the PUD
application. Because of the location of the development and existing capacities, no
significant up-grades are required to accommodate this development. Improved electrical
service will be required and the upgrades will be paid for by the applicant and are not
expected to be borne by the general public.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes the proposed zoning overlay and the proposed development do not
represent adverse impacts upon the natural environment. Sufficient criteria to evaluate
potential impacts on the natural environment are included as PUD criteria and the overlay
actually ensures the community a greater degree of scrutiny.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with
the community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
The overlay requires a greater degree of review than would otherwise be required and
compatibility issues regarding proposed heights, FAR, and the proposed parking garage
use can be more thoroughly evaluated with the PUD overlay.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject
parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff Finding:
There has been a philosophical discussion in the past several years with respect to
growth, affordable housing, preservation of rural lands, and the advantages of density
within compact communities. Generally the current concept encourages higher densities
within traditional town sites and preservation open and rural lands between city centers.
This shift in philosophy can be seen in the Interim Citizen Housing Plan, the 2000
AACP, and in the reports and discussion of the Infill Program. This shift requires new
thinking in relation to housing the automobile and private sector involvement in serving a
strengthened market for convenient parking. At the same time, significant anxiety exists
concerning increased building mass and intensity of land uses.
Staff believes these conditions supports this overlay as it requires a more rigorous review
and balancing of these issues.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
title.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 15
Staff Finding:
The additional review and involvement ofthe neighborhood is in the public interest. The
overlay does not grant the applicant any additional development rights or reliance. Staff
believes this standard is met.
Residential Design Standards
This application fails to meet several of the Residential Design Standards. The
practicability of applying these standards to such as development is difficult and staff
believes the proposed development creates constraints and conditions not favorable to
reaching compliance with all the standards.
The following standards are not being adequately addressed:
Secondary Mass
- Requires a portion of the FAR be detached from the mam
building.
- Requires a porch be developed on the front fa9ade.
- Requires 20% of the front fa9ade to be one story in height.
Porch
One Story Element
Staff believes that compliance with these standards would detract from the project and
that the combination of uses within the project dictates the architecture of the building.
Staff believes the proposed architecture is appropriate and adequately provides a
residential aesthetic on Hyman Avenue fa9ade on the upper levels of the building.
Staff recommends the residential design standards be waived for this project and the
architecture of the building be guided by the PUD standards.
GMQS Exemption for AH
Section 26.470.070(J), Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption
Section 26.470.070(1) of the Regulations provides that, "All affordable housing deed
restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing
designee shall be exempt [from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures]."
Review is by City Council. The section goes on to state that,
The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this Section shall
include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the
proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of
dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed,
specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the
dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed
price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing a total of two (2) affordable housing units that are to be deed
restricted as a Category I-one bedroom rental unit and a Category 3- three bedroom
Park Place Review Criteria Page 16
rental units. Staff feels that there certainly still is a need for the development of
affordable housing in that we are still under the projected need of 800 to 1300 additional
affordable housing units that is set forth in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan's
Housing Policies. Staff believes the proposed site is located in an appropriate location
for the development of affordable housing in close proximity to the commercial core and
well within the Urban Growth Boundary as is mandated by the AACP. Additionally, the
Housing Authority has reviewed the proposal and has indicated that units are consistent
with the requirements of the affordable housing guidelines with respect to the Size,
layouts, and Categories proposed.
Staff has included a condition requiring the developer to provide sufficient assurance to
the City that these rental units will remain affordable considering the State Supreme
Court's ruling in the Telluride affordable housing case. This has been accomplished in
the past with other developments proposing rental affordable housing and is expected to
be satisfied in this instance. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
Park Place Review Criteria Page 17
ttA.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU:
Joyce Allgaier, Community Development Deputy Director
Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner~
"Park Place" (707 E. Hyman Avenue) - Continued Public Hearing /
Consolidated ConceptuallFinal PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning,"
Conditional Use, GMQS Exemption
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
October 26, 2003
PROJECT: "PARKPU.a;"COMMERCIAL'PARKINGGARAGE
-:-.... ..... .
REQUEST: Approvals to subdivide the parcel and construct a 99 space
Commercial Parking Facility with two (2) affordable housing
units on the eastern parcel currently developed with an "A-
Frame" structure.
ZONING: Office (0) Zone District
LAND USE ACTIONS: Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, Conditional Use,
Subdivision, Rezoning to include a PUD Overlay, and
GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing.
(A GMQS scoring application for Commercial
Development will be submitted upon the September 15
deadline and is not part of this review.)
STAFF Approval with Conditions
RECOMMENDATION:
SUMMARY:
Al the previous P&Z hearing (October 7th), the Commission directed staff to prepare a
revised Resolution incorporating a series of proposed changes to the conditions of
approval. Attached is a revised Resolution. Below is a brief summary of the changes and
how the Operations Prospectus relates to the Resolution.
Staff is recommending approval, subject to conditions outlined in proposed P&Z
Resolution No. L9., Series of 2003.
RESOLUTION AMENDMENTS:
Construction Practice & Noise: A provision to Section 14, Construction, was added to
make sure the project developer is aware of the noise check provision, which was added
as Section 15. This second section requires a review of the completed, operational
project before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy under a range of expected operating
conditions, as discussed in previous hearings.
.'0",....
Park Place Page 1
/"....
-.
Operational Plan & Annual Report: A Section was added tying the City's approval to
an Operation Plan. Section 17 references the Operations Plan, which will be attached to
the Resolution as an exhibit. The section provides a process for amending the Plan
(Conditional Use Amendment), requirements for an annual report on the project, and a
process for P&Z to resolve interpretations/disagreements on the Operational Plan. No
changes were made to the employee audit requirement, Section 12, item I.
-
Hours of Operation: This issue was handled by amending the Operational Plan. A
closing time of 10 p.m. was used. Page 2 of the Operational Prospectus.
Hourly Parking Limitation: The revised Operation Prospectus no longer provides
hourly parking, only daily rates. Page 2 & 3 of the Operational Prospectus.
Conditions run with the Property and apply to the Operator: Additional language was
added to Section 20 making clear that the conditions of approval also apply to subsequent
owners and operators. Additional language has also been included in the Operational
Prospectus, page 4.
Fire Code Compliance: Specific Fore Code citations were included in Section 13 -
Building Permit Requirements. Items 13, 14, and 15 cover these requirements.
19 Spaces for Public Use: Section 5 includes additional language regarding a minimum
of 19 spaces for public use. The section defines "general public" as personal not having
an ownership interest in the Project. Page 2 of the Operational Prospectus also includes
~
-
Enforcement: TIle language related to the temporary or permanent revocation of the
Conditional Use approval was isolated in a new Section 19 - Enforcement.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No. _, Series of 2003, recommending that City Council
approve the Park Place Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, Subdivision, GMQS
exemption, and Conditional Use for a commercial parking structure."
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Resolution with attached Operational Prospectus (revised 10.21.03)
Strike/bold version of Operational Prospectus revisions.
REFERENCE:
August 19,2003, Staff Memorandum with Exhibits A, B, & c.
Park Place Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. -13.
(SERIES OF 2003)
'..,i;..""
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE CONCEPTUAL
AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) REVIEW, CONDITIONAL
USE REVIEW, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS WAIVERS, SUBDIVISION
REVIEW, REZONING TO INCLUDE A PUD OVERLAY, AND GROWTH
MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION REVIEW FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR A
COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY AND OFFICE BillLDING LOCATED ON
LOTS A, B, C, AND D, BLOCK 105, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
(the Project) from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, John Cooper Managing Partner, owner
and applicant, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, for combined Conceptual
and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval, Rezoning for a PUD Overlay,
Subdivision approval, Conditional Use approval, Residential Design Standards waivers,
and Growth Management Exemption approval for affordable housing for a proposed
commercial parking facility housing ninety-nine cars, two affordable housing units, and
an accessory parking attendant office, and an existing office building; and,
WHEREAS, the parcel of land is described as Lot A, B, C, and D, Block 105,
City and Towntsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, also described as the Hannah-
Dustin Condominiums according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 78
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, and is currently developed with an "A-Frame"
structure, 707 East Hyman Avenue, generally located on Lots C and D, and the "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring Street, generally located on Lots A and B. Both are
currently office buildings. Minimal changes are proposed for the Hannah Dustin
Building and site. The commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the A-Frame;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304, 26.310, 26.410, 26.425, 26.445,
26.480, and 26.710 of the Land Use Code, land use applications requesting land use
review for Rezoning for Planned Unit Development Overlay designation, Conditional
Use, Planned Unit Development Conceptual and Final plan adoption, Residential Design
Standards waivers, and Subdivision approval, may be approved, approved with
conditions, or denied by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after
considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, fue Planning
and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, the appropriate referral
agencies, and members of the general public; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(I) and for the purpose of
providing clarity and reducing duplication the Community Development Director, in
consultation with the applicant, has modified the Conditional Use Review and Residential
-
P&Z Resolution No.l'l
Series of2003. Page]
'I
f",
'"
(")
Design Standards variance procedures for this project such that the Planning and Zoning
Commission, at a public hearing, shall make a recommendation to City Council and City
Council, at a public hearing, shall be the final decision-making body; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445.020 and notwithstanding the parcel
being less than 27,000 square feet in size the Community Development Director has
allowed this project to be reviewed according to the City's Planned Unit Development
process considering that fuis project may have the ability to further goals of the Aspen
Area Community Plan and that fue procedures and review standards of fue City's Planned
Unit Development process best serve the interests of the community in reviewing the
proj ect; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445.030(B)(2) the Community Development
Director has permitted the consolidation of Conceptual and Final Planned Unit
Development review considering the limited extent of issue involved; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, the City Parking Department, the City
Transportation Department, the City Zoning Officer, City Parks Department, the Aspen
Building Department, the Environmental Health Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
.......
--
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 19,2003, continued
to September 2, 2003, October 7,2003, and October 21,2003, the Planning and Zoning
Commission considered the noted recommendations and comments from the general
public and recommended, by a _to _ L--.:l vote, the City Council grant approval for
the Rezoning for PUD Overlay designation, Conceptual and Final PUD Development
Plan approval, Conditional Use approval, Subdivision approval, and growth management
exemption approval for affordable housing for the proposed commercial parking facility
and existing office building, subject to conditions of approval listed herein.
.......,
-
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that City
Council should approve the Park Place commercial parking facility and office building
project, as proposed in the land use application, with fue following conditions of
approval:
Section 1: Rezoning
The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be, upon filing of the
Subdivision plat and Final PUD Plans, amended by the Community Development
Director to reflect the following property as designated with a Planned Unit Development
Overlay zoning designation. No change to the underlying "Office" designation shall
occur.
Lots A, B, C, and D, Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Colorado.
-
P&Z Resolulion No. 1\
Series of 2003. Page 2
fi"'-'
..-.......
Section 2: Growth Management Approval Contingencv
The Subdivision and Planned Unit Development approvals granted by the City shall not
be considered valid until the project obtains all growth management allotments and
approvals. The City shall not accept or approve final Subdivision/PUD plats, plans, and
agreements unless all growth management allotments have been awarded by the City of
Aspen.
Section 3: Residential Design Standards
The project, as depicted in the Final PUD Plans, shall be exempt from the City's
Residential Design Standards.
Section 4: Approved Proiect Dimensions
The following approved dimensions of the project shall be reflected in the Final PUD Plans:
Dimension: Parking Garage Lot: Hannah Dustin Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft. 60 ft.
Front Yard Setback 6.5 ft. O-IOft. (as shown on final PUD
Plan) (west = primary)
6.5 ft. (north = secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east)
5 ft. (east)
Rear Yard Setback Oft. 10 ft
Maximum Height 35 ft. 28 ft.
Percent of Open No Requirement No Requirement
Space
Allowable FAR 1.29: I (The parking Same as Office zone requirement
"shelves" shall not be
counted as FAR, only fue
building shell and
traditional floors.) .
Residential Off- 3 total N/A
Street Parking
Commercial Off- 96 spaces 3 along alley
Street Parking
Distance between 10 ft. 10 ft.
Buildinlls on the lot.
~""'"
-
P&Z Resolution No. 1.'1
Series of 2003. Page 3
'I
r'
.......
Section 5: Parking Spaces and Parking Garage
Parking spaces within the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and not used
for storage or other similar non-automobile related purposes.
.~
-
Three (3) total parking spaces shall be allocated to the two on-site affordable housing
units. (One space for the one-bedroom unit and two spaces for the wee-bedroom unit.) If
the residential units are transferred separate from the remaining property interests, the
parking space allocated to the residential unit shall be conveyed in fee as part of the
ownership interest in the residential unit.
A minimum of nineteen (19) spaces shall remain available to the general public for public
parking. General public shall be persons with no ownership interest in fue Project. These
spaces may be individually transferred as long as they remain available to the general
public.
The remaining seventy-seven (77) parking spaces may be sold, transferred, or leased by
fue owners thereof on a daily or long-term basis. These parking spaces may be used to
satisfy parking needs of future commercial expansions on- or off-site and may be sold or
leased to third parties for use as remote residential parking.
The parking garage and parking spaces shall be considered an approved commercial
parking facility and an approved remote parking facility as such terms are used in the
City's Land Use Code. Parking spaces may be physically reconfigured, with approval
from the Community Development Director, to accommodate additional or fewer parking
spaces such that a total change of no greater than five (5) parking spaces, from that
depicted on the Final PUD Plans, occurs. Physical reconfigurations reducing parking by
more than five (5) spaces shall require a PUD amendment. Conversion of parking spaces
to non-parking uses shall require a PUD amendment.
~
-'
Section 6: Affordable Housing Units
The Project shall include one (I) one-bedroom Category One affordable housing unit and
one (I) three-bedroom Category 3 affordable housing unit as described on the Final PUD
Plans. The one-bedroom unit shall have one (I) associated parking space within fue
parking garage. The three-bedroom unit shall have two (2) associated parking spaces
within the parking garage.
The two affordable units shall be exempted from the Growth Management Quota System
and counted towards the growth ceiling for affordable housing.
The affordable housing units shall be either transferred as "for-sale units" to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
Guidelines or, if the units are to be rented, a legal instrument permanently ensuring their
affordable status acceptable to the City Attorney shall be provided. The City shall accept
,.~._,,~.,
P&Z Resolution No. ~
Series of2003. Page 4
,"-",
~
a nominal property interest (l1l0 of 1 percent undivided interest) or other reasonable
means of assurance.
""'_0"'"
Residents of the affordable housing units shall meet fue minimum occupancy and all
other qualification criteria in the APCHA Guidelines, as amended. The rental structure of
the affordable units shall not exceed a maximum rental rate of Category 2 for the one-
bedroom unit and Category 3 for the three-bedroom unit as such rates are defined in the
APCHA Guidelines, as amended from time to time. Rental tenants shall be qualified by
APCHA.
Section 7: Impact Fees
Park 1mvact Fees of $5,754 shall be assessed. Amendments to the Project shall include
an adjustment to this impact fee according to the following schedule:
Park Fees:
lone-bedroom @ $2,120 per unit =
I three-bedroom unit @ 3,634 per unit =
$2,120
$3,634
$5,754
School Imvact Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the unimproved land
divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis. The City of
Aspen verifies the unimproved land value of the lands underlying fue Project to be
2,961,700 based on information from fue Pitkin County Assessor. This represents
$10,750,870 per acre. One-third of this value divided by the proposed 2 units results in a
$1,791,823 per acre standard for calculating the impact fee. The subject subdivision is not
conducive to locating a school facility and a cash-in-lieu payment shall be accepted.
School Impact Fees are follows, payable at building permit issuance:
1/3 land Land Per unit Number
value per Dedication Impact Fee of Units
unit per standard
acre (acres)
One bedroom $1,791,823 .0012 $2,150 I $2,150
Two Bedroom $1,791,823 .0095 $17,022 0 0
Three Bedroom $1,791,823 .0162 $29,028 1 $29,028
Four Bedroom $1,791,823 .0248 $44,437 0 0
Total: $31,178
Amendments to the project shall include an adjustment to fuis impact fee according to the
above schedule.
---
-
P&Z Resolution No. Jj
Series of 2003. Page 5
c
,.-..
Section 8: Landscape Plan
The proposed landscape plan shall provide a number, type, and quality of plant material
acceptable to the City Parks Department. Sufficient mitigation shall be provided, in a
form acceptable to fue City Parks Department, to offset the removal of existing trees on
the site. The Landscape Plan sheet(s) of the Final PUD Plans shall include an acceptable
tree replacement and mitigation plan with a signature line for approval by the City Parks
Department.
"'"
....-""
Tree removal mitigation shall be based on the valuation of existing trees to be removed.
Tree Removal permits shall be obtained. New trees to be established within fue Project
shall be credited towards this valuation. The Parks Department recommends removal of
fue Spruce tree rather fuan relocation.
The Subdivision/PUD agreement shall include provisions guaranteeing the successful
implementation of the landscape and ongoing maintenance.
Section 9: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
The building permit application shall comply wit all requirements of the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District. Following are specific requirements applicable to this
project:
I. If a back-up generator is used, compliance with fuel tank requirements will be
necessary.
2. Contaimnent systems for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system are necessary.
3. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
4. If water is used to clean the garage, there will need to be floor drains. Floor drains
will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will require an oil/sand separator. In
case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must be sized to accommodate fire
flows.
5. The Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay
applicable fees.
~
Section 10: Proiect Name
The Project shall be renamed to avoid emergency service confusion. A new name shall
be reflected on the Subdivision/PUD plans and agreements.
Section 11: Subdivision & Final PUD Plans
Wifuin 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision and a Final PUD Development Plan.
-,
P&Z Resolution No. L1
Series of 2003. Page 6
.y'
The Subdivision Plat shall comply with current requirements of the City Community
Development Engineer and also shall include the following items:
I. The final property boundaries and disposition of lands wifu appropriate property
descriptions.
2. Easements and signature blocks for utility mains and transformers with signature
blocks for utilities not provided by the City of Aspen. Easements for electric
transformers. Transformers shall be located outside of the public right-of-way. An
easement to access the mechanical equipment on the east side of the Hannah Dustin
building may be necessary.
3. The applicant shall provide the final approved Subdivision line data or survey
description data describing the revised parcel boundaries to fue Geographic
Information Systems Department prior to applying for a building permit. The final
building location data, including any amendments, shall be provided to the GIS
Department prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The Final PUD Plans shall include:
I. An illustrative site plan with dimensioned building locations. Adequate snow
storage areas shall be depicted.
2. A landscape plan showing location, amount, and species of landscape improvements
with an irrigation plan.
3. Design specifications for any improvements to public rights-of-way with profiles
and drainage designs for any road/alley improvements.
4. An architectural character plan demonstrating the general architectural character of
each building depicting materials, fenestration, projections, and dimensions and
locations of elevator shaft heads, skylights, mechanical equipment, etc. Mechanical
equipment shall be screened from pedestrian view.
5. A utility plan meeting fue standards of the City Engineer and City utility agencies.
The City Water Department prefers one fire tap and one domestic service tap.
6. A grading/drainage plan with any off-site improvements specified. Any off-site
improvements done in coordination with the City Engineering Department and costs
shall be prorated with ofuer properties receiving such benefit.
7. An exterior lighting plan meeting fue requirements of Section 26.575.150. On
building facades ofuer than the Hyman Avenue fa9ade, lighting shall be limited to
that required by the building code.
Section 12: SubdivisionlPUD Al!:reement
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD Agreement binding this property to
this development approval. The Agreement shall include the necessary items detailed in
Section 26.445.070, in addition to the following:
P&Z Resolution No. B
Series of 2003. Page 7
Lj_
"'""
--.
I. A methodology of determining actual employee generation of the Project after one
complete year of operation and the manner of providing mitigation of any additional
employee generation. TIle project is providing housing for 4.75 employees.
According to the City's requirement of providing mitigation for 60% of fue
employees generated, this housing mitigates a total generation of 7.9 employees.
Additional mitigation shall be required for any actual employee generation in excess
of 7.9 employees. The methodology shall include an audit process and timeline, a
method of selecting an auditor, the method of determining acceptable mitigation if
additional employees are generated, and be acceptable to the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority.
2. A traffic management plan describing construction hauling routes and methods to
shuttle workers to the construction site. The City prefers the applicant use East
Hyman Avenue to Original Street as the primary hauling route.
3. Geologic and soils report describing ground water issues and methods of
construction to be used to avoid adversely affecting neighboring properties and
rights-of-way. Water rights may need to be obtained if dewatering operations
remove groundwater.
4. In addition to the financial securities for improvements required by Section
26.445.070, tlle applicant shall provide to the City of Aspen a letter of credit, cash to
be held in a City account, or other financial security executable through the period
of construction and acceptable to the City of Aspen, to recover the construction site
to a safe condition, including but not limited to, filling-in excavated areas if
construction is discontinued. The securities shall be specified in fue
Subdivision/PUD agreement and payable upon building permit application.
5. An agreement to return the section of East Hyman Avenue to its intersection with
Original Street, or other primary hauling route, to an acceptable condition after
construction, as detennined by the City Engineer. Subsurface work may be
necessary. Curb and gutter work may be necessary. A final two-inch overlay may
be necessary.
-
-,#"
"""
",.,..oY
Section 13: Buildinl! Permit ReQuirements
The building pern1it application shall include/depict:
I. A letter from the primary contractor stating that the approving Ordinance has been
read and understood.
2. A signed copy of the Ordinance granting final land use approval.
3. Payment for Parks and School impacts fees as specified herein. Financial securities
as required in the Subdivision/PUD agreement.
4. A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Healtll Department
which addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads, perimeter silt
fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent rights-of-way, and the ability for the
-
P&Z Resolution No.l~
Series of 2003. Page 8
..........,
'\." ;.Y
-~-,-. .
Environmental Health Department to request additional measures to prevent a
nuisance during construction. The applicant shall wash tracked mud and debris
from the street as necessary, and as requested by fue City, during construction.
The applicant shall provide phone contact information for on-site project
management to address construction impacts.
5. A construction noise suppression plan approved by the Environmental Health
Department which includes the ability for the City to request additional measures
to prevent a nuisance during construction. The applicant shall provide phone
contact information for on-site project management to address construction
impacts.
6. An estimated construction schedule with estimated schedules for construction
phases affecting city streets and infrastructure. Street and alley closures shall be
specified with provisions to maintain access to neighboring properties. Any street
or alley closures shall require noticing emergency service providers, neighbors, fue
City Streets Department, the Transportation Department, City Parking Department,
and the City Engineering Department. (Estimated schedule to be distributed to
above agencies.)
7. A construction management and parking plan meeting fue specifications of the City
Building Department. The plan shall demonstrate continuous emergency access to
the site and neighboring properties and requires payment for street parking used
during construction.
8. Tree removal pernlits for any regulated trees to be removed. The Parks Department
recommends the Spruce tree be removed rather than relocated.
9. Structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and for
the residential area (res-check).
10. Adequate access to the mechanical room must be shown.
] I. The requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units shall
be fulfilled.
12. Disability access to the bathroom and the vehicle pickup area must be defined.
13. The plans shall include a fire sprinkler system that complies with NFPA-13 and
NFP A-n. The plans shall include standpipes.
14. The building permit plans shall include an emergency access plan acceptable to
the Fire Marshall and a ventilation plan acceptable to the Fire Marshall.
15. The building permit plans shall be reviewed by an independent consultant for
compliance with applicable fire protection codes and regulations. The applicant
shall coordinate this review and determination of an independent consultant with
the Fire Marshall. Review fees may be assessed.
P&Z Resolution No.l!j
Series of 2003. Page 9
"
r,
~
",.
Section 14: Construction
1. No soil nails shall be used within public rights-of-way or utility easements. The
City recommends soil hardening for these areas.
2. Building foundation footers shall not extend into the right-of-way.
3. Vehicles and material storage shall not block the alleyway.
4. Root barriers shall be installed around new trees to prevent future buckling of the
sidewalk.
5. The design and construction of the Project shall take into consideration the
concerns and requirements of noises exceeding the City's noise ordinance,
including proper noise mitigation methods and adequate provision for necessary
modifications of the building to meet the City's noise limitations.
-
Section 15: Noise Ordinance Compliance
The project shall comply with fue City of Aspen noise ordinance, as amended from time
to time. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Project shall be checked by
the City's Environmental Healfu Department for compliance under a range of expected
operating conditions. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued if the Project
exceeds the City's noise limitations. The Project shall not operate without a Certificate of
Occupancy.
Section 16: Oueuing Vehicles along Hvman Avenue
The parking garage operator shall not permit or encourage patrons to vacate their cars
until those cars are fully located on-site within the designated entry/exit parking bays.
Queuing cars shall remain occupied.
.-.
-
Section 17: Operations Plan and Annual Report
The Project shall operate according to the approved Operations Plan, attached as Exhibit A.
The Operations Plan may be amended from time to time according to the procedures for
amending a Conditional Use, Chapter 26.425 of the Land Use Code.
The Project operator shall submit to the City an annual operations report containing:
. A profile of the past year's use of the parking spaces, including how many spaces
were available to the public per day (a minimum of 19 spaces are required to be
available to tlle public) and typical day and evening capacity rates during "on"
seasons, "off' seasons, and during significant events.
. A report on the sCalming system or other system used to determine owner usage.
. Typical peak hour and typical activity during peak hour.
. Top 20 peak usage days alld a report on what operating issues were associated with
those days and how those issues were addressed.
. A summary of allY complaints received and how fuose complaints were addressed.
.-.
.....,,1/
P&Z Resolution No.l.q
Series of 2003. Page 10
.--'
,.,-......
, .
The annual operations report shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission as
an information item (not for any specific action). As a result of the City reviewing the
aJmual report, or at aJ1Y other time, fue City may request the operator and property owner
improve certain operational issues to conform to the requirements of the approved
Operations Plan.
Interpretation matters or disagreements between City staff and the Project owner regarding
the intent, wording, or enforcement of fue Operations Plan shall be resolved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission. The Project owner may appeal an adverse determination made by
tlle PlaJming and Zoning Commission regarding the intent, wording, or enforcement of the
Operations PlaJl to City Council, pursuant to fue procedures of Chapter 26.316, Appeals, of
the City Land Use Code.
Section 18: Condominiumization
Condominiumization of the Project (after redevelopment) to define and redefine separate
ownership interests of the Project is hereby approved by the City of Aspen, subject to
recordation of a condominiumization plat in compliance wifu the current (at the time of
condo plat submission) plat requirements of the City Community Development Engineer.
The Project developer shall have the right to condominiumize fue affordable residential
units under a separate condominium regime independent of other portions of tlle Project.
Section 19: Enforcement
The City may enforce the provisions of this approval, including fue provisions of the
approved Operations Plan as may be amended from time to time, by appropriate means
including, but not limited to, temporary or permanent revocation of the conditional use
approval.
Section 20:
All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Community Development Department, tlle Planning
and Zoning Commission, or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and fue same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein,
unless amended by other specific conditions.
The approvals granted herein shall run Witll the land and all conditions and limitations of
this approval shall apply to the property owner, or his successors or assigns, and any
property management company or independent operations company acting on behalf of the
property owner.
P&Z Resolution No.lEl,
Series of2003. Page] I
L~
r
-
,
Section 21:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall
be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions fuereof.
-
APPROVED by the Commission during a public hearing on August 19,2003.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
City Attorney
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
ATTEST:
-
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
C:\homelCurrent PlanninglCASESlPark _PlacelPZ _ Reso.doc
Attachment A - Operational Prospectus
~
'-.w"."
P&Z Resolution No.1S
Series of 2003. Page 12
.."......
Operations Prospectus
'f~-)dll bi \- A
(:Lt;o '4\=-_ I 'Ul?~
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in fue core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many oftheir day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during fue
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their spaces on and offthe rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing fue operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility.
Components of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. The employee housing units will fully mitigate for any employee
generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility.
Use of Spaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent fuat no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owner.
~
-
'1_
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
I'"
.
.......
""'""
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system. Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to fueir arrival. However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management shall retain 19 spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
,,",.."
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking availability. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will only be a daily rate for
parking. During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell discounted single-day parking
in order to encourage persons to park and leave their vehicles all day, i.e., come in the
morning and leave it till the end of the day for one price so long as they exit only once.
Longer rentals to non-owners, such as weekly and monthly rentals, will not be permitted.
Such rentals would interfere with the daily parking function, and potentially obstruct
availability of spaces for owners.
-
."",,,,,l-'
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not sufficient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m. Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past
these hours of operation during high season, unless reviewed by the City to accommodate
some special need. Special longer hours may be established for event parking in
conjunction with City parking and traffic management activities. Examples of these
special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of July fireworks. Owners and users
will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles.
Parkin!! Types'
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the basic method of usage. Examples of this
include day skier parking, day business parking, and night dining/shopping parking.
Nineteen of the 99 total spaces shall be available at all times for daily parking. Other
spaces shall also be available when not in use by their owners.
-
.....
Operations Prospectus ....
Page 3
',.;
.,..,.,.....
. Off-season. During times of low and off seasons, fue intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day. It will
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
and exit for a fixed price of up to II hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in fue close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in fue core.
. Longer-term. Owners and non-owners may occupy up to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed. However, this longer-term parking
may not be held empty for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public day perking when not actually in use by owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are sold, there will be an Owners' Association
created for owners who will pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and ofuer
necessary expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the
space to the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible that some buyers would
buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding
current yields on other investments.
Management of building bv the development group
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected that fees in the range of 25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
The vast majority of the costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
,-
-
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
,.-....
--
-'
Replacement of the development group
""'"
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility. Subsequent owners of the management group would
assume any land use conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facility or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective ofreturn
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when fueir owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
-.
,",,&.d
Finally, there will be the investorlbuyer. Not using fue space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their am1UaI gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 of the
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Operations Plan defined in this prospectus may be amended through the City of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process.
-
.
,,-,
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts oftown or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their !ets-spaces on and off the rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing the operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility.
Components of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. The employee housing units will fully mitigate for any employee
generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility.
Use of Spaces
-
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owner.
-
.....'-,
'c
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
. serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system. Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into fue public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrival. However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management intends toshall retain 19 spaces which will
be for public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a
public parking function.
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with fue emphasis
placed on all day parking availability. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will only be a daily rate for
parking. be a descending IWllrly rate. During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell
discounted single-day parkillgs in order to encourage persons to park and leave their
vehicles it-all day, i.e., come in the morning and leave it till the end of the day for one
price so long as they exit only once. Longer rentals to non-owners. such as weekly and
monthly rentals. will not be permitted. Such rentals would interfere with the daily
parking function. and potentially obstruct availability of spaces for owners. sinee it
cCllld end lip as simJlly a helding area fer cars ami it is eElIIceivaale that all 80 sJlaee
ewnefS cellld eeme en any Jlartietdar day limiting Pllblie llsage.
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not sufficient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 1.Q:00 IU!h..ll-oflband
7:00 a.m. Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend
past these hours of operation during high season. unless reviewed bv the Citv to
accommodate some special need. Special longer hours may be established for event
parking in coni unction with Citv parking and traffic management activities. Examples of
these special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of July fireworks. Owners and
users will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles.
Parking Types
The different types of parking available to the public should include fue following:
OUoDrly. There will be an ilsllrly price sCHedllle, altHsllgh tHis is list the mest
desirable metRed fer Park Place. It will be mere than del!ble tilan the street
parking for the first 2 3 ilslIfS te disesllrage SIlCR llsage. Uellrly rates will be
......,
"
Operations Prospectus
Page 3
deseending lJver time in mder Ie eneelffilge llsers Ie take advaRtage ef lenger
stays. (I.e., Ii 8 ilellr fleFieds.)
HDaily. Daily rates for parking will be the basic flrefeffea method
of usage. Examples of this include day skier parking, day business parking, and
night dining/shopping parking. Nineteen of the 99 total spaces shall be available 1
at all times for dailv parking. Other spaces shall also be available when not in use
bv their owners. Tile aeseending rate e'/eT time fer flarking faeilitates tilis.
,
"
Off-season. During times oflow and off seasons, the intent of management is .<
to offer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day. It will }.-
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
and exit for a fixed price of up to 11 hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course offue day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in the core.
.
.
Longer-term. Owners and non-owners may OCCUpy UP to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed. However. this longer-term parking
may not be held empty for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public day perking when not actually in use bv owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are were-sold, there will wlJllld be an Owners'
Aassociation created for owners who will wellld pay a quarterly fee for building
maintenance and other necessary expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily
offset by providing the space to the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible
that some buyers would buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be
competitive or exceeding current yields on other investments.
Management of building bv the development group
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected that fees in the range of25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
'"""",,,
1
1
-
/""'"'""
"'/
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
""-
The vast majority ofthe costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
Replacement of the development group
lt is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management ofthe parking facility. AR)' eOflditioRs illlposed relative to the operatioR of
the faeilit)' wOllld be asslllfled by sallse~lHeflt OV/Rers of the lIlanagellleRt
~SubseQuent owners of the management group would assume anv land use
conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facilitv or by subsequent management
companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the facility for its private
owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from fue prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how fue
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of fue spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, there will be the investorlbuyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
---
~'.-..
,
Operations Prospectus
Page 5
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 of the
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Ooerations Plan defined in this prospectus may be amended through the City of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process.
.-..
,
Pl
MEMORANDUM
"'.._~.
TO:
Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission
THRU:
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Community Development Director
Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner 0fiNwJ
"Park Place" - 707 E. Hyman Avenue
Growth Management Scoring - Public Hearing
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
November 11, 2003
SUMMARY:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is
requesting land use approvals to construct a 99 parking space commercial parking
facility with an accessory office and two (2) affordable housing units. A growth
management allocation of 4,000 square feet of net leasable space is being requested.
The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B,
C and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and
is located in the Office (0) Zone District. The property
is currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707
East Hyman, and the "Hannah-Dustin" building, 300 So.
Spring. Both are currently office buildings. No changes
are proposed for the Hannah Dustin Building. The
commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the
950 square foot A-Frame.
The parking operation is proposed as an entirely automated system. Cars are placed
on "pallets" and then mechanically moved witl1in the building. No internal ramping
is involved and drivers do not actually enter the parking area. A small office houses
an attendant who aids patrons with the system. The Main Issues section of this memo
page 2, provides more detail on certain aspects of the project. The Scoring section of
this memo starts on page 5 and provides the scoring criteria and staffs analysis of
each criterion.
The GMQS process requires scoring by the Growth Management Commission. The
scoring will occur at the hearing by use of the scoring sheets provided at the meeting.
Projects must achieve minimum "threshold" scores in various categories in order to
proceed.
Staff has scored the application and found it meeting the necessary scores for
approval. Staff is recommending approval.
Park Place GMC memo page I
II
.,-.,
P2
MAIN ISSUES:
Traffic Generation: There is a question of whether this facility will attract more auto
trips to town ("build it and they will come") or will this project ease parking
frustration of people already coming to town. Staff suggests its likely a little of both-
this facility will add to the inventory of parking and provide some relief to the
"circling phenomenon." Parking demand is primarily a function of downtown
destinations (restaurants, shopping, skiing, etc.) and parking serves that demand. At
the same time, additional capacity may attract some additional auto trips that would
otherwise be either discouraged from downtown or be handled by otl1er transit modes.
This section of Hyman Avenue is one of the least traveled streets downtown (vehicles
per day approximately 2,300 to 3,200) and no physical improvement are necessary to
accommodate the additional 145 trips.
"""'"
.",,,,,",
Traffic Queuing. The proposed project has two parking bays and can queue up to
four cars at a time. Parking each car takes approximately 90 seconds - the average
time for tl1e system's mechanics to complete a full cycle. It is suggested tl1at during
peak periods, both bays will accept vehicles and patrons wanting to retrieve their cars
will be required to wait. With the two bays in operation, a minimum of three minutes
will be available for exiting the vehicle, collecting belongings, etc. With a parking
space behind each bay, additional time is available for patrons. The 90-second cycle
time of the mechanical system permits the facility to process up to 40 cars per hour,
more than the expected peak-hour demand of 37 autos, 29 inbound. (See traffic report
section of application.) Staff does not foresee a queuing problem with this project.
--.
~"-
Noise: Compliance with the City's noise limitations was raised during the P&Z
review. A system of tl1e same manufacturer located in Washington D.C. was
analyzed by an acoustical engineer. (See noise report in application.) Sound readings
within the lobby of this system reported an overall sound level of approximately 43 to
48 dBA. It is this "A-weighted" scale that the City's noise ordinance specifies as the
method of measuring noise. (The second two charts of the noise report describe the
"profile" of the noise, or what it sounds like.)
The City's noise limitation for this commercial zone district is 65 dBA during the day
(7 am to 9 pm) and 60 dBA during the night (9 pm to 7 am) measured at the property
line. The lobby readings of the Washington D.C. facility indicate that this facility will
be well within the City's requirement at tl1e property line. In fact, the facility should
be within the City's more-strict residential noise limitations of 55 dBA during the day
and 50 dBA at night.
Sound readings were also taken within the mechanical area of tl1e Washington D.C.
facility. These readings aren't pertinent to the noise issue because: one of the
overhead doors will remain closed during mechanical operation; patrons do not enter
the mechanical area; and, the City does not regulate noise levels within buildings.
-
Park Place GMC memo page 2
.......
. .',
, ,
P3
Staff believes the facility will be in compliance with the City's noise regulations. The
proposed resolution requires a "noise check" prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy (C.O.). This test will be performed by the City of Aspen and will be done
under a variety of operating conditions.
q,.""
Public Parking: The level of public access was discussed at P&Z and fue applicant
specified 19 parking spaces as permanently available to the public. The public access
element of the project was important to several P&Z members wanting the facility to
remain actively serving parking needs and not storage of vehicles or remaining
unused. The 19-space requirement is specified in the proposed resolution.
Operations Prospectus: During their review, the Planning and Zoning Commission
requested an operations plan detailing the day-to-day operation of fue facility and
documenting representations of the applicant. This plan contains hours of operation,
a description of how the operator will use unused spaces for public parking, and a
yearly report to the City. The operations prospectus is appended to fue proposed
resolution.
Pedestrian Improvements: The site currently provides a sidewalk along Spring
Street and essentially no pedestrian provision along Hyman Avenue. The proposal
would complete fue sidewalk provided along the Benedict Commons for the
remainder of the block.
Sidewalk
along
Benedict
Commons
and existing
condition
along subject
property.
Dimensional Requirements: The dimensions of this project are proposed to be
established tl1rough adoption of a PUD (Planned Unit Development). Following is a
comparison of the proposed dimensions and those allowed in the Office Zone District.
Dimension: Proposed Proposed Hannah Office Zone
Park Place Dustin Lot: District:
Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot 60 ft. 60 ft. 60 ft.
Width
Front Yard 6.5 ft. 0-lOft. (varies) (west 10 ft. ( secondary
Park Place GMC memo page 3
1.1
~"'. "
P4
"""
Setback = primary) front yard is 2/3 of
6.5 ft. (north = primary front yard)
secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east) 5 ft.
5 ft. (east)
Rear Yard Setback Oft. lOft (existing) 15 ft.
Maximum Height 35 ft. 28 ft. (existing) 25 ft.
Percent of Open No No Requirement No Requirement
Space Requiremen
t
Allowable FAR 1.29:1 Same as Office zone .75:1. May be
requirement increased to 1:1
through Special
Review
Residential Off- 3 total N/A Minimum: Lesser of
Street Parking I /bedroom or 2/unit.
Commercial Off- 99 spaces 3 along alley (loss of 3/1 ,000 s.f. net
Street Parking 3 surface spaces on leasable space.
north side)
Distance between lOft. 10 ft. 10 ft.
Buildings on the
lot.
Staff believes the proposed dimensions are appropriate.
Both the neighboring Benedict Commons Building and the
Aspen Athletic Club building across the street exceed a I: I
FAR with the Aspen Athletic Club Building having an FAR
of approximately 1.82:1. The Benedict Commons building
has a 6.5-foot setback along the Hyman Avenue property
line.
The 35 -foot proposed height of the parking facility is
measured to the top of the flat roof. The adjacent Benedict
Commons building was approved for a 30-foot height limit
and certain ridgelines are developed to approximately 34 feet
(measured at the midpoint of the sloped roof). The portion
of the building closest to Hyman Avenue has been restricted
to 26 feet, reducing the appearance of massing on the front
fa9ade.
The proposed east side yard setback of 5 feet meets the
requirement of the Office Zone Districts and mirrors the 5-
foot setback of the Benedict Commons building.
No changes to the he Hannah-Dustin building are proposed.
Neighboring Benedict
Commons Building
Bell Mountain Townhomes
across the alley from
subiect site.
Park Place GMC memo page 4
~
-
~
.......
''l~
--
P5
SCORING:
Score sheets will be distributed at the meeting. The application responds to
each of the scoring criteria with a requested score. Staffs analysis is provided
below with a recommended score.
Scorinl! - Quality of Desi!w:
Score:
o
1
2
3
A totally deficient design
A major design flaw
An acceptable (but standard) design
An excellent design
Criterion - Architectural Design. Considering the compatibility of the proposed
development (in terms of scale, siting, massing, height, and building materials) with
existing, neighboring developments.
Staff Response - The proposed building has been designed to appear as a
mixed-use building. Staff believes this is appropriate for this mixed-use
neighborhood. The residential uses provide an appealing fa9ade along the
street and help soften the building. The building's mass has been setback to
provide a smaller scale along the street fa9ade. The massing, height, and
siting of the building is generally consistent with the neighboring buildings.
The proposed materials are consistent witl1 neighboring buildings and are
appropriate for a mixed-use building within this mixed-use zone district. Staff
recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Site Design. Considering the quality, character, and appropriateness of
the proposed layout, landscaping, and open space areas, the amount of site coverage
by buildings, the extent of underground utilities, and the arrangement of
improvements for efficiency of circulation, including access for service, increased
safety and privacy, and provision of snow storage areas.
Staff Response - The neighborhood is mixed-use and the plan completes an
urban streetscape along Hyman Avenue. The small site and proposed use do
not provide a significant opportunity for useable open space. All utilities are
being under-grounded and snow storage is expected to be minimal as the
building has a flat roof and there is minimal surface area that will require
snow removal. A condition related to a snow storage easement has been
included in the proposed resolution. Staff recommends a score of 2 for this
criterion.
"'....,.#
Criterion - Environmental Conservation. Considering the use of passive and/or
active energy conservation techniques in the construction and operation of the
proposed development, including but not limited to insulation, glazing, passive solar
orientation, efficient heating and cooling systems and solar energy devices; the extent
Park Place GMC memo page 5
.-...1.---.
P6
r,
""._,-,#
.-..
to which the proposed development avoids wasting energy by excluding excessive
lighting and inefficient wood burning devices; and the proposed development's
location with regard to the potential for solar gain to result in energy conservation.
~
-
Staff Response - The application represents the installation of low-flow
fixtures, efficient lighting and heating systems, and energy efficient glazing
and insulation. Compliance witl1 the City's efficient building will be
achieved. Staff recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Amenities. Considering the provision of usable open space, pedestrian
and bicycle ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters, and other common areas for
users olthe proposed development.
Staff Response - The proposal will significantly improve the aesthetics of the
area. The office and planned attendant service provides amenity to the users
of the facility. Staff also believes the parking use provides amenity to the
downtown by adding to the parking infrastructure. Staff recommends a score
of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Visual Impact. Considering the scale and location of the building(s) in
the proposed development to prevent infringement on designated scenic view planes.
Staff Response - The plan does not interfere with any protected views and the
building has been designed to lessen its massing on the street fa9ade. The
proposed 35-foot height of the rear portion of the building is generally
consistent with the height of surrounding buildings. The 35-foot height is also
10 be measured to tl1e flat roof and does not incorporate an exemption for
pitched roofs. Staff recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
--
Criterion - Trash and Utility Access. Considering the extent to which required trash
and utility access areas are screened from public view; are sized to meet the needs of
the proposed development and to provide for public utility placement; can be easily
accessed; allow trash bins to be moved by service personnel, provide users with
recycling bins, and provide enclosed trash bins, trash compaction or other unique
measures.
Staff Response - Proper utility easements and access have been proposed.
The trash demand is expected to be minimal due to the project having only
two residences. Residential access to the trash bin, expected to be along the
alleyway, is circuitous. An easement and a trash facility on the Hannah Dustin
property could improve this condition. Staff recommends a score of I for this
criterion.
--
Park Place GMC memo page 6
,
P7
Scoring - A vailabilitv of Public Facilities and Services
....,""'"
Score:
o Proposed development requires the provision of new public
facilities and services at increased public expense.
1 Proposed development may be handled by existing public
facilities and services, or any public facility or service improvements
made by the applicant benefits the proposed development only, and
not the area in general.
2 Proposed development improves the availability of public
facilities and services in the area without increased, undue public
expense.
Criterion - Water Supply / Fire Protection. Considering the ability of the water
supply system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to
install any water 5ystem extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading
required to serve the proposed development. Fire protection facilities and services
shall also be reviewed, considering the ability of the appropriate fire protection
district to provide services according to established response times without the
necessity of upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of available water pressure
and capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment of the applicant to
provide any fire protection facilities which may be necessary to serve the proposed
development
Staff Response - Sufficient infrastructure is available on this site. Adequate
municipal water exists for this property and there is no apparent limitation.
The site is within the service area of the Fire District. Compliance with the
Fire Code is required. The applicant and the Fire Marshall have discussed the
various code provisions and staff has included the relevant requirements in the
proposed resolution.
The current building was not developed with a sprinkler system and the
proposed building should improve fire safety for the area. Staff believes this
will improve general fire safety of the area. Staffrecommends a score of 2 for
this criterion.
Criterion - Sanitation. Considering the ability of the sanitary sewer system to serve
the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any sanitary
system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the
proposed development.
Staff Response - The project will be served by the Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District and the District's requirements have been incorporated into
the proposed resolution. This includes devices to prevent chemicals that may
Park Place GMC memo page 7
P8
,....
...
"""
."
come from the autos from entering the storm sewer. Staff recommends a
score of 1 for tl1is criterion.
~
-
Criterion - Public Transportation/Roads. Considering the ability of the proposed
development to be served by existing public transit routes. The review shall also
consider the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed development without
substantially altering existing automobile and pedestrian traffic patterns, creating
safety hazards or maintenance problems, overloading the existing street system or
causing a need to extend the existing road network and consider the applicant's
commitment to install the necessary road system improvements to serve the increased
usage attributable to the proposed rjevelopment.
Staff Response - This section of Hyman Avenue has a very low use (vehicles
per day approximately 2,300 to 3,200) compared witl1 similar downtown
streets with 2-3 times the use. This facility will add approximately 145 trips
per day, a minimal increase the existing use of tl1e street. No street or
intersection improvements will be necessary to accommodate this volume.
Peak hour trips are projects to be 37 vehicles per hour and the system can
accommodate up to 40 vehicles per hour. The majority of the peak-a.me trips
are inbound (29 trips).
With both bays in active use plus the two extra loading spaces, incoming
patrons will have between 3 and 6 minutes to gather belongings and exit their
vehicle. (90 seconds on average per vehicle x two bays = 3 minutes. Plus a
space behind each bay = 6 minutes.) Staff does not foresee a queuing problem
with this project. Staff recommends a score of I for this criterion.
~
~
Criterion - Drainage. Considering the degree to which the applicant proposes to
maintain historic drainage patterns on the development site. If the development
requires use of the City's drainage system, the review shall consider the commitment
by the applicant to install the necessary drainage control facilities and to maintain
the :.ystem over the long-term.
Staff Response - The proposed development incorporates site drainage and
the City Engineer is satisfied with the applicant's proposal. The current
development does not contain site drainage and the proposal should be
considered an improvement to the area's drainage infrastructure. Staff
recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Criterion - Parking. Considering the provisions of parking spaces to meet the
commercial, office, and/or residential needs of the proposed development as required
by Chapter 26.515, and considering the design of the parking spaces with respect to
their visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience, and safety.
Staff Response - The project provides parking for the residential uses, plus
commercial parking for the general public. This improvement to downtown
-.,
~,I>#I"
Park Place GMC memo page 8
--
'" "
,.. .,
P9
'-'
parking infrastructure will benefit a wide range of downtown destinations and
should be considered an improvement to the area's infrastructure. Staff
recommends a score of 2 for this criterion.
Scorinl! - Affordable Housinl!.
Score: Project houses 61 to 100 percent of tl1e additional employees generated by the
proposed development: 10 points for the first 60 percent housed, plus I point
for each additional 8 percent housed.
Staff Response - The land use code provides an employee generation schedule of 3
employees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space in the office zone district.
Because this project is unique (it is not a typical office building) staff recommends
the employee generation of specific use be considered as opposed to tl1e one-size-fits-
all schedule.
The expected employee generation of this project is 5 FTEs (full-time equivalents). A
one-bedroom apartment and a three-bedroom apartment house 4.75 employees
according to the City Land Use Code. This project houses 95% of the employees
generated.
The Housing Board has recommended approval of the mitigation, witl1 conditions.
Staff has proposed language in the resolution tying the employee housing mitigation
to tl1is specific proposal and requiring an audit to confirm actual employment.
Staff recommends a score of 14 for this criterion - 10 points for the first 60% and I
point for each 8% above 60% = 14.
Scorinl! - Bonus Points.
Score: 0-4 points.
Bonus points may be awarded to proposals exceeding tl1e substantive standards.
Projects must still meet threshold scoring and bonus points are only effective during a
competition (when more applications are submitted tl1at allocations available). There
is no competition. Staff has not recommended bonus points.
Commissioners wishing to award bonus points must provide a written explanation for
doing so. Space is provided on the scoring sheets.
-
Park Place GMC memo page 9
-I
Pl0
,....
~"....'
---
ApPLICANT:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC. Represented by Stan Clauson, AICP
"""'"
-
LOCATION, LOT SIZE, ZONING:
707 East Hyman Avenue. The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B, C
and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, and is located in the Office (0)
Zone District.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Hannah/Dustin building (west building) -- Office (also current use)
A-Frame (east building) - Commercial parking, affordable housing, accessory office.
REVIEW PROCEDURE:
Growth Management Scoring.
An application for non-exempt development requires a two step process: Review by
the Growth Management Commission and final review by the City Council.
Step One - A public hearing before tl1e Growth Management Commission. After the
Community Development Director has determined that the application is complete,
the application shall be forwarded to the Growth Management Commission for
review and scoring at a public hearing. The Growth Management Commission shall,
by resolution, recommend to the City Council award of development allotments in
accordance with the scoring
-"""
.......,1
Step Two - A public hearing before City Council. Notice of the hearing shall be by
publication, posting and mailing. The City Council, following a public hearing, shall
by ordinance allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants.
Actions reQuired for aooroval of allotments. Since the Growth Management Quola
System applies throughout the Aspen Metro Area, no growth management allocation
shall be awarded unless the City Council and Board of County Commissioners both
accept the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends tl1e Growth Management Commission find the Park Place
Commercial Parking Facility meeting or exceeding the necessary threshold score for
development allotment.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission
Resolutionol, Series of 2003, finding the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
meeting the necessary threshold scoring for development allocation."
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Development Application
-,
.. ,~#"
Park Place GMC memo page 10
-
" .'
-
',_ J
Pll
,-...."""
ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. M
(SERIES OF 2003)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOTMENTS FOR A
COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY AND OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED ON
LOTS A, B, C, AND D, BLOCK 105, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
(the Project) from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, John Cooper Managing Partner, owner
and applicant, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, for a Growth Management
allocation of 4,000 square feet of net leasable space for a proposed commercial parking
facility housing ninety-nine cars, two affordable housing units, and an accessory parking
attendant office, and an existing office building; and,
WHEREAS, the parcel of land is described as Lot A, B, C, and D, Block 105,
City and Towntsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, also described as the Hannah-
Dustin Condominiums according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 78
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, and is currently developed with an "A-Frame"
structure, 707 East Hyman Avenue, generally located on Lots C and D, and tl1e "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring Street, generally located on Lots A and B. Both are
currently office buildings. Minimal changes are proposed for the Hannah Dustin
Building and site. The commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the A-Frame;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304 and 26.470 of the City of Aspen Land
Use Code, land use applications requesting allotments from the Growth Management
Quota System are reviewed and scored by the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management
Commission at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the
Community Development Director, and members of tl1e general public. The scoring is
then forwarded to the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Aspen City
Council and development allotments may then be allocated by Ordinance by the Aspen
City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the
Community Development Director, and members of the general public; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, the City Parking Department, the City
Transportation Department, the City Zoning Officer, City Parks Department, the Aspen
Building Department, the Environmental Health Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of 2003. Page I
.I
P12
r
'-
.-..
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 11, 2003, the
Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission considered tl1e noted
recommendations and testimony offered by the general public, considered the project for
initial and final scoring (score summary attached), found the proposal meeting or
exceeding the necessary scoring, and recommended, by a _ to _ L --> vote, City
Council allocation of 4,000 square feet of commercial development allotment for the Park
Place Commercial Parking Facility proposal, subject to the conditions of approval listed
herein.
"""
-
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth
Management Commission that the City Council should allocate 4,000 square feet of
commercial development allotment for the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility
proposal, subject to the following conditions of approval:
Section 1: Parking Spaces and Parking Garage
Parking spaces within the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and not used
for storage or other similar non-automobile related purposes without amending the
Growth Management approvals.
Three (3) total parking spaces shall be allocated to tl1e two on-site affordable housing
units. (One space for the one-bedroom unit and two spaces for the three-bedroom unit.) If
the residential units are transferred separate from the remaining property interests, the
parking space allocated to the residential unit shall be conveyed in fee as part of the
ownership interest in the residential unit.
"""
..."I
.A minimum of nineteen (19) spaces shall remain available to tl1e general public for public
parking. General public shall be persons with no ownership interest in the Project. These
spaces may be individually transferred as long as they remain available to the general
public.
The remaining parking spaces may be sold, transferred, or leased by the owners thereof
on a daily or long-term basis. These parking spaces may be used to satisfY parking needs
of future commercial expansions on- or off-site and may be sold or leased to third parties
for use as remote residential parking.
The parking garage and parking spaces shall be considered an approved commercial
parking facility and an approved remote parking facility as such terms are used in the
City's Land Use Code. Parking spaces may be physically reconfigured, with approval
from the Community Development Director, to accommodate additional or fewer parking
spaces such that a total change of no greater than five (5) parking spaces from that
depicted in the Growth Management application occurs. Conversion of parking spaces to
non-parking uses shall require a Growth Management review.
-.
'-
GMC Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 2
P13
Section 2: Affordable Housing Units & Emplovee Audit
The Project shall include one (1) one-bedroom Category One affordable housing unit and
one (1) three-bedroom Category 3 affordable housing unit as described in the Growth
Management application. The one-bedroom unit shall have one (1) associated parking
space within the parking garage. The three-bedroom unit shall have two (2) associated
parking spaces witl1in the parking garage.
The two affordable units shall be exempted from the Growth Management Quota System
and counted towards the growth ceiling for affordable housing.
The affordable housing units shall be either transferred as "for-sale units" to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
Guidelines or, if the units are to be rented, a legal instrument permanently ensuring their
affordable status acceptable to tl1e City Attorney shall be provided. The City shall accept
a nominal property interest (1/1 0 of I percent undivided interest) or other reasonable
means of assurance.
Residents of the affordable housing units shall meet the minimum occupancy and all
other qualification criteria in the APCHA Guidelines, as amended. The rental structure of
the affordable units shall not exceed a maximum rental rate of Category 2 for tl1e one-
bedroom unit and Category 3 for the three-bedroom unit as such rates are defined in the
APCHA Guidelines, as amended from time to time. Rental tenants shall be qualified by
APCHA.
The Subdivision Improvements Agreement shall include a methodology of determining
actual employee generation of the Project after one complete year of operation and tl1e
manner of providing mitigation of any additional employee generation. The project is
providing housing for 4.75 employees. According to the City's requirement of providing
mitigation for 60% of the employees generated, this housing mitigates a total generation of
7.9 employees. Additional mitigation shall be required for any actual employee generation
in excess of7.9 employees. The methodology shall include an audit process and timeline, a
method of selecting an auditor, the method of determining acceptable mitigation if
additional employees are generated, and be acceptable to the AspenlPitkin County Housing
Autl1ority.
Section 3: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
The building permit application shall comply with all requirements of the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District. Following are specific requirements applicable to this
project:
I. If a back-up generator is used, compliance with fuel tank requirements will be
necessary.
2. Containment systems for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system are necessary.
GMC Resolulion No. _,
Series of 2003. Page 3
r
""'"
,-
P14
3. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
4. If water is used to clean the garage, there will need to be floor drains. Floor drains
will be connected to tl1e sanitary sewer and will require an oil/sand separator. In
case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must be sized to accommodate fire
flows.
5. The Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay
applicable fees.
"""'"
-
Section 4: Enerev Code & Fire Protection Requirements
The building permit application shall include/depict:
I. The structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and
for the residential area (res-check).
2. The requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units shall
be fulfilled.
3. The plans shall include a fire sprinkler system that complies with NFPA-13 and
NFPA-72. The plans shall include standpipes.
4. The building permit plans shall include an emergency access plan acceptable to
the Fire Marshall and a ventilation plan acceptable to the Fire Marshall.
5. The building permit plans shall be reviewed by an independent consultant for
compliance with applicable fire protection codes and regulations. The applicant
shall coordinate this review and determination of an independent consultant with
the Fire Marshall. Review fees may be assessed.
"'"
~~'
Section 5: Noise Ordinance Compliance
The project shall comply witl1 the City of Aspen noise ordinance, as amended from time
to time. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Project shall be checked by
the City's Environmental Health Department for compliance under a range of expected
operating conditions. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued if tl1e Project
exceeds the City's noise limitations. The Project shall not operate without a Certificate of
Occupancy.
The design and construction of the Project shall take into consideration the concerns and
requirements of noises exceeding the City's noise ordinance, including proper noise
mitigation methods and adequate provision for necessary modifications of the building to
meet the City's noise limitations.
.-.
>'
GMC Resolulion No. _,
Series of2003. Page 4
,.....',
,
, ,
P15
.-<",
Section 6: Oueuing Vehicles along Hvman Avenue
The parking garage operator shall not permit or encourage patrons to vacate their cars
until those cars are fully located on-site within the designated entry/exit parking bays.
Queuing cars shall remain occupied.
Section 7: Operations Plan and Annual Report
The Project shall operate according to the approved Operations Plan, attached as Exhibit A.
The Operations Plan may be amended from time to time according to tl1e procedures for
ameriding a Conditional Use, Chapter 26.425 of the Land Use Code.
The Project operator shall submit to the City an annual operations report containing:
. A profile of the past year's use of the parking spaces, including how many spaces
were available to the public per day (a minimum of 19 spaces are required to be
available to the public) and typical day and evening capacity rates during "on"
seasons, "off' seasons, and during significant events.
. A report on the scanning system or other system used to determine owner usage.
. Typical peak hour and typical activity during peak hour.
. Top 20 peak usage days and a report on what operating issues were associated with
those days and how those issues were addressed.
. A summary of any complaints received and how those complaints were addressed.
The annual operations report shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission as
an information item (not for any specific action). As a result of the City reviewing the
annual report, or at any other time, the City may request the operator and property owner
improve certain operational issues to conform to the requirements of the approved
Operations Plan.
Interpretation matters or disagreements between City staff and the Project owner regarding
the intent, wording, or enforcement of the Operations Plan shall be resolved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission. The Project owner may appeal an adverse determination made by
the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the intent, wording, or enforcement of the
Operations Plan to City Council, pursuant to the procedures of Chapter 26.316, Appeals, of
the City Land Use Code.
Section 8: Enforcement
The City may enforce the provisions of this approval, including the provisions of the
approved Operations Plan as may be amended from time to time, by appropriate means
including, but not limited to, temporary or permanent revocation of the conditional use
approval.
GMC Resolution No. ~,
Series of2003. Page 5
_1-.1_______
P16
c
()
Section 9:
All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to tl1e
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Growth
Management Commission, or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein,
unless amended by other specific conditions.
'""
...-'
The approvals granted herein shall run with the land and all conditions and limitations of
this approval shall apply to the property owner, or his successors or assigns, and any
property management company or independent operations company acting on behalf of the
property owner.
Section 10:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall
be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions thereof.
APPROVED by the Growth Management Commission during a public hearing on
November 11,2003.
-
....~'
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION:
City Attorney
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
C:\home\Current Planning\CASESlPark ]lace\GMC _ Reso.doc
Attachment A - Operational Prospectus
""'"
"'''',
GMC Resolution No. _
Series of 2003. Page 6
,....,
Operations Prospectu~
Page I
Exhibit A to GMC ~,361ution No. _, Series of 2003.
P17
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals jiving on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their spaces on and off the rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase over time witl1 parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing the operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility.
Compouents of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. Subject to an audit, the employee housing units will fully mitigate for any
employee generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility.
Use of Spaces
'.".,"
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owner.
II
P18
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
c
."-.'.''"'"
Exhibit A to GMC Resb,l'Ifion No.~, Series of2003.
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system. Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrival. However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management shall retain 19 spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
"""
---
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking availability. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will only be a daily rate for
parking. During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell discounted single-day parking
in order to encourage persons to park and leave their vehicles all day, i.e., come in the
morning and leave it till the end of the day [or one price so long as they exit only once.
Longer rentals to non-owners, such as weekly and monthly rentals, will not be permitted.
Such rentals would interfere with the daily parking function, and potentially obstruct
availability of spaces for owners.
........
"-l,....,'
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not suflicient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m. Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past
these hours of operation during high season, unless reviewed by the City to accommodate
some special need. Special longer hours may be established for event parking in
conjunction with City parking and traffic management activities. Examples of these
special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of July fireworks. Owners and users
will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles.
Parking Tvpes
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the basic method of usage. Examples ofthis
include day skier parking, day business parking, and night dining/shopping parking.
Nineteen of the 99 total spaces shall be available at all times for daily parking. Other
spaces shall also be available when not in use by their owners.
. Off-season. During times oflow and off seasons, the intent of management is
to otTer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day. It will
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
"""
~".""'"
-.
Operations ProspectuW
Page 3
Exhibit A to GMC ~lution No. _, Series of2003.
P19
and exit for a fixed price of up to II hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in the core.
.
Longer-term. Owners and non-owners may occupy up to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed. However, this longer-term parking
may not be held empty for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public day perking when not actually in use by owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are sold, there will be an Owners' Association
created for owners who will pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and otl1er
necessary expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the
space to the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible that some buyers would
buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding
current yields on other investments.
Management of building by the development group
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected tl1at fees in tl1e range of 25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
The vast majority of the costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
Replacement of the development group
~"""'"
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility. Subsequent owners of the management group would
j"I~--
P20
Operations Prospectus C
Page 4
Exhibit A to GMC Re~ion No. _' Series of2003.
assume any land use conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facility or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit.
-...
-
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on tl1e predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during tl1e highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, tl1ere will be the investor/buyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
""".
"wtII
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed tl1at the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 of the
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Operations Plan defined in this prospectus may be amended through the City of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process.
"""
.,.......r'
...........
~"
~".__./
......"'"
~{t/ trr~:
LAW OFFICES OF
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.e.
'i~,^"
HERBERT S. KLEIN
hsklein@rof.net
LANCE R. COTE.
cote@rof.net
MADHU B. KRISHNAMURTI
madhu@rof.net
201 NORTH MILL STREET
SUITE 203
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
Telephone (970) 925-8700
Facsimile (970) 925-3977
November 5, 2003
. also admitted in California
Via Hand Deliverv
Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Park Place Parking Garage Commercial GMQS Application.
Dear Chris and Honorable Members oftl1e Commission:
I represent tl1e 700 E. Hyman Condominium Owners' Association (tl1e "Association")
concerning tl1e Park Place Commercial Parking Facility application for a commercial GMQS
allocation for a parking structure to be located at tl1e corner of Spring St. and Hyman Avenue.
Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend your scoring hearing on tl1is matter on November II th and
am providing you with my comments in writing.
The Association opposes this project for many reasons, all related to tl1e unacceptable
impacts it will create to tl1e residential properties which surround it. The members among you from
tl1e City of Aspen Planning Commission, have already heard our concerns during tl1eir consideration
of tl1e PUD and Conditional Use permit hearings completed just a couple of weeks ago and, in
response to the neighborhood outcry against this project, voted to recommend denial of this
application. I
We wish to inform the Growth Management Commission, and in particular, its County
members who have not heard our concerns, of the significant and incurable conflicts this parking
structure will create in its neighborhood and to .remove tl1e gloss tl1at the GMQS application casts on
tl1e warts oftl1is project.
Our primary concerns relate to the functional problems tl1at are posed by tl1e site plan, which
places six stories (three above grade and three below grade) with almost lot line to lot line coverage
on a 6000 square foot lot, leaving insufficient space on the lot to accommodate arriving and
departing vehicles. It is clear that there will be a problem witl1 cars queuing across the sidewalk and
onto tl1e street, creating gridlock and obstructing pedestrian usage, especially during peak times,
..- IThe project was also vigorously opposed by the neighboring Benedict Commons residential project and the Bell
'- Mountain Residences Association as well as several other neighbors.
'I
I"""
P22
,
~
,/
Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
November 5, 2004
Page 2
"""
"''"''
such as morning and late afternoon hours during ski season. We ask that you carefully review the
site plan and closely question tl1e applicant on tl1ese points. While this project might have merit in
another location on a larger lot, it is a disaster as proposed.
We also have serious concerns about tl1e noise generated from tl1e project. The noise study
submitted by tl1e applicant does not report the noise levels at the property line, where measured by
the City Code. However, it does report that the noise levels within the structure will exceed the
permissible levels established by tl1e City Noise Ordinance.
We also object to the aestl1etics of tl1e building, which is simply a large, square box witl1
little articulation of design elements and no open space. Although the application touts the benefits
to tl1e City in providing parking for owners of the condominiumized spaces and the public, the
applicant would only commit to a guaranty tl1at merelyl9 of the 99 spaces will be available for
public use. Hardly a public benefit worth the degradation to the neighborhood.
The GMQS scoring criteria assigns points in several. categories that relate to our concerns
about traffic congestion, tl1e pedestrian street scape, architectural design and visual impact. Included
within tl1e category of Quality of Design, are separate scoring criteria for the exterior quality of the
bUild)ing~ th~. quality o~ tl1e ~ite ddes.ifn, amenities (including useable open space and pedestrian "'"'
ways, vlsua Impact, an tras an utllty access. _
More information supporting our concerns follows along with comments on how tl1ey relate to tl1e
GMQS criteria and scoring.
1. The Traffic Report. The applicant has provided a traffic study from Felsburg Holt &
UUevig, dated August 28, 2003. The report indicates that Hyman Avenue experiences
approximately 3,500 vehicles per day ("vpd") in the summer and 2300 vpd in tl1e winter. The report
measures the increase in projected traffic generated by the project and finds that the increase in
traffic is not significant. However, the report does not analyze the impact on traffic flows due to tl1e
operational characteristics of the garage. Clearly, 3500 vpd is a lot of traffic. The garage will
require botl1 right and left turning movements for cars entering and exiting the facility. The report is
silent on the effect of these turning movements on traffic flow. Cars heading west on Hyman, will
need to make a left turn into the garage. The application indicates tl1at this small site only has tl1e
capacity to queue four cars at one time and this assumes that all available space is used for arriving
vehicles, witl1 no consideration about departing vehicles. When cars are already queued at tl1e
entrance, these vehicles wiU either wait until the entrance clears, or they will circle the block. In
eitl1er case, traffic flows will be adversely affected. Similarly, vehicles traveling east on Hyman will
have to make a right turn. The entrance is close to tl1e intersection and when cars are backed up at
the entrance, these vehicles waiting to enter will block traffic coming on to Hyman Avenue.
The Association has engaged Kathleen Krager of the firm of Bowers & Krager, Inc., traffic
........,
-
-
.......
'-'
P23
Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
.""'" November 5, 2004
Page 3
engineers, to evaluate fue applicant's report. Her analysis is attached hereto at Exhibit A and it
identifies the deficiencies that render fue applicant's report meaningless with respect to traffic
conflicts caused by the operational realities of this project.
The applicant's report attempts to evaluate queuing and states that the time required to park
each car is 90 seconds "from the time the vehicle drives onto the lift to the time the lift returns for
the next vehicle." However, this does not take into account the time it takes to unload people, skis,
kids, etc., nor the time it takes to check in or to retrieve forgotten items. These activities are clearly
part of the calculus of the time it takes a car to enter and clear fue queuing area, but are totally
ignored by the report. We estimate that these activities will take three to five minutes, depending on
how busy the attendant is. Thus, the total time is more like five to seven minutes per car, not 90
seconds. The report suggests that payment will occur on pick up, however, fuat takes time as well
and when the four spaces needed for queuing vehicles entering are full, cars cannot leave. When
questioned about this at a recent Planning Commission hearing, fue applicant stated that during peak
usage for arriving vehicles arriving cars would have a priority and people picking up their cars
would have to wait. We do not believe fuat people paying well over one hundred fuousand dollars
for their parking space will be so accommodative. Our traffic report also addresses this from a
purely functional perspective and correctly points out that: "The proposal to hold exiting vehicles
while allowing vehicles to enter the garage will result in numerous operating problems, including fue
likely potential fuat vehicles will need to leave fue facility to make room for entering vehicles."
The applicant's report also assumes fuat 80% of fue users will be members of fue public, not
owners of fue spaces, and that they will be parking for long periods of time, thus reducing fue
number of operations and the traffic generation of fue facility. The applicant has not proposed a
mefuod of assuring 80% public use,2 only fuat it will sell spaces for over one-hundred fuousand
dollars and try to allow for public use when fuose spaces are not being used. At those prices, we can
confidently assume that fue buyers are not going to sacrifice their ability to use the spaces whenever
they want in order to gain a few dollars per hour of parking revenue from public use, which income,
is likely to be exceeded by fue cost of tax accounting for these meager sums. The notion of long
term use of fue facility is not supported by any facts. These assumptions of the report are critical to
its analysis and are simply made up, having no reliable foundation.
Simply put, the project raises grave concerns about the location of this garage near fue
intersection and its potential for grid-lock, blocking turning movements, snarling traffic and creating
inconvenience and safety problems for pedestrian use of the sidewalk. The report does not address
fuese at all and its failure to account for fuem along with its unsupported assumptions about fue
composition of users and fue length of parking stays, renders its conclusions erroneous.
2During the City Planning Commission review, the applicant offered to guaranty that only 19 of the 99 spaces will
be available for public use.
IJ
,...
-.....,
P24
...
City of Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
November 5,2003
Page 4
,""",
-...I'
2. The Noise Report. The applicant submitted a noise study dated Aug. 27, 2003, from
Gary Ehrlich, Senior Acoustical Engineer. The report was done on, what we are told is, the only
otl1er facility in tl1e U.S. using tl1is technology. The equipment was located in a private parking
garage and sound measurements were taken near the garage overhead door. The equipment was
operated witl10ut any cars on the lift. On the last page of tl1e report it states:
"It can also be seen that the sound level in the garage was typically between 50
and 65 dBA, and occasionally reached 70 to 80 dBA."
If tl1ese sound levels exist at tl1e property line (where measured under the City Code), they
would exceed the maximum sound levels for this zone district allowed under the City's Land Use
Code ("Code"), and the project could not be approved.
The relevant Code provisions are found in Article 18 (the "Noise Ordinance"). Section
18.04.040 limits tl1e maximum allowable noise in tl1is land us.e district to 55 dBA between tl1e hours
of 10:00PM and 7:00AM and 65 dBA between tl1e hours of 7:00AM and 10:00PM. So when tl1e
report says the sound level is "typically between 50 and 65 dBA," it is saying that the garage will,
depending on tl1e hours of use, typically violate the Aspen Municipal Code noise ordinance! When
the report says the noise levels "occasionally reached 70 to 80 dBA," it is saying that occasionally
the noise reached levels that are deemed harmfUl! 3
""""
",",.i""-'
Viewing tl1e charts submitted witl1 the report makes it clear tl1at tl1e Noise Ordinance's night
time 55 dBA limit is exceed most of the time and sound levels between 60 and 70 dBA are reached
about half tl1e time. (See Figure 1 attached to the report). Furthermore, since the report was based on
the lift being operated witl10ut a car, we can only assume that the noise generated from this
equipment when it is under full load (e.g. when 5-6000 pound SUV's are on the lift) can only be
higher, not lower.
To provide the Commission with some reference for these noise levels, a sewing machine
operates around 60 dBA, a washing machine around 70 dBA and an alarm clock at 2 feet is about 80
dBA.' Front loaders, backhoes, tractors, concrete mixers, moveable cranes, generators and
compressors operate in the 70-80dBA range.5
'Levels of75 dBA for outdoor activities and 65dBA for indoor activities are considered to generale "severe noise
impacts" by the Federal Highway Administration. See:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/regions/NorthwestJrp&s/environmentaVaae/policies.htm#anchor6
4American Tinnitis Association at www;ata.org
'Reitze, Environmental Law, Chapter Three B-19
"""
......,.
~""
\0; ~
P25
'~"''''''>/
City of Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
November 5, 2003
Page 5
As previously mentioned, the noise report was not done at the property line and the applicant
has stated in prior public hearings that the garage lift will operate with tl1e doors closed. Without a
study of tl1e noise tl1at escapes the building, all we know is that tl1e lift equipment exceeds
permissible noise levels.
3. Specific Comments on Scoring Criteria. The following are brief statements concerning
certain of tl1e specific scoring criteria that we request you take into consideration in your
deliberations. The paragraph numbers track with the scoring section of the Code:
I. Oualitv of Design:
a. Architectural Design: The facility is a big box. It exceeds the height limits in its zone and is not
compatible architecturally, or with respect to its mass and scale, witl1 neighboring properties. We
believe it represents a totally deficient design and should receive a score of zero.
b. Site design: There is virtually no open space and the site is almost entirely covered by tl1e
building. Most importantly, tl1e operational characteristics of tl1is project are not accommodated by
this small site. Circulation is neither efficient nor safe as incoming and outgoing vehicles need to
cross the sidewalk and, as discussed in detail above, are likely to be parked across the sidewalk and
line up onto the street during peak usage. Based on the criteria of the scoring, tl1is aspect must be
determined to be a totally deficient design, with a score of zero.
d. Amenities: There are no amenities. There is no useable open space. Altl10ugh the application says
that pedestrian safety will be enhanced by the construction of new sidewalks, tl1e parking garage use
and the operational problems associated witl1 it render the sidewalks unsafe and frequently unusable.
This reflects a totally deficient design and should earn a score of zero.
e. Visual Impact. The building is out of scale witl1 the neighborhood. Its mass will block views
looking towards Aspen Mountain. Its almost 100% lot coverage provides no relief along tl1e street
and its placement, with hardly any setback, directly next to Benedict Commons, will shut out light
and air from many residential units. Again, this deserves a score of zero.
f. Trash and utility areas. As if to accentuate the deficiency of its design, the application states that
there is no room on the site for a trash area and its dumpster will be located on tl1e adjacent property.
Again, this deserves a score of zero.
2. Availability of Public Facilities and Services.
c. Public Transportation/roads. The project will substantially alter in a negative way, existing
automobile and pedestrian traffic patterns, creating safety hazards and overloading tl1e existing street
system. Anotl1er zero, please.
II
,,-.
""'"
.~
P26
City of Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
November 5, 2003
Page 6
We appreciate your consideration of our concerns and tl1ank you for your time in reviewing
fuis letter.
Very truly yours,
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
By:/duLu-dc!CIft~
Herbert S. Klein )
Attachment
700 E Hyman condo assn\gmqs-U-2(hklI04).wpd
""""
"".'''<
"""
~
-
-
\......
...."'",
""
RECE/II'ED
{JeT " n. "-
, II Iii C f!~:1.~
50wers &- Krager, Inc.
....~.""
Qctot:er1,2003
Mr. Herbert S. Klein
Herbert S. Klein & Associates
201 North Mill Street, Suite 203
As~, Colorado 81611
9709258700 fax 9253977
RE: Propcsed Park Place Parking Garage at 707 East Hyman in As~, Colorado 406thk.doc
Dear Herb:
Per your request, I have reviewed the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility Application to de-
termine potential traffic imr;a:ls. Unfortunately, the application is completely lacking in informa-
tion regarding traffic operations, and I am unable to offer any professional opinion based on the
information con1ained in the"application. To provide any form of traffic review, the following
information must t:e provided:
1. AnticipalEd site trip generation for daily and peak hour trips
2. Existing street traffic volumes at peak times of operation
3. Level of Service analyses for entrance/exit at peak periods
4. Average time from entering the garage unti I the rext car can enter the sarre elevator
5. Queue analysis of waiting vehicles during peak periods
6. Parking summary of the number of spaces provided for apartment/office users and employ-
ees of the garage
Although the application provides some information on expected daily trips, it does not provide a
complete understanding of the assumptions used to determine the anticipated daily trips. Both the
assumptions and da1a to support the assumptions need to t:e reviewed. No peak hour trip generation
has been provided, which is critical in determining both the::n:E'SS operations and queuing dlarac-
teristics of the site.
Furthermore, I would recommend that all traffic analyses t:e completed with the assumption that
one bay is designated for ingress and the other bay is designated for egress. The propa;al to hold
exiting vehicles while allowing vehicles to enter the garage will result in numerous operating prob-
lems, including the likely potential that vehicles will need to leave the facility to make room for
entering vehicles.
"....-
.
,
z
I
EXHIBIT
A
899 Logan Street, Suite 210 Denver, CO 8020)-)15+ T()0))++G-2G26 F(0))++G-0270
1.1
,.,
'"""'
P28
Mr. Herbert S. Klein
Herbert S. Klein & Associates
4OIifhk.doc
October 1, 2003
Page 2
Finally, the site plan should identify the queuing area for waiting vehicles to verify that vehicles
waiting to enter the garage will not impact the sidewalk.
........
"",,,,,';
When this information beOJmes available from the applicant, I will be happy to revievv it. Without
the additional information, it is not pa;sible to determine tt'e traffic impacts of this application, and
the City of Aspen should not approve the proposal.
Please feel free to call me regarding this matter.
Sinrerely,
~~~
Kathleen L. Krager, P.E., PTOE
Transportation Engineer
fax and mail
-
--
""..-
....,"'
7Sl.A ·
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Joyce Allgai~~munity Development Deputy Director
Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner~
"Park Place" (707 E. Hyman Avenue) - Public Hearing
Consolidated ConceptuallFinal PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning,
Conditional Use, GMQS Exemption
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
August 19, 2003
PROJECT: "PARK PLACE" COMMERCIAL PARKING GARAGE
REQUEST: Approvals to subdivide the parcel and construct a 99 space
Commercial Parking Facility with two (2) affordable housing
units on the eastern parcel currently developed with an "A-
Frame" structure.
ZONING: Office (0) Zone District
LAND USE ACTIONS: Consolidated ConceptuallFinal PUD, Conditional Use,
Subdivision, Rezoning to include a PUD Overlay, and
GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing.
(A GMQS scoring application for Commercial
Development will be submitted upon the September 15
deadline and is not part of this review.)
STAFF Approval with Conditions
RECOMMENDATION:
SUMMARY:
Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is
requesting land use approvals to construct a 99 parking space commercial parking facility
with an accessory office and two (2) affordable housing units.
The parcel is 12,000 square feet consisting of Lots A, B, C and D of Block 105, City and
Townsite of Aspen, and is located in the Office (0) Zone District. The property is
currently developed with an "A-Frame" structure, 707 East Hyman, and the "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring. Both are currently office buildings. No changes are
proposed for the Hannah Dustin Building. The commercial parking facility is proposed to
replace the A-Frame.
The parking operation is proposed as an entirely automated system. Cars are placed on
"pallets" and then mechanically moved within the building. No internal ramping is
Park Place Page I
JIIf'.'....
~~,
.....""
"'....
involved and drivers do not actually enter the parking area. A small office houses an
attendant who aids patrons with the system.
A CD has been included in the application and can be run on any computer with a CD
drive. This will also be played at the hearing. A representative of the parking system
manufacturer will make a presentation at tl1e hearing and will be available for questions,
etc.
Staff has reviewed this application against the applicable criteria and believes all criteria
have been met. Staff is recommending approval, subject to conditions outlined in
proposed P&Z Resolution No. _, Series of 2003.
MAIN ISSUES:
Sketch Plan Review: A parking garage concept (on the A-Frame property only) was the
subject of a "sketch plan review" with City Council and the Planning and Zoning
Commission October 21, 2002. This review process allows a potential applicant to
identify planning issues with the City's boards and neighbors of the site in a public
hearing format. The proposed operation has significantly changed since the sketch plan
review.
The planning issues identified were: Compatibility of the use with surrounding uses and
properties, lighting of the facility, height and aesthetics of the building, hours of
operation, noise, traffic generation and air pollution, employee generation, and potential
future uses of the building. The two boards expressed concerns over these issues on "first
blush" and indicated to tl1e applicant that these issues would need to be addressed in an
application. The two boards indicated acceptance of the project being reviewed as a
PUD, potential flexibility with employee generation calculations, and potential ability for
the project to gain multi-year allotments in growth management.
Aspen Area Community Plan: The 2000 AACP endorsed the following policies and
goals that have applicability to this project:
. Limit traffic on Highway 82 into Aspen to 1993 levels.
. Reduce internal flow of traffic within Aspen.
. Hold the supply of public parking within tl1e Aspen Community Growth
Boundary to 1998 levels, with the exception of affordable housing parking.
. Reduce automobile congestion in the downtown core, particularly in the evening
and on weekends so as to foster economic sustainability.
. Manage the supply of parking to limit adverse impacts of automobile use and to
conserve land in the Aspen area.
. Provide a wide range of flexible transportation management tools and techniques
to reduce single-occupant automobile use.
The Economic Sustainability Report (a follow-up to the AACP) recommended the City
"continue to reinvest in Aspen's infrastructure through collaboratively exploring
public/private and interagency partnerships for certain projects and moving forward on
Park Place Page 2
~,.;",
~"'
'-"
-
other that have already been approved. These include: I) The Entrance to Aspen as
approved in the CDOT Record of Decision; 2) Possible additional and more convenient
parking; and, 3) A gondola interconnect for the four ski areas."
Recent proj ects and planning efforts also affect this discussion. The Rio Grande Parking
Garage was originally planned for an additional level below grade. This unbuilt level
would have accommodated and additional 80 cars. The Independence Place Plaza project
("Superblock") was planned in this general area as an outgrowth of tl1e 1986 parking
study referenced in the application. 228 parking spaces were contemplated for the IPP
project.
The "hold public parking" statement in the AACP seems to not support this (or any)
additional parking. At the same time the "reduce congestion," "transportation
management," "add more parking," and recent planning activities seem to support this
concept of additional public parking.
Staff believes parking, especially public parking, is an infrastructure necessary for the
success of the downtown shopping district. This parking garage will add capacity and
relieve some of tl1e demand on street parking, valet parking, and the Rio Grande facility.
Staff believes the proposal complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Parking Facility Use: A Commercial Parking Structure is a conditional use in the Office
Zone District. The criteria for reviewing a Conditional Use concentrate on the proposal's
compatibility with surrounding uses, considering both physical and operational aspects of
the proposal, and the proposal's infrastructure demands and employee housing demands.
Staff believes this parking facility, due to its proposed operation style, is compatible with
surrounding uses and in conformance with the Conditional Use criteria. (See Exhibit A
for full criteria and responses.)
Traffic Generation: There is a question of whether tl1is facility will attract more auto
trips to town ("build it and they will come") or will this project ease parking frustration of
people already coming to town. Staff suggests its likely a little of both - this facility will
add to tl1e inventory of parking and provide some relief to the "circling phenomenon."
Parking demand is primarily a function of downtown destinations (restaurants, shopping,
skiing, etc.) and parking serves that demand. At the same time, additional capacity may
attract some additional auto trips that would otl1erwise be either discouraged from
downtown or be handled by other transit modes.
The City's Transportation Department believes additional traffic will occur on this block
of East Hyman but does not foresee the increase to cause a degradation of intersection
service levels. No physical improvements will be necessary to accommodate this
proposal.
The Environmental Health Department has raised a concern about additional trips
causing air quality impacts and has asked the applicant to mitigate such additional trips.
The City has no impact mitigation requirements for trip generation and no requirements
have been proposed. However, one of the most-touted transportation demand
Park Place Page 3
""'"
~...
'-'
management strategies is the application of market rate fees to parking. Certainly "free
parking" attracts drivers. Paying a fee, especially a daily fee, for parking will act as a
deterrent. Also, the applicant is interested in paving the alleyway and doing so is
typically viewed as an air quality mitigation method.
Traffic Queuing. The proposed project can queue up to four cars at a time and parking
each car takes approximately 36 seconds (plus time for exiting the car, etc.). There may
be times when a patron must wait a few minutes for service. An occupied car waiting for
a position to open-up is adequate, although not a desirable scenario: Staff is concerned
about the parking garage operator allowing patrons to leave cars un-occupied within the
street, blocking traffic, etc.
This issue could be addressed through a condition of approval although staff is interested
in the parking manufacturer's comments on this topic. Also, staff is interested in peak
demand expectations and how many patrons might be expected at one time. For
example: Just before the mountain opens on a significant "powder" day or just after the
4th of July fireworks.
Pedestrian Improvements: The site currently provides a sidewalk along Spring Street
and essentially no pedestrian provision along Hyman Avenue. The proposal would
complete the sidewalk provided along the Benedict Commons for the remainder of the
block.
Sidewalk along Benedict Commons Existing condition along subject
property
Dimensional Requirements: The dimensions of this project are proposed to be
established through adoption of a PUD (Planned Unit Development). Following is a
comparison of tl1e propOosed dimensions and those allowed in tl1e Office Zone District.
Dimension: Proposed Proposed Hannah Office Zone
Park Place Dustin Lot: District:
Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft. 60 ft. 60 ft.
Front Yard Setback 6.5 ft. O-lOft. (varies) (west = lOft. (secondary front
primary) yard is 2/3 of primary
6.5 ft. (north = front yard)
Park Place Page 4
"..~
"
,-"
secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east) 5 ft.
5 ft. (east)
Rear Yard Setback Oft. lOft (existing) 15 ft.
Maximum Height 35 ft. 28 ft. (existing) 25 ft.
Percent of Open No No Requirement No Requirement
Space Requirement
Allowable FAR 1.29:1 Same as Office zone .75:1. May be
requirement increased to 1:1
through Special
Review
Residential Off- 3 total N/A Minimum: Lesser of I
Street Parking /bedroom or 2/unit.
Commercial Off- 96 spaces 3 along alley (loss of 3 3/1 ,000 s.f. net leasable
Street Parking surface spaces on space.
north side)
Distance between 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft.
Buildings on the lot.
Staff believes the proposed dimensions are appropriate. Both the neighboring Benedict
Commons Building and the Aspen Athletic Club building across the street exceed a I: I
FAR with the Aspen Athletic Club Building
having an FAR of approximately 1.82:1. The
Benedict Commons building has a 6.5-foot
setback along the Hyman Avenue property line.
The 35-foot proposed height of the parking
facility is measured to the top of the flat roof. The
adjacent Benedict Commons building was
approved for a 30-foot height limit and certain
ridgelines are developed to approximately 34 feet
(measured at the midpoint of the sloped roof).
The portion of the building closest to Hyman
Avenue has been restricted to 26 feet, reducing Neighboring Benedict Commons Building
the appearance of massing on the front fa9ade.
The proposed east side yard setback of 5 feet
meets the requirement of the Office Zone Districts
and mirrors the 5-foot setback of the Benedict
Commons building.
The proposed west side yard setback (between the
proposed parking garage and the Hannah Dustin
building) of 3 feet is less than the Office Zone
requirement. The proposed setback for the
Hannah Dustin building is 0 feet. The City's
Building Department has suggested the proposed
property line be repositioned such that the parking Bell Mountain Townhomes across the
alley from subject site.
Park Place Page 5
~
"'.',,",
,."
~/
garage has a 0- foot setback. This would prevent the east facing walls of the Hannah
Dustin Building from having to be retrofit as "fire walls." If this route were pursued, the
minimum lot size of the parking garage structure would need to be varied.
The Hannah-Dustin building is not proposed to be altered. The dimensional requirements
that are proposed to be established through the PUD reflect tl1e existing dimensional
conditions of the building.
Employee Generation & Affordable Housing: According to the applicant, this project
will generate approximately 5 FTE (full-time equivalents) plus a potential part-time
bookkeeper/manager. The City requires mitigation for 60% of the employees generated.
The applicant has proposed two affordable units - a Category lone-bedroom unit and a
Category 3 three-bedroom unit. These units house 4.75 employees, in excess of the
City's requirement. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has reviewed this
proposal and has recommended approval with a series of conditions. These conditions
require an audit of the operation to determine actual employee generation and a legal
mechanism to guarantee the rental units remain affordable (considering the Telluride
decision).
Employee generation and mitigation will also be reviewed with the forthcoming growth
management application.
Floor Area: A question has been raised regarding whether or not the internal parking
"shelves" should be considered floor area. These internal shelves do create separate
levels but those levels do not provide traditional useable spaces. The City's PUD allows
dimensions to be determined for a specific project and staff recommends this floor area
question be resolved through the PUD.
Staff believes the individual parking platforms should not be considered Floor Area for
the purposes of this development proposal. For the current plan, the floor area question
may be academic but could be important if the use is terminated and the building
converted. Describing the parking shelves not as floor area would require a PUD
amendment to later retrofit actual floors within the structure and would require additional
net leasable allotments from the growth management system.
Subdivision: The subdivision request is to divide the lot into two properties and is also
necessary for the creation of multi-family housing. The site is flat and contains no
geologic hazards or other reasons to recommend denial is suitable for subdivision. Staff
believes that the proposed subdivision application complies with all of the standards.
Growth Management: The proposed parking garage requires a GMQS scoring approval.
GMQS applications, however, may not be reviewed by the City until after the September
15th application deadline. This is to ensure a fair scoring process occurs if more than one
application is submitted.
This review and approval (if granted) will be conditioned upon a successful growth
management scoring.
Park Place Page 6
REVIEW PROCESS:
The Applicant is requesting approval of the following land use requests to develop the
proposed parking facility:
~ Consolidated ConceptuallFinal PUD (to approve the dimensions
of the new parking facility building)
~ Subdivision (to split the parcel and for the two AH units)
~ Rezoning (to add a PUD Overlay)
~ Conditional Use (to approve the parking garage use. Combined
with PUD review)
~ GMQS Exemption (for the two AH units)
The Planning and Zoning Commission shall provide a recommendation to City Council
on all of the land use requests. The P&Z may recommend approval, approval with
conditions, or denial at a duly noticed public hearing. (The Conditional Use request has
been combined with the other requests to be finally decided by City Council.)
The project also requires a growth management allotment and applications for GMQS
scoring may not be submitted until September 15th. Any actions on the pending requests
will be conditioned upon a successful GMQS review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that the proposal meets the applicable review standards. Staff believes that
the proposed dimensional requirements are appropriate and compatible with the
immediate vicinity. Additionally, the City of Aspen Parking Department Director has
reviewed the application and believes that the proposal will take some pressure off of tl1e
on-street parking spaces within the downtown area. Therefore, staff recommends that the
Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed resolution recommending that
City Council approve the proposal with the conditions that are set forth therein.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No. _, Series of 2003, recommending that City Council
approve the Park Place Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, Subdivision, GMQS
exemption, and Conditional Use for a commercial parking structure."
A TT ACHMENTS
Exhibit A - Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B - Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C - Application
~~it- D - ~ ~ ~ )6\e,\Y\
Park Place Page 7
RESOLUTION NO.
(SERIES OF 2003)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE CONCEPTUAL
AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) REVIEW, CONDITIONAL
USE REVIEW, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS WAIVERS, SUBDIVISION
REVIEW, REZONING TO INCLUDE A PUD OVERLAY, AND GROWTH
MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION REVIEW FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR A
COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY AND OFFICE BillLDING LOCATED ON
LOTS A, B, C, AND D, BLOCK 105, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
(the Project) from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, John Cooper Managing Partner, owner
and applicant, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, for combined Conceptual
and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval, Rezoning for a PUD Overlay,
Subdivision approval, Conditional Use approval, Residential Design Standards waivers,
and Growth Management Exemption approval for affordable housing for a proposed
commercial parking facility housing ninety-nine cars, two affordable housing units, and
an accessory parking attendant office, and an existing office building; and,
WHEREAS, the parcel of land is described as Lot A, B, C, and D, Block 105,
City and Towntsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, also described as the Hannah-
Dustin Condominiums according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 78
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, and is currently developed with an "A-Frame"
structure, 707 East Hyman Avenue, generally located on Lots C and D, and the "Hannah-
Dustin" building, 300 So. Spring Street, generally located on Lots A and B. Both are
currently office buildings. Minimal changes are proposed for the Hannah Dustin
Building and site. The commercial parking facility is proposed to replace the A-Frame;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304, 26.310, 26.410, 26.425, 26.445,
26.480, and 26.710 of the Land Use Code, land use applications requesting land use
review for Rezoning for Planned Unit Development Overlay designation, Conditional
Use, Planned Unit Development Conceptual and Final plan adoption, Residential Design
Standards waivers, and Subdivision approval, may be approved, approved with.
conditions, or denied by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after
considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, the Planning
and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, the appropriate referral
agencies, and members of the general public; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(I) and for the purpose of
providing clarity and reducing duplication the Community Development Director, in
consultation with the applicant, has modified the Conditional Use Review and Residential
Design Standards variance procedures for this project such that the Planning and Zoning
P&Z Resolution No._,
Series of2003. Page 1
Commission, at a public hearing, shall make a recommendation to City Council and City
Council, at a public hearing, shall be the final decision-making body; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445.020 and notwithstanding the parcel
being less than 27,000 square feet in size the Community Development Director has
allowed this project to be reviewed according to the City's Planned Unit Development
process considering that this project may have the ability to further goals of the Aspen
Area Community Plan and that the procedures and review standards of the City's Planned
Unit Development process best serve the interests of the community in reviewing the
proj ect; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445.030(B)(2) the Community Development
Director has permitted the consolidation of Conceptual and Final Planned Unit
Development review considering the limited extent of issue involved; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, the City Parking Department, the City
Transportation Department, the City Zoning Officer, City Parks Department, the Aspen
Building Department, the Environmental Health Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 19, 2003, the
Planning and Zoning Commission considered the noted recommendations and comments
from the general public and recommended, by a _to _ C-.J vote, the City Council
grant approval for the Rezoning for PUD Overlay designation, Conceptual and Final PUD
Development Plan approval, Conditional Use approval, Subdivision approval, and growth
management exemption approval for affordable housing for the proposed commercial
parking facility and existing office building, subject to conditions of approval listed
herein.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that City
Council should approve the Park Place commercial parking facility and office building
project, as proposed in the land use application, witl1 the following conditions of
approval:
Section 1: Rezoning
The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be, upon filing of tl1e
Subdivision plat and Final PUD Plans, amended by the Community Development
Director to reflect the following property as designated with a Planned Unit Development
Overlay zoning designation. No change to the underlying "Office" designation shall
occur .
Lots A, B, C, and D, Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Colorado.
Section 2: Growth Management Apuroval Contingency
The Subdivision and Planned Unit Development approvals granted by the City shall not
be considered valid until the project obtains all growth management allotments and
approvals. The City shall not accept or approve final Subdivision/PUD plats, plans, and
P&Z Resolution No. ~,
Series of2003. Page 2
agreements unless all growth management allotments have been awarded by the City of
Aspen.
Section 3: Residential Design Standards
The project, as depicted in the Final PUD Plans, shall be exempt from the City's
Residential Design Standards.
Section 4: Approved Project Dimensions
The following approved dimensions of the project shall be reflected in the Final PUD Plans:
Dimension: Parking Garage Lot: Hannah Dustin Lot:
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. 6,000 sf.
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft. 60 ft.
Front Yard Setback 6.5 ft. O-IOft. (as shown on final PUD
Plan) (west = primary)
6.5 ft. (north = secondary)
Side Yard Setback 3 ft. (west) o (east)
5 ft. (east)
Rear Yard Setback Oft. 10 ft
Maximum Height 35 ft. 28 ft.
Percent of Open No Requirement No Requirement
Space
Allowable FAR 1.29: 1 (The parking Same as Office zone requirement
"shelves" shall not be
counted as FAR, only the
building shell and
traditional floors.)
Residential Off- 3 total N/A
Street Parking
Commercial Off- 96 spaces 3 along alley
Street Parking
Distance between 10 ft. 10 ft.
Buildings on the lot.
Section 5: Parking Spaces and Parking Garage
Parking spaces within the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and not used
for storage or other similar non-automobile related purposes.
One parking space shall be allocated to each of the two on-site affordable housing units.
If the residential units are transferred separate from the remaining property interests, the
P&Z Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 3
parking space allocated to residential unit shall be conveyed m fee as part of the
ownership interest in the residential unit.
The remaining 96 parking spaces may be sold, transferred, or leased by the owners
thereof on a daily or long-term basis. Parking spaces may be used to satisfY parking
needs of future commercial expansions on- or off-site and may be sold or leased to third
parties for use as remote residential parking.
The parking garage and parking spaces shall be considered an approved commercial
parking facility and an approved remote parking facility as such terms are used in the
City's Land Use Code. Parking spaces may be physically reconfigured, with approval
from the Community Development Director, to accommodate additional or fewer parking
spaces such that a total change of no greater than five (5) parki~pac~s, from that
depicted on the Final PUD Plans, occurs. Physical reconfigurations l'lJ~~eatgZparking by
more than five (5) spaces shall require a PUD amendment. Conversion of~'parking
spaces to non-parking uses shall require a PUD amendment.
Section 6: Affordable Housing Units
The Project shall include one (I) one-bedroom Category One affordable housing unit and
one (I) three-bedroom Category 3 affordable housing unit as described on the Final PUD
Plans. Each unit shall have one (I) associated parking space within the parking garage.
The two affordable units shall be exempted from tl1e Growth Management Quota System
and counted towards the growth ceiling for affordable housing.
The affordable housing units shall be either transferred as "for-sale units" to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
Guidelines or, if the units are to be rented, a legal instrument permanently ensuring their
affordable status acceptable to the City Attorney shall be provided. The City shall accept
a nominal property interest (1/10 of I percent undivided interest) or other reasonable
means of assurance.
Residents of the affordable housing units shall meet the minimum occupancy and all
otl1er qualification criteria in the APCHA Guidelines, as amended. The rental structure of
the affordable units shall not exceed a maximum rental rate of Category 2 for the one-
bedroom unit and Category 3 for the three. bedroom unit as such rates are defined in the
APCHA Guidelines, as amended from time to time. Rental tenants shall be qualified by
APCHA.
Section 7: Impact Fees
Park 1m/Jact Fees of $5,754 shall be assessed. Amendments to the Project shall include
an adjustment to this impact fee according to the following schedule:
Park Fees:
lone-bedroom @ $2,120 per unit =
1 three-bedroom unit @ 3,634 per unit =
$2,120
$3,634
$5,754
P&Z Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 4
School 1moact Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the unimproved land
divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis. The City of
Aspen verifies the unimproved land value of the lands underlying tl1e Project to be
2,961,700 based on information from the Pitkin County Assessor. This represents
$10,750,870 per acre. One-third of this value divided by the proposed 2 units results in a
$1,791,823 per acre standard for calculating the impact fee. The subject subdivision is not
conducive to locating a school facility and a cash-in-lieu payment shall be accepted.
School Impact Fees are follows, payable at building permit issuance:
1/3 land Land Per unit Number
value per Dedication Impact Fee of Units
unit per standard
acre (acres)
One bedroom $1,791,823 .0012 $2,150 I $2,150
Two Bedroom $1,791,823 .0095 $17,022 0 0
Three Bedroom $1,791,823 .0162 $29,028 I $29,028
Four Bedroom $1,791,823 .0248 $44,437 0 0
Total: $31,178
Amendments to the project shall include an adjustment to this impact fee according to the
above schedule.
Section 8: Landscape Plan
The proposed landscape plan shall provide a number, type, and quality of plant material
acceptable to the City Parks Department. Sufficient mitigation shall be provided, in a
form acceptable to the City Parks Department, to offset the removal of existing trees on
the site. The Landscape Plan sheet(s) of the Final PUD Plans shall include an acceptable
tree replacement and mitigation plan with a signature line for approval by the City Parks
Department.
Tree removal mitigation shall be based on the valuation of existing trees to be removed.
Tree Removal permits shall be obtained. New trees to be established within the Project
shall be credited towards this valuation. The Parks Department recommends removal of
the Spruce tree rather than relocation.
The Subdivision/PUD agreement shall include provisions guaranteeing the successful
implementation of the landscape and ongoing maintenance.
Section 9: As en Consolidated Sanitation Distric
The building permit application shall comply
Consolidated Sanitation District. Following are sp
project:
I. If a back-up generator is used, compliance with fuel tank requirements will be
necessary.
. tVl I requirements of the Aspen
. IC requirements applicable to this
P&Z Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 5
2. Containment systems for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system are necessary.
3. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
4. If water is used to clean the garage, there will need to be floor drains. Floor drains
will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will require an oil/sand separator. In
case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must be sized to accommodate fire
flows.
5. The Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay
applicable fees.
Section 10: Proiect Name
The Project shall be renamed to avoid emergency service confusion. A new name shall
be reflected on the Subdivision/PUD plans and agreements.
Section 11: Subdivision & Final PUD Plans
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision and a Final PUD Development Plan.
The Subdivision Plat shall comply with current requirements of the City Community
Development Engineer and also shall include the following items:
I. The final property boundaries and disposition of lands with appropriate property
descriptions.
2. Easements and signature blocks for utility mains and transformers with signature
blocks for utilities not provided by the City of Aspen. Easements for electric
transformers. Transformers shall be located outside of the public right-of-way. An
easement to access the mechanical equipment on the east side of the Hannah Dustin
building may be necessary.
3. The applicant shall provide the final approved Subdivision line data or survey
description data describing the revised parcel boundaries to the Geographic
Information Systems Department prior to applying for a building permit. The final
building location data, including any amendments, shall be provided to the GIS
Department prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The Final PUD Plans shall include:
I. An illustrative site plan witl1 dimensioned building locations. Adequate snow
storage areas shall be depicted.
2. A landscape plan showing location, amount, and species oflandscape improvements
with an irrigation plan.
3. Design specifications for any improvements to public rights-of-way with profiles
and drainage designs for any road/alley improvements.
4. An architectural character plan demonstrating the general architectural character of
each building depicting materials, fenestration, projections, and dimensions and
P&Z Resolution No. _,
Series of2003. Page 6
. ,
locations of elevator shaft heads, skylights, mechanical equipment, etc. Mechanical
equipment shall be screened from pedestrian view.
5. A utility plan meeting the standards of the City Engineer and City utility agencies.
The City Water Department prefers one fire tap and one domestic service tap.
6. A grading/drainage plan with any off-site improvements specified. Any off-site
improvements done in coordination with tl1e City Engineering Department and costs
shall be prorated with other properties receiving such benefit.
7. An exterior lighting plan meeting the requirements of Section 26.575.150.
Section 12: SubdivisionlPUD Agreement
Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building
Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD Agreement binding this property to
this development approval. The Agreement shall include the necessary items detailed in
Section 26.445.070, in addition to the following:
I. A methodology of determining actual employee generation of the Project after one
complete year of operation and the manner of providing mitigation of any additional
employee generation. The project is providing housing for 4.75 employees.
According to the City's requirement of providing mitigation for 60% of the
employees generated, this housing mitigates a total generation of 7.9 employees.
Additional mitigation shall be required for any actual employee generation in excess
of7.9 employees. The methodology shall include an audit process and timeline, a
method of selecting an auditor, the method of determining acceptable mitigation if
additional employees are generated, and be acceptable to the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority.
2. A traffic management plan describing construction hauling routes and methods to
shuttle workers to the construction site. The City prefers the applicant use East
Hyman A venue to Original Street as the primary hauling route.
3. Geologic and soils report describing ground water issues and methods of
construction to be used to avoid adversely affecting neighboring properties and
rights-of-way. Water rights may need to be obtained if dewatering operations
remove groundwater.
4. In addition to the financial securities for improvements required by Section
26.445.070, the applicant shall provide to the City of Aspen a letter of credit, cash to
be held in a City account, or other financial security executable through the period
of construction and acceptable to the City of Aspen, to recover the construction site
to a safe condition, including but not limited to, filling-in excavated areas if
construction is discontinued. The securities shall be specified in the
Subdivision/PUD agreement and payable upon building permit application.
5. An agreement to return the section of East Hyman Avenue to its intersection with
Original Street, or other primary hauling route, to an acceptable condition after
construction, as determined by the City Engineer. Subsurface work may be
necessary. Curb and gutter work may be necessary. A final two-inch overlay may
be necessary.
P&Z Resolution No._,
Series of 2003. Page 7
Section 13: Building Permit Requirements
The building permit application shall include/depict:
I. A letter from the primary contractor stating that the approving Ordinance has been
read and understood.
2. A signed copy of the Ordinance granting final land use approval.
3. Payment for Parks and School impacts fees as specified herein. Financial securities
as required in the Subdivision/PUD agreement.
4. A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Health Department
which addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads, perimeter silt
fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent rights-of-way, and the ability for the
Environmental Health Department to request additional measures to prevent a
nuisance during construction. The applicant shall wash tracked mud and debris
from the street as necessary, and as requested by the City, during construction.
The applicant shall provide phone contact information for on-site project
management to address construction impacts.
5. A construction noise suppression plan approved by tl1e Environmental Healtl1
Department which includes the ability for the City to request additional measures
to prevent a nuisance during construction. The applicant shall provide phone
contact information for on-site project management to address construction
impacts.
6. An estimated construction schedule with estimated schedules for construction
phases affecting city streets and infrastructure. Street and alley closures shall be
specified with provisions to maintain access to neighboring properties. Any street
or alley closures shall require noticing emergency service providers, neighbors, tl1e
City Streets Department, the Transportation Department, City Parking Department,
and the City Engineering Department. (Estimated schedule to be distributed to
above agencies.)
7. A construction management and parking plan meeting the specifications of the City
Building Department. The plan shall demonstrate continuous emergency access to
the site and neighboring properties and requires payment for street parking used
during construction.
8. Tree removal permits for any regulated trees to be removed. The Parks Department
recommends the Spruce tree be removed rather than relocated.
9. Structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and for
the residential area (res-check).
10. Adequate access to the mechanical room must be shown.
II. The requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units shall
be fulfilled.
12. Disability access to the bathroom and the vehicle pickup area must be defined.
13. One fire sprinkler system is needed for the entire building.
P&Z Resolution No. _,
Series of 2003. Page 8
Section 14: Construction
1. No soil nails shall be used within public rights-of-way or utility easements. The
City recommends soil hardening for these areas.
2. Building foundation footers shall not extend into the right-of-way.
3. Vehicles and material storage shall not block the alleyway.
4. Root barriers shall be installed around new trees to prevent future buckling of the
sidewalk
Section 15: Oueuing Vehicles along Hvman Avenue
The parking garage operator shall not permit or encourage patrons to vacate their cars
until those cars are fully located on-site within the designated entry/exit parking bays.
The City may enforce this provision by appropriate means including, but not limited to,
temporary or permanent revocation of the conditional use approval.
Section 16: Condominiumization
Condominiumization of the Project (after redevelopment) to define and redefine separate
ownership interests of the Project is hereby approved by the City of Aspen, subject to
recordation of a condominiumization plat in compliance with the current (at the time of
condo plat submission) plat requirements oftl1e City Community Development Engineer.
The Project developer shall have the right to condominiumize the affordable residential
units under a separate condominium regime independent of other portions of the Project.
Section 17:
All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Planning
and Zoning Commission, or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein,
unless amended by other specific conditions.
Section 18:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of tl1is Resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall
be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions thereof.
P&Z Resolution No. _,
Series of 2003. Page 9
.,.~
o..,.J
'"""
APPROVED by the Commission during a public hearing on August 19,2003.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
City Attorney
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
C:\homelCurrent PlanninglCASESlPark _PlacelPZ _ Reso.doc
P&Z Resolution No.
Series of2003. Page 10
'.
,
EXHIBIT A
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Review Criteria & Staff Findings
Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Final PUD
Section 26.445.050 of the Regulations provides that development applications for Pinal
PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements.
A. General Requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with many objectives of the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
The 2000 AACP endorsed tl1e following transportation policies and goals that have
applicability to this project:
. Limit traffic on Highway 82 into Aspen to 1993 levels.
. Reduce internal flow of traffic within Aspen.
. Hold the supply of public parking within the Aspen Community Growth
Boundary to 1998 levels, with the exception of affordable housing parking.
. Reduce automobile congestion in the downtown core, particularly in the evening
and on weekends so as to foster economic sustainability.
. Manage the supply of parking to limit adverse impacts of automobile use and to
conserve land in the Aspen area.
. Provide a wide range of flexible transportation management tools and techniques
to reduce single-occupant automobile use.
The Economic Sustainability Report (a follow-up to the AACP) recommended the City
"continue to reinvest in Aspen's infrastructure through collaboratively exploring
public/private and interagency partnerships for certain projects and moving forward on
other that have already been approved. These include: 1) The Entrance to Aspen as
approved in the CDOT Record of Decision; 2) Possible additional and more convenient
parking; and, 3) A gondola interconnect for the four ski areas."
Recent proj ects and planning efforts also affect this discussion. The Rio Grande Parking
Garage was originally planned for an additional level below grade. This unbuilt level
would have accommodated and additional 80 cars. The Independence Place Plaza project
("Superblock") was planned in this general area as an outgrowth of the 1986 parking
study referenced in the application. 228 parking spaces were contemplated for the IPP
project.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 1
The "hold public parking" statement in the AACP seems to not support this (or any)
additional parking. At the same time the "reduce congestion," "transportation
management," "add more parking," and recent planning activities seem to support this
concept of additional public parking. Staff believes parking, especially public parking, is
an infrastructure necessary to the downtown shopping district. Staff does believe the
parking garage proposal complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
The Applicant has appropriately proposed to develop affordable housing well within the
Urban Growth Boundary and in close proximity to the Commercial Core of the City as is
consistent with the housing policies that are set forth in the AACP. In addition, the
Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan states that citizen housing should be provided
within the metro area and in close proximity to public mass transit as the proposed
development is. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
The immediate vicinity is comprised of commercial, mixed use, and multi-family
residential buildings. The proposed parking garage will support these uses and the uses
of the immediately adjacent downtown core. Staff finds this proposal consistent with the
character of the surrounding area.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed development would adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is
exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the
proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with,
final PUD development plan review.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has concurrently applied for a commercial GMQS allotment to construct
the proposed commercial square footage. This request cannot be reviewed until after the
application deadline of September 15th. This will occur prior to or as a condition of final
PUD approval. Additionally, the Applicant has requested a GMQS exemption to
construct the affordable housing units proposed within the development. Staff believes
this criterion is being met.
B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements:
The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements
for all properties within the PUD ...The dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate
dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional
Park Place Exhibit A Page 2
/
requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing
development patterns shall be emphasized.
1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are
appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property:
a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected
future land uses in the surrounding area.
b) Natural and man-made hazards.
c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding
area such as steep' slopes, waterways, shade, and significant
vegetation and landforms.
d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and
the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian
circulation, parking, and historical resources.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed height is appropriate given the heights of the surrounding
structures. The parking garage facility is proposed at a height of thirty-five (35) feet to
the top of the flat roof. The existing buildings that surround the site of the parking garage
are built to a height of between thirty (30) and thirty-five (35) feet tall. Therefore, staff
believes that the proposed height is compatible with the surrounding buildings.
Additionally, the proposed FAR of 1.29: I is compatible with the neighboring buildings in
that both the neighboring Benedict Commons Building and the Aspen Athletic Club
Building that exists across the street contain greater than a 1: I FAR, with the Aspen
Athletic Club Building containing a I: 1.82 FAR.
2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and
quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the
character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed dimensional requirements for the parking facility
structure are compatible with the surrounding properties. Several of the surrounding
structures are built to a height similar to that of the thirty-five (35) feet proposed for the
parking facility. Additionally, the PUD that would consist of both the existing Hannah-
Dustin Building and the proposed commercial parking facility would provide a quantity
of open space equal to that of the neighboring Benedict Commons PUD.
3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established
based on the following considerations:
a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed
development including any non-residential land uses.
b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking
is proposed
c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities,
including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize
automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development.
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and
general activity centers in the city.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 3
'",,-...-'
',...'
Staff Finding
The Applicant has proposed to incorporate the required parking spaces for the affordable
housing units within the parking facility. Therefore, staff has proposed a condition of
approval that requires the Applicant to designate three (3) of the parking spaces within
the parking facility for the affordable housing units.
4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum
density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal,
and road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding
The infrastructure capabilities are sufficient to accommodate this proposal.
5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the
maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural
watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water
pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in
the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or
causes harmful disturbance to critical naturalfeatures of the site.
Staff Finding
No natural hazards or other conditions exist that would dictate such a reduction m
allowable density.
6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there
exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such
increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding
development patterns and with the site's physical constraints.
Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if:
a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as
expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area
plan to which the property is subject.
b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and
there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified
Park Place Exhibit A Page 4
....,./
in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those
characteristics mitigated.
c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern
compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and
expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics.
Staff Finding
Staff believes the proposed density is appropriate for the site and for the character of the
immediate vicinity. Sufficient transportation infrastructure is a community goal
expressed in the AACP and is necessary for continued economic health of the downtown.
None of the physical characteristics of the site limit the allowable density (criteria 4&5)
and the proposed density of compatible with the surrounding development pattern.
B. Site Design:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces,
is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the
adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The
proposed development shall comply with the following:
1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique,
provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to
the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate
manner.
Staff Finding
No such characteristics of the site exist such that a change in the site plan would be
necessary.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open
spaces and vistas.
Staff Finding
No significant open space or vistas exist that would dictate a change in tl1e proposed site
plan.
3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the
urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest
and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement.
Staff Finding
The sidewalk improvements are needed in the area and positively contribute to the urban
context in which this site is located.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow
emergency and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Proper emergency access will be maintained with this proposal.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 5
~.. ...rI'
Staff Finding
This criterion has been met.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a
practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact
su"ounmngpropertie~
Staff Finding
The City Engineer and the applicant have reviewed drainage requirements and believe
this criterion is satisfied.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are
appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions
associated with the use.
Staff Finding
No programmatic needs of the uses direct the design of spaces between the buildings.
C. Landscape Plan:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed
landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels,
and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The
proposed development shall comply with thefollowing:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces,
preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample
quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen
area climate.
Staff Finding
The proposed landscape improvements will significantly improve this site. The existing
surface parking along Hyman Avenue detracts from the streetscape and provides no
pedestrian accommodation. The proposal will amend this situation and complete a
needed link in the pedestrian network.
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide
uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in
an appropriate manner.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other
landscape features is appropriate.
Staff Finding
No predominant site features or landscape features exist that would require preservation
through the construction phase.
D. Architectural Character:
It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the
City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is
Park Place Exhibit A Page 6
,~ ,
based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the
building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale,
orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other
attributes, which may significantly represent the character of the proposed
development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan
and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of
the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development
shall:
1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city,
appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the
property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the
intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and
cultural resources.
Staff Finding
The architectural character of this proposal is adequate for the proposed use and for the
immediate vicinity. The residential uses along Hyman Avenue provide some relief and
architectural interest to the building.
2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by
taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation
and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems.
Staff Finding
The proposed mechanical system provides an extremely efficient method of car storage.
The system requires no internal ramping and no mechanical exhaust/venting. Staff
believes the proposal, even considering the mechanics of the system, will require less
energy and less land area than a conventional ramped and mechanically vented garage.
3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe
an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
Staff Finding
The flat roofs essentially mitigate this concern. Some maintenance along the north side
of the garage will be necessary, but within reason.
E. Lighting:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development
will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and
general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished:
1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous
interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site
features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate
manner.
2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting
Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD
documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements,
and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for
residential development.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 7
"'~..J
Staff Finding
The applicant has indicated full compliance with the City's lighting code will be
achieved.
F. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area:
If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or
recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed
PUD, the following criteria shall be met:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the
property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the
various land uses and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation
areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or
dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a
similar manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future
residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
No such common space has been proposed.
G. Utilities and Public Facilities:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose
any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the
public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed
utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply
with thefollowing:
1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the
development.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be
mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the
developer.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for
the additional improvement.
Staff Finding
The applicant will be required to provide service upgrades as necessary. An electrical
transformer may be necessary. No City utility agencies have requested oversizing.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 8
,,<."",,",
....->'
'...'
H. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1 & 2 apply to Minor PUD
applications):
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily
accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides
adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use
of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development
shall meet the following criteria:
1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate
access to a public street either directly or through and approved private
road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use.
Staff Finding
Proper access is maintained to all lots and structures with this proposal.
2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking
arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding
the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be
improved to accommodate the development.
3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or
connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access
to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated
. public trail casements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and
maintenance.
4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted
specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate
manner.
5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained
under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public usc to
ensure appropriate public and emergency access.
6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or
for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical.
Staff Finding
Staff does not foresee this proposal creating undue congestion on the eXlstmg road
network. The number of expected trips is not expected to necessitate infrastructure
improvements. The ability to stage up to 4 cars should alleviate queuing issues within
H yman Avenue. Staff has included a condition requiring the operator to not allow cars to
be left unattended within the right-of-way.
No trail/bike path recommendations of the AACP or historic use patterns affect this site.
This entryway has been properly designed. Staff believes these criteria have been met.
1. Phasing of Development Plan.
The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not
create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners
and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of
Park Place Exhibit A Page 9
."',,",
"",......
"- .""
the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the
adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with
the following:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a
complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later
phases.
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-
lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the
PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any
mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective
impacts associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
No phasing has been proposed.
Subdivision
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for
Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements.
1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the area.
3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future
development of surrounding areas.
Staff Finding
See comments under PUD Section.
4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable
requirements of this Title.
Staff Finding
Staff finds this application in compliance with applicable regulations of the City,
considering the proposed conditions of approval.
B. Suitability of Landfor Subdivision
Park Place Exhibit A Page 10
'-...,
"
a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land
unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep,
mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other
natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or
welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision.
b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed
to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature
extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs.
Staff Finding
The land is suitable for subdivision. No natural hazards exist that affect the division of
this land. The proposed subdivision provides an efficient use of land witl1 no
unnecessary public costs.
C. Improvements. The improvements setforth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided
for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See,
Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met:
1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to
the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or
the goals of tile community.
2. The Applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested
and provide justification for each variation request, providing design
recommendations by professional engineers as necessary.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has consented to install the required subdivision improvements that are
applicable to this proposal as is detailed in the application. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling
units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the
requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which
is comprised of new dwelling units shall he required to provide affordable housing in
compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota
System.
Staff Finding
The new dwelling units are affordable according to the City's regulations and IS m
compliance with the Citys growth management regulations.
E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication
Standards setforth at Chapter 26.630.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 11
"
"'"
, J
Staff Finding
School Impact Fees are assessed based on one-third the value of the unimproved land
divided by the proposed number of residential units on a per acre basis. The City of Aspen
verifies the unimproved land value of the lands underlying the Project to be 2,961,700 based
on information from the Pitkin County Assessor. This represents $10,750,870 per acre.
One-third of this value divided by the proposed 2 units results in a $1,791,823 per acre
standard for calculating the impact fee. The subject subdivision is not conducive to locating
a school facility and a cash-in-lieu payment shall be accepted. School Impact Fees are as
follows, payable at building permit issuance:
1/3 land Land Per unit Number
value per Dedication Impact Fee of Units
unit per standard
acre (acres)
One bedroom $1,791,823 .0012 $2,150 I $2,150
Two Bedroom $1,791,823 .0095 $17,022 0 0
Three $1,791,823 .0162 $29,028 1 $29,028
Bedroom
Four Bedroom $1,791,823 .0248 $44,437 0 0
Total: $31,178
Amendments to the project shall include an adjustment to this impact fee according to the
above schedule.
F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to
applications for which all growth management development allotments have been
granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter
26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable
Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth
management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth
management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to
the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, ~ 2)
Staff Finding
The City cannot review the GMQS application until the September 15,2003, application
deadline has passed. This is to ensure all applications for the year's allotment are
reviewed and scored concurrently. The subdivision review is subject to successful
GMQS review and the entitlement cannot be perfected without growth management
allotments. Conditions of approval have been included to address this issue and staff
believes the criterion has been met.
Conditional Use
26.425.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses.
When considering a development application for a conditional use, the appropriate
review board shall consider whether all ofthe following standards are met, as applicable.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 12
1. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and
standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone
district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other
applicable requirements of this Title; and
Staff Finding
See comments under PUD Section.
2. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding
land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposedfor development; and
Staff Finding
The proposal is expected to compliment uses and activities within the downtown vicinity.
The proposed use and operating characteristics are compatible with the development
pattern and character of the immediate surrounding uses.
3. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed
conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise,
vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and
Staff Finding
Staff expects off-site impacts will be minimal. The proposal is not expected to generate
noise, trash, odors, vibrations, or have service deliveries that would be unexpected in this
mixed-use area. Traffic and pedestrian circulation are improved with the proposal.
Visually, the parking garage use has been masked with residential development along the
Hyman Avenue fa9ade and will have appropriately-designed parking entrances along the
street. Staff believes this design is sensitive to the surrounding properties and more than
adequatel y minimizes the affects of the parking garage use.
4. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use
including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks,
police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical
services, drainage systems, and schools; and
Staff Finding
Sufficient infrastructure exists to accommodate the use.
5. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental
needfor increased employees generated by the conditional use; and
Staff Finding
The applicant is providing employee housing to accommodate the use. The
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has reviewed the proposal witl1 their Board
and has found the application providing employee housing in excess of the City's
Park Place Exhibit A Page 13
requirements. An audit condition has been included to ensure adequate housing is
provided in the case where current employee projections are exceeded.
Rezoning
Note: Requiredfor PUD Overlay. No change to underlying Office Zone is proposed.
Section 26.310.040, Standards Applicable to Rezoning
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions ofthis title.
Staff Finding:
The proposed PUD Overlay is consistent with the Land Use Code and does not represent
any potential conflicts. The parking garage concept is unique and the PUD review
process allows a broader discussion on the merits of such a proposal. The PUD Overlay
also allows for the parcel to be split and the existing Hannah Dustin building to remain
unaltered. Staff believes the PUD Overlay is appropriate and desired and is
recommending approval.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Please refer to comments related to the AACP under the PUD section. In summary, staff
believes this application is in compliance with the AACP.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and
neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Finding:
No change to the underlying zoning is being proposed, only a PUD overlay. The Overlay
provides for a greater discussion and involvement of neighboring property owners as to
the compatibility of the proposed development. Staff believes the proposal meets this
standard.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety .
Staff Finding:
The PUD Overlay will not be increasing the allowable density of the parcel as the Office
Zone District provides for the density being contemplated. A parking garage is a
conditional use in this zone district and effects of traffic generation and safety are being
addressed through the conditional use review and the PUD review.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to
which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of snch
facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage
Park Place Exhibit A Page 14
facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency
medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
The utility and infrastructure needs for tl1e project have been addressed in the PUD
application. Because of the location of the development and existing capacities, no
significant up-grades are required to accommodate this development. Improved electrical
service will be required and the upgrades will be paid for by the applicant and are not
expected to be borne by the general public.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes the proposed zoning overlay and the proposed development do not
represent adverse impacts upon the natural environment. Sufficient criteria to evaluate
potential impacts on the natural environment are included as PUD criteria and the overlay
actually ensures the community a greater degree of scrutiny.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with
the community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
The overlay requires a greater degree of review than would otherwise be required and
compatibility issues regarding proposed heights, FAR, and the proposed parking garage
use can be more thoroughly evaluated with the PUD overlay.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject
parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff finding:
There has been a philosophical discussion in the past several years with respect to
growth, affordable housing, preservation of rural lands, and the advantages of density
within compact communities. Generally the current concept encourages higher densities
within traditional townsites and preservation open and rural lands between city centers.
This shift in philosophy can be seen in the Interim Citizen Housing Plan, the 2000
AACP, and in the reports and discussion of the Infill Program. This shift requires new
thinking in relation to housing the automobile and private sector involvement in serving a
strengthened market for convenient parking. At the same time, significant anxiety exists
concerning increased building mass and intensity of land uses.
Staff believes these conditions supports this overlay as it requires a more rigorous review
and balancing of these issues.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
title.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 15
....~''-
Staff Finding:
The additional review and involvement of the neighborhood is in the public interest. The
overlay does not grant the applicant any additional development rights or reliance. Staff
believes this standard is met.
Residential Design Standards
This application fails to meet several of the Residential Design Standards. The
practicability of applying these standards to such as development is difficult and staff
believes the proposed development creates constraints and conditions not favorable to
reaching compliance with all the standards.
The following standards are not being adequately addressed:
Secondary Mass
- Requires a portion of the FAR be detached from the mam
building.
- Requires a porch be developed on the front fa9ade.
- Requires 20% of the front fa9ade to be one story in height.
Porch
One Story Element
Staff believes that compliance with these standards would detract from the project and
that the combination of uses within the project dictates the architecture of the building.
Staff believes the proposed architecture is appropriate and adequately provides a
residential aesthetic on Hyman Avenue fa9ade on the upper levels of the building.
Staff recommends tl1e residential .design standards be waived for this project and the
architecture ~f the building be guided by the PUD standards.
GMOSExemption for AH
Section 26.470.070(J), Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption
Section 26.470.070(J) oftl1e Regulations provides that, "All affordable housing deed
restricted in accordance witl1 the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing
designee shall be exempt [from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures]."
Review is by City Council. The section goes on to state that,
The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this Section shall
include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the
proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of
dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed,
specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the
dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed
price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing a total of two (2) affordable housing units that are to be deed
restricted as a Category I-one bedroom rental unit and a Category 3- three bedroom
Park Place Exhibit A Page 16
rental units. Staff feels that there certainly still is a need for the development of
affordable housing in that we are still under the projected need of 800 to 1300 additional
affordable housing units that is set forth in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan's
Housing Policies. Staff believes the proposed site is located in an appropriate location
for the development of affordable housing in close proximity to the commercial core and
well within the Urban Growth Boundary as is mandated by the AACP. Additionally, the
Housing Authority has reviewed the proposal and has indicated that units are consistent
with the requirements of the affordable housing guidelines with respect to the size,
layouts, and Categories proposed.
Staff has included a condition requiring the developer to provide sufficient assurance to
the City that these rental units will remain affordable considering the State Supreme
Court's ruling in the Telluride affordable housing case. This has been accomplished in
the past with other developments proposing rental affordable housing and is expected to
be satisfied in this instance. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
Park Place Exhibit A Page 17
...".,....'-~^.-.-,..-,..~,'_.~..,".....'._"..~._----._-""_._"'-...<--~~ ,.
-W~'l~\r ~
"""""
MEMORANDUM
To: Development Review Committee
From: John Niewoehner, Community Development Engineer,
DRC Caseioad Coordinator
Date: July 7, 2003
Re: Park Place Private ParkinQ Facilitv
Attendees:
James Lindt, Community Deveiopment Department
Chris Bendon,Community Development Department
Nick Adeh, Engineering Department
Denis Murray, Building Department
Brian Flynn, Parks Department
John Niewoehner, Community Development Department
Tim Ware, Parking Department
Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer
Jannetle Whitcomb, Environmental Health
Stan Clauson, Planner Representing Applicant
Brain McNellis, Planner Representing Applicant
Peter Fornell, Applicant
Jeff Halferty, Architect for Applicant
At the July 7,2003 meeting, the Development Review Committee reviewed the following project:
Park Place Private ParkinQ Facilitv: A private parking facility is proposed for 300 South Spring
Street near the intersection of Spring St. and East Hyman Ave. The proposed garage will
accommodate approximateiy 99 parking spaces and will have seven levels including three below
grade. Besides the parking area and garage office, two apartments are planned for the second
and third floors.
This was the second DRC meeting for this project. The first DRC meeting was October 9, 2002.
These minutes are not meant to duplicate comments from the October DRC.
DRC COMMENTS
1. EnQineerinQ Department:
. Due to past bad experiences, the City does not allow soil nails to extend into ROW or
utility easements. Investigating the use of soil hardening techniques is recommended.
. Street Impact Fee: At the time of the building permit application, a street impact fee will
be accessed that accounts for the construction wear and tear on the streets.
. The Engineering Department supports the Applicants plan to pave the alley as long as
the alley improvements are engineered to accommodate drainage.
. Traffic Management Plan: At the time of building permit application, a traffic
management plan needs to be submitted that defines the construction hauling routes
and methods to shuttle workers to the construction site.
. Are there ground water issues? Groundwater could potentially increase the cost of
construction and operation. Dewatering operations cannot pump groundwater out of
the aquifer unless adequate water rights are obtained.
Page 2 of 3
July 7, 2003
Park Place
. Extensive geologic and soils are required to determine to determine whether
groundwater issues exist and how the building can be constructed without adversely
affecting adjacent properties and the ROW.
. Building foundation footers cannot extend into the ROW.
. Vehicles and materiai storage cannot block the use of the alley by emergency vehicles.
2. ZoninQ
. There are questions regarding the floor area of the structure. The racks that support
the cars are not real building floors but neither is the building an open shell. This is a
question for P&Z to settle. The PUD can be used to define the floor area.
. The applicant should use the PUD to request that the project be exempted from the
City's residential design standards.
. Parks and school impact fees will need to be paid for the affordable housing units.
. The project needs to be renamed. There are too many places in Aspen with a similar
name.
3. ParkinQ Department:
. Prior to the start of the project the City needs to know the frequency and duration of
street and alley closings. How will the project construction adversely affect the
neighboring properties' access and parking?
. The traffic management pian must describe how emergency vehicies will have
continual access to the construction site and adjacent properties. In addition, parking
spots on the street must be purchased for construction vehicles including worker's
vehicles.
4. Parks Department:
. Root barriers are to be placed around new trees to prevent future buckling of the
sidewalk.
. Parks Dept. recommends that the spruce tree be cut down instead of trying to
transplant it.
5. BuildinQ Department:
. Structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and for the
residential area (res-check).
. No access is shown to the mechanical room.
. Must fulfill the requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units.
. Disability access to the bathroom and the vehicle pickup area must be defined.
. One fire sprinkler system is needed for the entire building.
. As part of the lot split, it is advisable that the parking garage have the zero lot line
setback instead of the neighboring building.
7. City Water Department: no comments at this time
8. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: (by phone)
. Will there be a back-up generator? If so, there will be fuel tank issues.
. There will need to be containment for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system.
. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
Page 3 of 3
July 7, 2003
Park Place
o Will the garage be broom cleaned or cleaned with water? If water is used, there will
need to be floor drains. Floor drains will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will
require an oil/sand separator. In case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must
be sized to accommodate fire flows.
o Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay applicable fees.
9. Environmental Health:
o The applicant needs to provide a construction noise suppression plan.
o The Environmental Health needs to refine the expected trip generation numbers based
on an improved understanding of the project. Preliminary estimates determined that
garage would generate 952 trips per day. Vehicles trips cause air pollution.
o The paving of the alley and the construction of sidewalks will help mitigate for the
impacts of the vehicle trips resulting form the project.
/DRC/ParkPlaceDRC#2
MEMORANDUM
~
TO:
James Lindt, Community Development
FROM:
Cindy Christensen, Housing Office
DATE:
July 16,2003
RE:
PARK PLACE PUDI707 E. HYMAN AVENUE REFERRAL
707 E. Hyman; Parcel ill # 2737-182-27-001
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval to subdivide four lots and develop a parking structure
on two of the lots.
BACKGROUND: The structure will be located at 707 East Hyman Avenue where there is
currently an A-frame. The structure will accommodate 99 vehicles, contain a small office space
and two deed restricted affordable housing units with a total of four bedrooms. Parking for the
office and the residential units will be included as part of the commercial parking facility.
According to Section 26.425.040E, Conditional Uses, the applicant commits to supply affordable
housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use.
The applicant states that the facility will employ an average of five employees a year (a supervisor
and a parking attendant at low season and a supervisor plus two parking attendants at high season X
two shifts daily). There could also be the potential for a part-time bookkeeper/manager. Therefore,
there could be a total of six employees. Sixty percent of the six employees would be a mitigation
requirement of 3.6. The applicant is proposing to construct a one-bedroom unit in addition to a
three-bedroom unit. These units mitigate 4.75 FTE's.
The applicant is proposing that the one-bedroom be deed-restricted at the Category I rate and that
the three-bedroom be deed-restricted at the Category 3 rate. The square footages for the units are as
follows:
One-bedroom
11rree-bedroom
675 square feet
1,682 square feet
4
The minimum square foot for a Category lone-bedroom is 600 square feet and 1,200 square feet
for a Category 3 three-bedroom unit. The applicant exceeds the minimum square footages for the
units being proposed.
RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board met on this issue on July 16 and approved the
application with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall mitigate housing for a total of 4.75 new employees based upon the
applicant's needs. However, the applicant shall conduct an audit immediately after one
full fiscal year of operation for the proposed parking structure under the following terms:
. The applicant shall retain an auditor and shall gain prior approval from the Housing
Office Operations Manager for the selection ofthe auditor.
. The applicant shall be fully responsible for all fees associated with retaining an auditor.
Should the audit show an increase in the number of employees, over six FTE's, the applicant
shall return to the Housing Authority under the following terms:
. The applicant shall provide deed restricted, affordable housing for any additional
employees of the new facility.
. The applicant shall abide by the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines in
effect at the time of the audit.
2. The applicant shall deed restrict the studio unit to a Category 1 and the three-bedroom unit
to a Category 3.
3. The rental structure for the units shall not exceed maximum rental rate for a Category 2 unit
and a Category 3 unit as specified above.
4. The employees to be housed in the deed-restricted units shall meet the qualification criteria
contained within the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines.
5. The tenants shall meet the minimum occupancy requirements for the units proposed.
6. The applicant shall agree to a structured deed restriction for the units such that I/I0th of I
percent of the units is deed restricted in perpetuity to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority, or the applicant may propose other means that the Housing Authority determines
acceptable.
7. The deed restriction shall be filed concurrently with the Certificate of Occupancy and shall
state the following conditions for the units:
a. The deed restrictions on the affordable housing units shall be in perpetuity to the
rental price terms as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing
Guidelines in affect at the time of Amended Approval of the Master Plan.
b. The unit rental prices shall be no greater than allowed under the Affordable
Housing Guidelines that are in affect at the time of Final Plat Approval.
c. The Housing Office shall qualify all tenants under the Affordable Housing
Guidelines.
2
..".
MEMORANDUM
$
TO:
James Lindt, Planner
P"
FROM:
:::0
Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer
RE:
Park Place-Commercial Parking
DATE:
July 8, 2003
The applicant is proposing to subdivide one lot totaling 12,000 square feet into two 6,000
square foot lots which comply with the minimum lot size for the underlying Office (0)
zoning. The applicant is proposing to maintain the Hannah Dustin office building on
Lots A and B and build a parking garage on Lots C and D.
Dimensional Requirements:
The applicant is requesting variances from setbacks, height and floor area requirements.
These variances will be handled through the PUD process. Due to the unique
configuration of the parking spaces, the FAR should be defined and established through
the PUD. Also, if the applicant shifts the lot line for UBC requirements, the minimum lot
size for the RMFzoning must be varied as well.
Residential Design Standards:
As all residential development in the City of Aspen must meet the Residential Design
Standards, the applicant should request to be exempt from these standards for the
proposed affordable housing units.
Impact fees:
Park impact fees and school impact fees will be calculated and must be paid at the time of
building permit issuance.
Lighting Code:
All exterior lighting must comply with Section 26.575.150 of the Land Use Code.
Trash and Utility Service Requirements:
Per Section 26.575.060 of the Municipal Code, all utility/trash service areas must be
fenced, a minimum of fifteen (15) linear feet shall be reserved for box storage, utility
transformers or equipment, or building access, and a minimum of five (5) linear feet shall
be reserved for trash facilities. The applicant has not met this requirement but it may be
varied via the PUD.
\~ /
Subdivision and Project Name:
Due to life, health and safety issues, tl1e project and subdivision name must be changed.
There are already several subdivision within the City and County which incorporation
"Park Place" into their name and the emergency service require that new projects have
distinguishable names to avoid confusion during an emergency.
,
o.r~
1;
C". ,/
" #
To:
James Lindt, Planner .
--
From: Jinx Caparrella
Electric Department
RE: Park Place PUD - 707 E Hyman Ave.
Date: July 14,2003
I have to talk to someone about the electrical needs at this
location. It seems they want 3 phase and a voltage of 277/480.
We do not have that voltage there at the site.
They will have to buy a transformer of that voltage and
provide an easement for the transformer. Depending on the size of
the transformer they may have to buy two of them - one for the
service and also a spare.
o
o
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
~
..e"
Paul Smith * Chairman
Michael Kelly * Vice- Chair
] ohn Keleher * Sec/Treas
July 15, 2003
Frank Loushin
Roy Holloway
Bruce Matherly, Mgr
James Lindt
Community Development
130 S Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Park Place PUD
Dear James:
The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient collection system and
treatment capacity to serve this proposed project. Service is contingent upon compliance with the
District's rules, regulations and specifications which are. on file at the District office.
The applicant will be required to submit a detailed drainage plan for the District's review and
approval. All clear water connections such as outdoor floor drains, roof drains, and perimeter
drains are strictly prohibited. Sand and oil separators will be required for the parking garage
plumbing plan and must be reviewed and approved by the District prior to construction. In order
to protect the public collection system, all plans for soil nailing in the alley must be approved by
the District prior to final design approval. A containment plan will be required for the use and
storage of glycol and hydraulic oils. A tap permit can be completed as soon as detailed plans
become available. The tap permit will estimate the total connection fees for the project. All fees
must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
&-.-<A-- ~ ~ ~
Bruce Matherly
District Manager
565 N. Mill St., Aspen, CO 81611! (970)925-3601 ! FAX (970)925-2537
~;fb~
I'"
.....,
'"
-
f~f~
Bd11 blr 12
LAW OFFICES OF
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.c.
HERBERT S. KLEIN
hsklein@rof.net
LANCE R. COTE *
cote@rof.net
MADHU B. KRISHNAMURTI
madhu@rof.net
201 NORTH MILL STREET
SUITE 203
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
Telephone (970) 925-8700
Facsimile (970) 925-3977
August 13, 2003
,
-t'h ioO}
,
. also admitted in California
Via Hand Deliverv
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Park Place Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Conditional Use, etc.
Dear Chris and Honorable Members of the Planning Commission:
I am writing to you on behalf ofthe 700 E. Hyman Condominium Owners' Association (the
"Association") concerning the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility application for a parking
structure to be located at the corner of Spring St. and Hyman A venue. The Association has serious
concerns about the adverse impacts that this project will have on the neighborhood and the City at large.
The 700 E. Hyman Condominiums are located directly across Hyman Avenue from the proposed parking
structure.
Among the Association's concerns are the following issues:
I. Traffic ImDacts. The application is devoid of any traffic study demonstrating that the traffic
generated from a 99 space parking garage would not adversely affect the neighborhood. The proposed
garage (to be constructed on a small 6,000 sq. ft. lot) will use an elevator to shuttle cars in and out of a
6 story building (3 floors below grade and 3 above grade). We can imagine the line-up of cars waiting
to enter while the elevator makes its rounds and cars are pick-up and dropped off. The application
indicates that this small site only has the capacity to queue four cars at one time. The location of this
garage near the intersection creates questions about the potential for grid-lock, snarling traffic and
blocking turning movements. The impacts of adding a large number of vehicle trips per day to this
location needs to be evaluated before anfiiecision on this project is made.
At the sketch plan review with the City Council, this concern was articulated and the applicant
heard that a traffic study was necessary. The applicant has ignored this and simply states that the garage
will not generate traffic since the traffic is already coming into town. However, its position misses the
point. This facility will be a traffic magnet. New traffic, not presently heading for this neighborhood,
will be drawn to this intersection. How many cars? We do not know. Will there be more cars than at
present? Absolutely!
-
'-'
~.......
""'"
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
August 13, 2003
Page 2
Furthermore, with the project's primary intent of selling parking spaces, we have no idea how
many spaces will be available for the public. One can easily imagine many vehicles lined up to park, but
only a few spaces available for public use. Traffic circulation issues are of great significance in both
PUD standards and a Conditional Use evaluation. The application is completely silent with respect to
these concerns.
2. Environmental Oualitv. The noise and fumes from so many cars and resulting congestion
is likely to degrade the environment in this block which is composed entirely of residential and office
uses. High turnover retail uses are not present on this block and it has a quieter environment than the
commercial core blocks to the west. Traffic on this block is mostly through traffic and not the result of
destination uses present on the block. Placing a parking garage in this location will certainly increase
air pollution, noise and fumes and their concomitant adverse health affects. Presently, there is no late
night activity on this block. The parking garage will generate its adverse affects morning, noon and into
the night.' How much noise does the elevator make? How much exhaust will the cars waiting to get in
and out and backed up at the intersection generate? The residents of this block should not have to bear
this burden. Nothing in the application addresses these concerns. No air quality studies are present. No
noise studies. Only the applicant's glib statements that these problems do not exist.
3. Use of PUD Variations. The application seeks PUD designation so that underlying (0)
office zone district requirements can be modified to accommodate the unique needs of this development,
like greater lot coverage, floor area and height. Neighborhood compatibility of the proposed use and
structure should be the paramount concern in any decision to grant the flexibility that PUD designation
allows. So too must the application be exemplary and provide an overriding public benefit to justify the
variations. It must be supportive of and further realization of community goals.
At this point, we cannot imagine how this use could be deemed to be compatible with the
adjacent and nearby residential and office uses. The application touts compatibility with the
neighborhood of this single purpose monolith. We fail to understand how the applicant can make this
assertion with a straight face. The neighborhood consists of residential and limited office uses. The
parking garage will utilize half the length of its frontage as driving lanes and staging areas, blocking
pedestrian use of the sidewalk. Cars lined up to get into the facility will further diminish the pedestrian
and residential experience.
The application attempts to justify this project's eligibility for PUD treatment because 18 years
ago a parking study was done that favored a "super block" project that would have included some of the
block that is on the other side of the alley from the proposed parking structure. That project was an
'It is curious that the application does not address hours of operation. We must assume
that this operation will function 24x7.
-.
-
/""
....<,+#JI
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
August 13, 2003
Page 3
integrated development of City Market and the Bell Mountain Lodge properties. The existing City
Market parking lot would have been incorporated into a new structure and a variety of uses would have
been included in the development. The study proposed a 300 space parking facility that accessed from
Original Street. That project did not happen. It is specious to assert that this parking structure is what
was intended to be developed in that project or that the former study has any relevance to the current
proposal. We also note that the study assumed that 20,000 square feet of new commercial space would
be built annually and drove increased demand for parking. We do not believe that anywhere near that
amount of new commercial space has been constructed.
The PUD variations are sought so that this small lot can contain a large parking structure. An
additional floor of height and almost twice the allowable FAR than what is allowed in this zone district
(the Office zone has a .75/1 FAR - the application seeks 1.31/1) is sought. Based on the plans submitted,
the gross square footage is about 16,000 square feet on a 6000 square foot lot! If this was an office
building or a residential use, both of which are allowed by right, it is highly unlikely that any variations
in height or FAR would be granted. Why then should a conditional use such as this be entitled to more?
Also of great concern is that if this experiment in automated parking fails, what becomes of this
building? What other uses and impacts will be created in the neighborhood when it is converted to some
other use. What mitigation will the City be able to impose to address those impacts? The application asks
the City to take a leap of faith, but provides absolutely no information about the economic viability of
this use.
Questions arise as to the fiscal impacts to the City. Ifmany spaces are sold, the public will have
little opportunity to use these spaces. If few are sold, will the parking rate schedule be competitive with
the City's? Will the parking structure survive? Ifit is able to compete with the City, will it divert funds
to the private sector that now help to provide free bus service in town and subsidize the Rio Grande
Parking Structure? What about the loss of sales taxes that might otherwise be generated from
commercial uses of this property? What does the application say about these questions? Nothing.
4. This is not Infill. The application argues in several places that this project "furthers the goal
of infill." This analogy to infill development is misplaced. The infill program is intended to provide for
a mix of uses that will revitalize downtown. The proposed development is a parking garage (albeit with
a few required affordable housing apartments). It is ironic that the poster child for the infill program was
an undesirable use, e.g. a parking lot, and now the infill program is used as a justification to create
another parking lot - and worse, a large parking garage. If the City rezones this block to C-l, as is
suggested in the infill report, it is with the intention of fostering a mix of uses that generate sales taxes
for the City and vitality for the core. The argument that this garage will take away so much business
from the other, undesired parking lots, so they can be developed for commercial uses makes no sense.
It is not supported by any information to support its theory. It is the current code requirements and
--.
.......,,'"
-
"'..,.,
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
August 13, 2003
Page 4
exactions that make these parking lots unable to be redeveloped, not parking demand. If there were fewer
people willing to pay for parking on them, they could still not be economically redeveloped. All we are
getting here is another parking lot!
Summarv. While we agree that people need a place to park their cars, this proposal is simply not
compatible with the other uses on the block. Ironically, this development proposal perpetuates the
current reality that the highest and best use for downtown property is parking. The proposed
development could generate somewhere around $5-6 million in sales of parking spaces with no
corresponding public benefits. Its suggested community benefits are speculative and based on an
untested concept - that purchaser's of parking spaces will rent them out to the public when not used by
them.
The City should not permit this incompatible use, with its significant off-site impacts in this
neighborhood. If the developer wants to experiment with downtown development, then perhaps a true
mixed use project would be more appropriate here rather than a parking garage.
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns.
Very truly yours,
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
By:
/
/ ./
~\." /~/// /'
~-;I ,,'
~
Herbert S. Klein
sg\700 E Hyman Condo Assn\bendon-lt3
'_>'_'_' .. ._.~.,>,..... '__.'~_'_<'~~"_ " ,_.. ~~_~_'''''''''''_''''_''~'''-_'_'_._'-____''''''~'.,.~._",.,___..~..____~__._.._........._._..._k._..^_~___. ""....,
~
~~~1We. 6 . -\
~JI -* \ 1,IZ,cm 't 1?~ ~V\wJ..-. ~-- f- ~W\L.
Y f1 ~r~,,- ~M.b1 ~
II 2, Mt- ~k \ bw< ~. ~ ~
il
~~ ~fZwvl - CVV\otl~r v<;e. \- of.O~~.
,
,
! -t ~lW, w 'jiQ).
!'~~M~
I t~(~
I 1li<; c.~~
I
I
i,
I[i~~ ~ ~ 1~
l'jaY4).t p{J'J _ "UM~(
11~(j ~la ~~.
,
~V\ ~ ~em ~I~ ~ f(/I<< ~~
,i 1rV.~ ~~i&Vl .~~ ~~ \(yt) ~ittMtt\frif7
ilt~ ~~V\~ qo~ vyck~~.
ill \R4l~1~\ ~v~
II,
IIJn~
111~~~W\' ~\
i'
Ii ~ IN frv~ l ~ ~
Ii, Vt'1Wl~~~'
-.....". '_'~"'_----'~--'''-.'_---_._,
1'1
~'~__~"~^e,~",,_,_,_'''ft_.'.~M'
....
. ,;./
.
> ,
., .
~Puw<< ~(/I\f f~
~~-t:t ~/O~. M r"P-~
-..~
1:1 1?iw.. ttM
t Uhtdt:O w~ller
t ~ ~ <j1.~r-k4-#~ 6~,.,.~ 'T~
j,1 ~s ~t0 ~r
.; "~ ~M~ f{r ~~ Uhh"V)
tU Jo~V\ Coif<<
iN ~Ho ~rtfor. 1?m:divr Uw1W\0W?
,~ _.
" N,. eel ~ dol.
i ~ Vi) WA ~ '7i <Zfl, of ~"' I ~viLQ..,
,K) .:]oh~ ~fk~ " ! ~ ~~r
, ,N'. ~~ CA ~\L8 ,t7?~of CuM'f'NY\
l~ ~Y'8tJ\ ~h' ~ GJJJMj}tv~
~ g~+~
i~ ~~ WA~~7
.N i61J~~ ~~
~ MIL;t'(,d ~~ full ~IV' ~~0 0rz~
. ~b ~ ~ a\~ ..,~I'V~~
~r I~' No ~lu~ \" ~
1)i~k, ~ irt-f-at & ~,
~" (%r'b? I ~r'S )
~
._~..~-~....-.,~....-,-,.~...._..."._--~"....--~-~_..~
ill
y fa1U\~~.
:fJ Pw,,,, ~~r
!~~~~
iil Lfl(j(~ f1rf
li,1(1 cpje; i11~1l;{.
Ir ~ ft1fler
If ~v4 Coal~
1 ! 1rall\~ '1tA\JrJA
[, t21r1 ~'f4e(
II#~
~;+'-- -
:1
i'l~btr~ ~~
"I
, ,
, !
ltIcit ~W\- f H-lJ ~Fhu '8h~Ilf0(".
"I ~VI"b 1v(t)~
;,J ,b~t/A~V't-'" ~~i?
, tJ>f- tJV/- r;f ck~y tJr ~.
"i ~o C;1Z1'IACAttr {w..I~'
l~W~fut_ ~Yw1vAf rze,vl~
10J!w~1 V\dr a. ~i~.
il~~ t1 ~;:--
!l~.O ~~ 1'>1
,
,
! !
~o ~liu ~t S;b~:: ~le~
1)M'SL 1M' jcct d~" If LM<J~ rl- ....~).lA~ l~ {Wbli'-
J1",~ ~.,....\t ~ - c;. kHJ~M\O ~ls.
I! &1 Zi' tAle. ~i~
.! c:;p,;de.- ~~V\r- 1V1.W"ec.~ ~G",~ C9w.~s (lJOr.
!I 'f1IF. is ~~- vp .
I 0WMu{ ~ ~ ~s ~ -fkv.~k1>Vih~.
.1 '(0 ~ ef aUW/vtJ ~.A- ~k~w
.) ~~ ~bl~
I Nk- ~ ~ ti.r ~~ vSt-jPlJD.
I ~-~D ~~ fwr~'
,I \J~D o\itevti<M
~ ~ 'PUbI~ ~h~
.J 006i0 ~W1(/(\I~ - <7cJr'fb-+ t\O c.A~ :.. ~.
" CiM'\VV\lMl'r l!~ -Tv ~~7 ah:v1- ~
4tJflZtN\d,z, ~;~ r~
x-
.Ull:D lvw-tM0le- (~~) V<)t ;- 'F f/;0t1J ~ - (Vltl~~
tJt> l~~ F ~l,t I...... \M."'-"i>'S. ~w:-.l t-
~t 1\0 ~~\ UWWWM~
~)<J - t 60""^-~ Is
Vt1r~~ - ~ ~ le11e-{ o#.? -4
/ uIJev\:""o - ~.fwW(tr\LQ, ~~ S .J Co.
%k -i6r flwt cali\. If a~ .
'., -..,.
fto-lr1
~
~ G\kw} ~
0A~)~ ~~,
(\J~ ~ ~ <Wf:1~
\'Jo ~ (}'" ~(/
17oec;l"+ Mebf- ~;-h~l u~. ~".
rt. -+ fU1) - t.M- k'"1~ "'- bJ-.."....~ l>v~~.
..I tad~?*1 A~ "-/ r1c....~
"I Cwvt~ ~v~ bove; ~ ~ ~.
"I 1ffiro l4 rAvv - ~.
!t4r- N* ~ p ~ ~ - t\t- ~Ne nt4oh~~?
r~ ~ -. f'l!-" ;;t;;'~J-r ~ 'Mio
.. ~~ Ij; rDlfJe,. \AJ.4, {vt\ ~tC/N~ ,
..L
it - N
a~ ~ HI
1\~tf^ \~1~
1~0 \~
^-_.~..,..~..^ ,,- ..-.
,
~*'
lD<<t<-
--..
..,
,
,
"!l1..b^
j,1~
,
i
"I
"I
4:20
\'J4- V\.OV\.-G'1'f+
rec..y~
. re."5~~~ oA~ C\.~.
i: ~I~b
feb- (/).~ Ct 4-1 Q~l:" ~{X4rv7.
~i1vWeJ rw- .~~- (/ I
1
.1/ iJcwly~. 12f,. ?~ t ~
\ ~ 1., ~1#oJd1. {tb
tw;Ii,1rh 011M\~ \b~Ad ~ ~/C0
\\A,.\vuJuuh~ ~?J$ = ~f:1~/S4k
~Cf7' vu'D 'P,:z. ,CA~C~{ (1fb7ft.l(If~).
tNv,tf-n._.
~i~,
UM~I1k~~ 1Jvil(~ ., i cap].
Auec,.:;~ ofhLe-.
(. M VV\\ n I bed\ I ~ ~,
VVD A-rp~l- \)i,,"e~c;~~~. ~70V\I~ ~ w) O-eJI'I'
~~W\.<v( \.X{.
, Svb4ivlSl~V1 splll- 'ftVl.e-t~. Ail,
b-1'Qs ~~ -fir M .
~\~ ~(;O ~.-? Arr.
lIP ut
~ ~. cx:\ t\ v:02- S~~v..- ~ -
~v6 ldt-U-cd
$ifr.CR .
~ ~nJleor' t1JUTJ C\I\ l& l~ 1)~~Wl5 ~
~CN'\$ ~ -ArP\iu-.~+-.
Q {Je..Ul VI"
<[I~d~~.
~~l~1- d0v\~'
~'1el\ \Mr iM~.
~~.
?U~ClU
~- 1hi-q~'
\b~\~ cM-<E,11e
8JZ C:Z;M- bw- ~~
\l?, \.c,..O 1erM ~',
~V6 @,k ~ Qi~ ~_
?Joel c;~. ~ <ieI- ~ ~/t1A~.
~fz.( RezP!'r~?
-0/1/ a(tt%tys k jV'k'tc: ;-tC.7 ~/14'''<:. --- -jPeE-,t;/,.,A.
WI II f,e ~~ s;.4'I
'Pr-I'OV~~ -to aa.L-pt ~ll-les ~-ft> ~ V€-4tU<S
~\ '1-h.. -tz.kl ~~J- ~ ~0f
IVWMDV6 ~ ~ ~ ~
Lese:., qpevt c;ive ~ t;.. kvr'7.
l~tM. rr~
~ 'b1W-- ~eltet~ -~l4-~~.
~ w4l~
~\-.~ <blttJ. <>~~,
~-J~h L........Alt' - ~ (-?we lA5'/- ~ ,^",fll bu'-H:.
Q(J.L-. kl VI~f-~"
~~. L61N\\Mvkr- DrtM~"';,.
.we. \o.\,,~ 6ood.;~ tA\(Z:>V\2>. 'p/.Gl.(Q.. buses.
Sp~16 st. : u~:v;r da[l\J~ / 6Je.r U'iecA.
"n~iw --tv ~lb~LltiM~ ~~.
AeA ~ Cor'~~.
~ ~'1dc:r bo"'d- ~~. 0eeJ. f'~:"2 ~~~.
+~ Ql' LAb'^~ No\~ Cll^~c;;f-M...
t-Jo ICtlJ;re~t ~ )?"'o\lc... U<;e.
Alp~-nve 0be- l~ ~~~.
,.: ~\ Mh-~- ~. G~~ ~ lW>r~'^7,b",~
A ~~ ~
LW~ ~11~. ~.
~~{ .f\fe.-
~ l~-v-A~.
4
~ ~~ D..~. l~ tJ.~.
~ ~ t'1yn>"l AfThv-~~bk.. h,CIV5i?, 7JJ '5[>>.Cl"::> -t' 4"t "- b~ "" )1-_
PW-fk ~I t\ b-r,~ ~~~
'3l'.k.i.JC<.tl WUJlO-- ~ bMer w""7'
WkJ ~ t100r up. t,./\t-.r wrt- d.auM. D.i\o+'Ler
fY'j~ (OAJ ~ w[ ,.../\ U
~"r ..:.. u~ - AH / (-e,:> c1.es.z,n .
~i~eA ~~. L9~ f;ee-f-.
~ Df~c"lbv- +- ~M ~c:..
1w~. oHt'u"~. dVvJ"'~ :... ~" CCM~~.
~~+ T"^1-e<A , V\oi~ ISwe.s ~ os\"o.,,\.cl I~
~b fn.,ffi" oH - 'btv~ ~ .
-Ik tc, b~0. p",l~b ~
,\o~\o\ II\\~~ \1o.te. r"-"'~ q 60~.
1f1z<~'o::- \,),,~ - h~< 0. ~<o..:. ~~.
1- JlI~,^ r~\I\c.;",. l~ e.~ rvhlt~ \P'-:'~ ~'<<l2S 00- ~~c....?
b. Nh to':>::.
~~ u..v-.b c.4.
t,t ~lnuV\tV\ l~
~~ . - · \}.a k~ ~ cAr\"5ICk ~ M cM~\-<);lA "Wt:>.
ut~~elfJA i0'l\I:)'roh'~~a.vw,..f, +- M ~d-C BlJ;p.
"'~',~ ~ pWXoP.':>. How w;l,L -fh,'~ hJff~
.. ~tr/i1,~ t-.J~-.:. io ltVv..U I ~ fk ~t-
"" EJ::A. 'Q~ ~. t1Vua~,!;J.-fo tLc.- puh!/6 .
~~ SD~'
.. ~:b\lh~ +- ~-~ ~'d.k- ~~.
. C0", ~ ~ 1ge ~e.J 01 Sor~.
· ~ploy~ ~
~. 1? ') -0.
- I
'1/2- .M~ -f> ~.~ l a.VI-\
i;~
~
.Vpt.ra..n'MtJ.-t r.5s~ - ~i~
~WI4--h~~ -il~ !OI.JV\.
lAfi11I\{ d t; /U.. Y lJ WVfVhlMJ /
~;"';~J :
P/1:' w..~~ -.
@ - /I1a~ filh 0,^o~tt1 skw:
/.:,j(w - ~ ~sy~ ~ - hCMJ Wl'~l t~d ~
L/P~ ' - ~ ~ .{- . N~!..-';"" ,s ,....J ,
- ~u.bhtc l)i.- -H.,ow wILt Qpa.CJ.4.,. ~ VV\~ cAVIlI(ubLt
- ttoU.16 -d N\I,-vtL- -h~
::-r. JMsec\'~,.
- A-ss'-'v1..'"'-'4 0+ ~ ~ -F:...-tv.lf'(... l1 ~ ~.
@ ~(}loy(.€. ~ ~ /1:J/~ &..-'O'f~
r ~ ~t. ~
el9 lNuV'-+ tD eN"~ ivo...fe, '<... S~7 (( ~
~~ lS-twi't. .
i j ~.!l Ov&''''-U~ -tu I~~ '5~ll rwt t1( ~
oPJ1'- -X ~'~ .
@ CAw/.5: $..e.. .h~~ 5 ~. ~ rA- ff(). Cl4- .
A-r1.Jve.ss ~ss;L;~~ ~ ~&O ~ ;+ hu.Y
OlAt[;vu{;-t> fuvfos<- - ~t ~ d1J ~ ~klb
. ~. (\trcr ~(~ \l~.
~~-h~ fj ~."'" +- tk ~
@ ~ C~ ~J
i~ ~ fbvr VftM-~
.
~~ ~Me~ ~ l1~r,
w
0.\\ @
,
~
~ U~~~
of ~ ~ UJ.
~? kbt~ Tl"J- ~e-cf' ~k~l ~~ wvK ~
~~.'S Mo~ OrcA'I"\CtItl-Q.., I as av~~ ~
D\/\-tIV k> -n1A.V--J. 'P~1 4= LS'SvCivlce cf C'- co.
-nuz., 'Pw1e:* ~Vvv~\ be ~ ~ ~ CviC FH- .~-I,
~ ~l{(MllU- ~ CL ~VV(;€ ct ~ o~ cu~{u,l.--\ '.
" nfflQ; ~b U~1cA \AQs-etltl <?w..,L( lu,^ w\~ ~ (~
Y., () ~ ~~ avJ Ll\t~tz.,-\iv",,~ of- -f{,\;~:) ~VI.A.bt(
r:,_~ _Or" I
,:,a<f1~ s~\\ ~lr ~ 1 o\..CL.eS~S ~ Cl~~~v\~
~~' '~~ Ovv~
G\M ch"J 'P~ VWt,~'\C(,~ C~CAY\'1 ex
(~~f ~~ ~~~ cwh't cv--
~. ~\f of. tk ~ C'Al\tX
~ ,4 6u---r;{,;t/ /wt- k fssud;f
~ 't ~ ,;:reef ~ fk al;s l1afc
.. trl-U/~
"'~~rvJw 7f/,
it9J CAfi of' ?~:z GWftr/7?' 4t~ jo qejdyt~
{,/db ~ (d-kr - ~\c.c ~.
~\Jo{~ W\ ~ ('fhtes - lA~ as,.?,
~~.
t1Y- aA~. ~ ~iYJ~ ~ O(IU~ ~-- u~,
,-/Z.
1(2 ~.~
(;, 106 20
It. z-
Ie,
/}d#f?r"/i?4' 15'~~.
?fA/-'). ~ c~de,
'S
I~
+
~
/~&
rf~' a~_
117~ Mi/Jif]
~!t&<--
/k1J /~ 11 rJpj~ ~d5. f= (#1AJ.
~W;~ flit ~ {!;v dw~.
;J(7/~ (~</r- t,<J~ ~ ~ <A-- ~II-,
(lW; uf catl/c;{ e!k~. ~ fly
'\ 7/'A/h'c rr /J,pf ACUes~ ~
~ . /._1-
mW~ /oaa,'1 '
c1Ue "1' liC/w n4 a I wbk-t,
fed C0(/;~J1~f,
(~VlII twvt::-, ds a lit 1~r/eJfyt.1L-f-~
CV0f, illt1i~.
~
~f{-l;uc:I- o~ of I~ .
.fina~ dckk IW /L4,ic'c V*,-.
~f j/~$f~ ?i'S 0'1 i'm./eJf~~,
~~h u""i ~ f1A11~~d.
7??tIh2, --- ~b~~
Que ~ -<f'S'
~>'1d:!, ) VWI1-ffS ~/'tl f&'~f Iv ;;Ub1t2
't) IJ~/~ fuels W.
1it))& rJ~-Het-~. ;ttrt47t 5;~' G2 f!I tof- ~f re#u1)
4I--foadr:...v i1 j~
t,f <fn'ff' I ILL.
~ ~ fY.'U/;R
~-
tJ~(~. 1P1!t~ a-- ~1 ~/o~", /'h-. ~k{
Tlc.rn-G M~~ ~ h/td~.
al/~ f ~II atfo C'/njY/i41
h 51f~c;6 /Vey.; (oil-- Ct f:t~ .
bait'- if L:1/?~I"1ttf0 hth2- {/A /'vvvu
~~1t. t-a{& hl;h~ Mis-6. JIltW Qv;<<- ~ukJU
~ Tte ~y rNJ/NJ. '~fy;/]I\.~ V\eeA '~"'G~'
~t ~d CiAv.. ut~r6 pAce; or p~,
'f,i G~~.
t 12~,
!J4 dlMl~ dr;f)::"l .
NOI<;e Gt- ~1F~' ~ dvv~~.
CJu, ~ ~.h ~~L .~ Wc;.
(;)
g;;k~ Not nt'^f (;ou;cfi~.
~('ul/I..CAJ 1(c.tV\vu?'-'2 {s.sve.
<:f' U(bCt~ des;2J ls",vE',
~~~ Co- L.c-~ .J-. [,"? k-w'f '
f4v'fC Az:{~ 1 r?t.o1s. (lev,</- s~.
~ Not. V\^~ r\~l r'v.-- S :\r- '--low v"- .
M(\ be, {Mbtiv ~f;+.
~, 4esfklzc'~ okcr,
fi6 wfflz~ (l:1-vW .+- j;~(.
~ ~ ~slb;'ltry. ,
~ '~/(,~~ ~ ~ /11~. ~n;
~. ~~ ~~~~.
1~ C:;>>vtd vf~7()a6:-. ~~;nrf ~.
7' (J~itft:...,
tAJovlJ uk (noft'a'&? /7 or to 1 j'?V/J/td ~
fivo. ~f- 01 ~. k.us-
;)5. JJ~ !J1w/~i>d C&hk-I.
6te0 ~ k- l;;15te~ ./vU;~ J1v07,
~ IG kd/ CAt/a:d C/tJ~ k'5fzv
~Je{/, ka( E7! ~'k dtUt
~ Prl
(}:SM/~. ~l'r~ ~rLz/
/ivV'?:/~. ~ 7/?rraf. 74R"- -l~_.
%rp';J r:;- ~ r~ed da'1 U~ hwr-~.
~v v?f k P&luftY .
fh:,~~ - 5,,'V1.(( ol.ta~s.
-
+
-
(- )
t)f 111
t
at- "1 .o?;J
f~
~(l/ 1~(lI
~tiI~
fire 6:l:k.
~IM ~ ~{1Jd.1l1 ' "S~. ....Jo\~ ~~'"' I ~l~ '^~L-z
~e -~~
Ne.JJ ~~.
~ - hO\o/ rec.J c.."I~Iia.+t-- ,^,,:.wl-r's.
-
't1M1es - Cc."S. 1\0\- r\M,^'~.
~t\"~ [l~aVlC€":I ~ ~ rAf/rf.,..; 'PV.
1 /2I,{fi0 Cj~~'
6?vl!=. . 9)?C-
1'c)~~~,
a\J~.
(,.M({1. \..~
~~~,
"pUO ~s.
h,c>J ~ 'to clw.,L
~~
8'D l-tcv/ ~*I,
~~
~l.
r?~A(.
{((Met' of vW'l~Wp
~. M q.>iVlIc.o-- -'l1'~'t,
~ ~!~~ lts ~~ r'-~'"
fAevw Mr\d(
V\<J ~ r~' ~it s{vulvr6 or Dp.
I
f.ooe~ - ~\<;.e 0\- 1>>w- e.~.
~ kv-- t<+-'lkr d~
'\-\.> ~~i~
~'D Grn.-..k G.Ne~. ,'^?
V c;" \-e.k -ft:, reolu~ eu~z.c~ft<>v>.
,--
Jv\"'", - 11\.0.
lArjU (.eo~1 +o...f-4-ic..... t~'5Ii~
1:......~ _' ,
~IYlG - o..vewl.l' (!.~.,. ~i"l.
~'c.- - 0o~s.e.
c)M7f
-
I,^~;~.
~-- ~d.s ~ ~ ~WW>\:~
~t~k vJ) vW~Vtbw~..{. 'Sd-~s.
l'1Y\!11e.- BcoV'. Urc.b:.l\~. of- iw", ~, K.",,A sid~ oi--i?NJIA.
fluJ 1v ~<l(4' peC~~S.
v02 V ~yllJe.- pw~ s~p .
i ~ U"~""fC1f~ <?,'tes.
i drive. wwvJ ~l 1w i'"'~''7'
~t7Ui'S - pft( Ie.tw ~Wl? {W ~7'
wr u'l ~Pwr ~
friV&e ~~ ~ pwtZ6 ~.
f
~~
/I
III' Or'
S'&- re.~D.
eM r~v-\1cL. 0o\~.
~cNv>:; "t or- (0 f"^'
" ~. hQ..Jl"S.
~;cpe.. t riov f,. co.
~().)I'~ j">./l<-,', \1\<) ~~ "A~.
-Pvl'" cok ckv,Ct.
(') ~1I\"""l.
~\Cl"'- /TVct~\- l"\ "5f~<>'. 1ve. , f\O~~ ~.(('",..\.
~.... cOcM.. 9y-shvt .
~Icyee ~-fY.
~fI\.- ,,~ eM. c....,,"...l c>~l repo:t._
1'1 '5p:.~5 ~ (l'~ ~
put,)..2- use.
.vu\~ ~.
'f ld
111m. - 0.
~\ ~t\.
-
I ~I Ul'li~ tX 0#1.
.
.
I
a)- t/ 'ta?
~
1k6. .. M~:
-
wkJ /1- ,1- j;..'& 46t s, ct hi.
. Q~/!
~ Jtbd fKcME- ~Ir>
M~ ~ (,JA-:;" w4'~
aws !.ea,tM .
90 ~~.
.. ~~~ rt. -r p~:>\~ V~ej~ ~blew....
~~1}~(~' ~M~
~~, 41V4ts ~ kz..N{~
tJihz. ~~ ~t \~.
~ '/,.,,). P t.f- ~.
Cw~ ~itl CiftVWIJf.-.
lJOI~ ~~.
eo t, ~r' V'ttk ~~
~
CCA~i7 l~1lO ....... c>.. ~'? .
<Truc..\:s. 6r\ <;f,..'c
WhiJ- ht...,,~s ~ c:Ns ~ fIN 'f/NI:.. (]K-S/k.
jYai ~1~tc( I 1t~ p U1,~ ~~ ~.
- (aA.f(;c/J wi af~ ~ ~L
tA-;h-h'7' dI f/ah5 J /4yl.,f (1
..
~ Mil'" ~,.ut:;5
rf;U.~ rbcll/'
~ 1wf1etf~
{J~
Ow
~t.r.
-
~id
'lrvrA;s .
~"wt..?
~~
~ rxvk. 19.
~~
'( .::r~ - ~~'j is "flz~ .
mot "'" ~
~
V
~ <;k - rJ~ Co"-'il'o; \-c-~ .../ ~.
~ ~ ~v~k ~~~ err pA'iiu ~~
'l~l.N\\~ - ~\"i..~ rhf' wl\1l\'-1 aif~'ce."\fs ~l
y
'r
~
~
,
~
.lC.n.v -
~-
~'7 t.-.- -
'JPI".V\-
-
t\- ~ ~\~
A"M~'~ [:J. qe~.
+\~ ot ~ CP~:t, de. ~ C- e-'iCPJ'lt\... ~I'.~
Aff~lI\c;..k.. .fb,- (uu..-h:. '. 'ZC"'''^z>
CQ.V\ d.i1lJ'-&H- Q. ~~.
U~\'\ ~ ~",lt.-... 6.\C~ r--"r.e...... ....,1 ~i\t-.
'"<- -
1)v~;O\J"" ~ .
sf(A.k ~ rVV~\f\.~
..., fa~~ t M~
..
~1.q .O':J
...-dI ... ~~\tIt\ / uti h~ ~tto/~ ~
"~ f/A\e~
\)tt0 .
t~ lO.
~(EIL i- ~ rei""''''!?).
~l~ f(~V\ ,,~.
ffCt\NJ~ r ttrYlrJVlt r ~ T~'
~z;.c 'Pre- pee(?).
U~~ ~ V\7t~hw-l ~ n,itF;.
tveeJs Sol ( bPrf.v-
1r&t~ ~rt rf~ - ~~ .
~~~ 10 ~ ~ ~I.
~~r 17~ aAt:l~.
&\~~ ~
{:~~s or. CMb ~. ~ Jo -ShM ~ftw.
~i~. IVl~1 ~.C?\
:--- ~ 1KrV(, i VI VIIi} ~
~~ kSttf' ~~~ ~ ~~<5t <<ew~W\,
~ft (~.
~~l ~<).
~pW1~ Gck. ~ &~(~ ?I~\\ 0a'>\e.. (ffi\.~ "JI -er,.urc.
..
9- \)e,J ~~
o ~~ cv-. (2'",.-.
~ I~ ~ ~e.d--.....-f-.
JJo ~~~\ V\C<.\L-::, \--\-0 ~w,
Ul'\ \J~ <;0' I htV"JLMI~ .
~~ ~1U4- -R.e-. 0'( t/ O\1lWlt.1, vc..{\Ae
\ eok. (Alf' Ol~i.....~ ~ - a.~~
~~<;..'bil- Clo~V\~ +:> 9J-wWl ~
~~~,
ka-~ CI. \CMb a.l \~.
wkv\- i-o do v.> \ re:;1~f.; \:.. ~ (~. .
WO si--VlAt?e 0", c;pn~b
(DA-o,t. \M-r~' f'1t.~.
reNeMVe pn~~. crltCY,.
lMePK A '
W\\wr
b\Ji0Vl~ hecvtl
~
~ J.()r\~ CO\I1~!, ,_,
~\'>e. "S'f't"e'S$~ 'RIa<<^.. ~ It') WIt1m(VI~.
~ Ctvl~ tv[~ al,(lWe.
I' /~ ~J..' '/
-t Dp~u..-.
11000 1 r;r>/ JI~ -"1?'1 /<>
'PCtVI~o
r ~i l( 'f~ '-1"). v.M" ~
O\\~
.
-Wo
D-A- S ~\. 1310\0' -tv Cffl r, 2- ..;'
~~ +> ~~..I
COif'<-.v-^W?t<;.\ ~ ~4.
q"futt 1iv ~1I\Ic41.
ov\ -<71~
et-h61~ 1P'~ OV' fC'7;.
Pueo/?lV).b fCt'VJ'rel't1e1"-k 10 p I~ -cVf-.
,
Shovti 'fOule \.. 'pICl~.
~l~bf& -ft1(~.
(~~ ~~ CV\ f\~ ~(l
~
W~ [':7 ~(ln~w
1l \i (e 0. kflN1..
~~ pfre<5.
~/!r
~~.
~ ~~~ \01tM ~ 0M-l ~ \AJt ! V\~r~' .. J -h I I _
~t NM ~\b1 M!fl "'1- 1JWj -
() IA- U~ eM t::::. ~~
1\JP. 01'\. s, ~t. 1 ,L I ~t 1zLk
~ lAlAL ~r~ T\V ()A ()\I}!f/ rjvp-
~ ~ O^ We, r/Mtb.
(}dADvnJ W f _'- 11~ ~ 0I1[);.
lfJ'W Y/{M ~
~ f~V\ V'AI~U~ ~:-t1s
~~~ Vc~.
~ J
fW\ to l0~\J~ .. ~ 1.
~~t
017 Oi~ \~ @ Wf lA~ (}II E. lot
, !tit\l) UV' _
Irm ~ ~ u~. QVe-(~~~ '7~ tP/ tv'w,
~ t~~ ~\M~,t/
~ty~Je, f:<v\.
~~ -
~, i~ +~.
~ . f'1~ -- w~''') \'vWI~t-.
. (13e-v\t;t'Lu1- Cwvwv'<!l'\.").
~ ~VU~ ~)D(~. - 3 y~- )
J/~ t1",~ "'- 1MO lc-/::r~u
~. ~ (111\ vJe: ttS~.f;y ~~-
- ~ 1N,t:{~~ f~'
&rvef7~ :}j~ W~, D
-~.
~\~ \V~.
}1~~J\ ~
~~~
,
,
r
I
I
I
o
I,
I
(
..
...'"~>'"......_.....~,_..._--_..._.,.~-~~.."._-
,........
........
r".....,.
MEMORANDUM
" ".
To: Development Review Committee
From: John Niewoehner, Community Development Engineer,
DRC Case load Coordinator
Date: July 14, 2003
Re: Park Place Private Parkina Facility
Attendees:
James Lindt, Community Development Department
Chris Bendon,Community Development Department
Nick Adeh, Engineering Department
Denis Murray, Building Department
Brian Flynn, Parks Department
John Niewoehner, Community Development Department
Tim Ware, Parking Department
Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer
Jannette Whitcomb. Environmental Health
Stan Clauson, Planner Representing Applicant
Brain Pawl, Planner Representing Applicant
Peter Fornell, Applicant
Jeff Haiferty, Architect for Applicant
At the July 9, 2003 meeting, the Development Review Committee reviewed the following project:
Park Place Priyate Parkina Facility: A private parking facility is proposed for 300 South Spring
Street near the intersection of Spring St. and East Hyman Ave. The proposed garage will
accommodate approximately 99 parking spaces and will have seven levels including three below
grade. Besides the parking area and garage office, two apartments are planned for the second
and third floors.
This was the second DRC meeting for this project. The first DRC meeting was October 9, 2002.
These minutes are not meant to duplicate comments from the October DRC.
DRC COMMENTS
1, Enaineerina DeDartment:
. Due to past bad experiences, the City does not allow soil nails to extend into ROW or
utility easements, Investigating the use of soil hardening techniques is recommended.
. Street Impact Fee: At the time of the building permit application, a street impact fee will
be accessed that accounts for the construction wear and tear on the streets.
. The Engineering Department supports the Applicants plan to pave the alley as long as
the alley improvements are engineered to accommodate drainage.
. Traffic Management Plan: At the time of building permit application, a traffic
management plan needs to be submitted that defines the construction hauling routes
and methods to shuttle workers to the construction site.
. Are there ground water issues? Groundwater could potentially increase the cost of
construction and operation. Dewatering operations cannot pump groundwater out of
the aquifer unless adequate water rights are obtained.
. Extensive geologic and soils are required to determine to determine whether
groundwater issues exist and how the building can be constructed without adversely
affecting adjacent properties and the ROW.
. Building foundation footers cannot extend into the ROW.
. Vehicles and material storage cannot biock the use of the alley by emergency vehicles,
Page 2 of 3
July 7, 2003
Park Place
"""
-
"
, "
2. ZoninQ
. There are questions regarding the floor area of the structure. The racks that support
the cars are not reai building floors but neither is the building an open shell. This is a
question for P&Z to settle. The PUD can be used to define the floor area.
. The applicant should use the PUD to request that the project be exempted from the
City's residential design standards,
. Parks and school impact fees will need to be paid for the affordable housing units.
. The project needs to be renamed. There are too many places in Aspen with a similar
name,
3. ParkinQ Department:
. Prior to the start of the project the City needs to know the frequency and duration of
street and alley closings, How will the project construction adversely affect the
neighboring properties' access and parking.
. The traffic management plan must describe how emergency vehicles will have
continual access to the construction site and adjacent properties. In addition, parking
spots on the street must be purchased for construction vehicles including worker's
vehicles.
4, Fire Protection District:
. The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system throughout the building that complies
with NFPA-13,
. The Applicant shall install a fire alarm system throughout the building that complies with
NFPA-72.
. The Applicant shall.l!l?!ell s1i'ndpipes, ,,.,1 b;\J\~, ~ \- ,v~"""'k i-- .u....
. The Applicant shall~an emergency access plan ~ Fire Marshal
prior to the public hearing. . "'fJ"..;.:"") ~r au.e,t.. 'Q.... -l- f-l...L
. The Applicant shall ~_' _ a ventilation plan :a 1.._..1 .. ~1l-lAe Fire Marshal prior to
the public hearing. ...,~ - .
. ~~1J.\~l,.r"""1\- \;W.\\ ~ H'VI~".( .., "'.. ,.,.1."....-..... ~.\\-+~ ~\,,~... >vI IloffJ......1e
5, Parks Department: f'l,.. pn'levli... c "rJ<:<;. ~ f"Z:~lAA:i""1 .
. Root barriers are to be placed around new trees to prevent future buckling of the
sidewalk.
. Parks Dept. recommends that the spruce tree be cut down instead of trying to
transplant it.
7, BuildinQ Department:
. Structure must meet the energy code for the commercial area (com-check) and for the
residential area (res-check),
. No access is shown to the mechanical room.
. Must fulfill the requirements of the efficient building program for the residential units,
. Disability access to the bathroom and the vehicle pickup area must be defined.
. One fire sprinkler system is needed for the entire building.
. As part of the lot split. it is advisable that the parking garage have the zero lot line
setback instead of the neighboring building.
8, City Water Department: no comments at this time
9, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: (by phone)
".,-=.,
/.'''",
Page 3 of 3
July 7, 2003
Park Place
,.......,.,
"J
. Will there be a back-up generator? If so, there will be fuel tank issues.
. There will need to be containment for glycol and hydraulic oils used for the car handling
system.
. ACSD will need to review drainage plans to ensure that no storm water can enter
sanitary sewer.
. Will the garage be broom cleaned or cleaned with water? If water is used, there will
need to be floor drains. Floor drains will be connected to the sanitary sewer and will
require an oil/sand separator, In case of a fire, the drains and oil/sand separator must
be sized to accommodate fire flows.
. Project must adhere to the rules and regulations of the District and pay applicable fees,
10. Environmental Health:
. The applicant needs to provide a construction noise suppression plan.
. The Environmental Health needs to refine the expected trip generation numbers based
on an improved understanding of the project. Preliminary estimates determined that
garage would generate 952 trips per day. Vehicles trips cause air pollution.
. The paving of the alley and the construction of sidewalks will help mitigate for the
impacts of the vehicle trips resulting form the project.
IDRC/ParkPlaceDRC#2
~W\ Q+y1 "'CW'P"'"
SUMMER TRAFFIC COUNTS
Traffic counts were taken in the downtown from August 7th to August
10th. The following diagram compares the winter 1994 counts to the
summer 1997 counts. Generally, traffic volumes increased considerably
over the winter 1994 counts. Though direct comparisons can not be
made between the two surveys, the increased volumes are likely
partially attributable to general growth and to the fact that the
downtown sees more traffic in the summer versus the winter. To
validate these conclusions, traffic counts should be taken once again this
winter.
The Winter 1994 traffic counts were utilized in the transportation
analysis of the downtown. The conclusions were that traffic volumes on
Main Street and Durant warranted special pedestrian crossing
treatments; the downtown grid was functioning effectively in evenly
distributing traffic; and traffic volumes on the primary streets of the
downtown, including Galena, Cooper, Hyman, Hopkins and Mill, were
approaching a level where pedestrian safety and comfort could be
compromised. The Summer 1997 counts reinforce these conclusions.
Traffic volumes generally increased by 30% over the winter 1994 counts,
and in some areas, particularly Durant and Original, increased by over
50%.
Aspen Downtown Enhancement and Pedestrian Plan
Addendum
page 3
,""'"
"./
" ,#
~.
/,,~/'~/ ~::--
Charlier Associates, Inc. .
RECENEO
':3t.\l iJ ~ 1997
1881 Ninth Street, Suil~ ~~\+l B01.ll<ler, CO
"",,~, E'lE\.CPMtN I
COt.lt.lU1'lIi'i 0
80302
August 5, 1997
Bob Nevins
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Bob,
Enclosed are the two documents that I faxed to you on Fnday, August 5,1997, This includes a
spreadsheet with the summer 1997 traffic count data (weekday and weekend) and a map which
compares the winter 1994 weekday counts vs. the summer 1997 weekday counts.
Some important items to notice are as follows:
. The number from the 1994 winter count on Cooper between Original and Spring is actually 3,300.
not 8,300.
. The Aspen St. numbers are not as high as we expected but still high for a local residential street.
. The high numbers on Monarch St. are of concern due to the diversion that would be required for
the addition of Light Rail on this street.
. Highway 82 east of Original St. is not significantly higher in the summer than in the winter.
This is interesting due to the fact that the pass is closed in the winter
. A couple reasons for the significant differences in these comparisons are the seasonal differences
and three years of growth.
. Our suggestion is to duplicate the counts in February 1998 at the same locations as the summer
counts, Another suggestion is to send this information to CDOT to help expedite the process of fixing
your permanent traffic counter on Highway 82.
If you have any further questions, please call Jim or myself.
~~
C\'i
~
C\'i
D
~
s:
:J
o
U
U
4-
4-
C\'i
L.
\-
>;
C\'i
\:S
~
Q)
Q)
;;:
~
~
~
.;
tl 0
irl a
.:;, ~
!Ci ,-:
,
--~
..
0
, ;l
0
- .
- .
00
L.
Q)
~
s:
;;:
IS)
>
L.
Q)
E
E
:J
<S)
s:
Q)
~'7t'-
1C"'\ cr: C;
\j J (;; C.~
<( ~.=.
(\ S ~
-.or- C 6
0..::. ::l
~<
>; ,. ;:;
I '. i: ::
..,.- .;,.... -
U ~'c~
#,"-">
='
"
:;
c
c
~
=
.;
"
~
z
~
.
~
, ,
~
c
c
~
=
:0
.;
~
~
c
~
"
>
:
.;
'F'''''''' ilf
: I
~ ~ I iul
I ; I
~ ",SPUoI n
o
'0
~
.s;
,
'-----,
r---'
I
,
" 0
" '0
C m
c' Iri
N ~
IilIUsr
~
<i
!/
I'
f!
'l~
~
Ii ,i
1 HOO~ rl "30'1
' ..,. - __I--
, _6"." I I "COO
, I
:1 iTi11 i: iiij I' e. 8':
~, ~ I t;l.PJ I '" r .
~"_. "'-0 I ~ ",-"~ ' %
..",,-,-, "". v ......""-'1---'
Tun SHUH
~! ~".c g 'IT' m r mJ
, -
l
'"
) I " _..
\"'_C
j' GatenaSlo---..l' I
2 ~.
~ f;
.
..
<: ~ S. HURler 51.
.,
..
uu
I,~_-- '
. L..Jv../
: 2.5C:;'
I;
"
11C1N"tST
:i
6.DO{J
;2.532
Ii
,
'-
"
- " ~
:: z
~ c ~
" .
~ ~ ~
~ .;
.
~
.
'"
-.0:"
" ,.,....,
;; ~ ~
... -=!;.!:
3 ~ ~ ~
t3 t, ~ ~
~H
..............
.
>-
UJ
""
c
"
~ "
- .
::]
.. ~
m>
g;-
c
= :>-,
= t:
5"";:;
<J1~
1- t
"'~
m
,"
.
c
>-
I
L__
-.
.: ~ ~~~
:=: ,;' 4
.::
~/
!
,\
~\
:,~,
i
/i
I
i'
Ii
I' ,
'J; "
I' ,
,) /
':;?'
St~
J
.
~
~
"
,
C
~
,
t
!
,
,
,
j
~
>
~
3
,
,.
<
),
\\\
,,\
~'"
~,
<:.'
\
'"
"pO'
~O' ,
bO~
m m
1-""0 ..
Qj..::.t: go
:> ~ ~
< ~ m
:l:.c
u
...
":'
~N
~>-
em
.-"
?;~
~
?;
~"
eo~
~ ~
~-"
~ ~
:> ~
<?;
><--
~O'
~6
=~
U)OO
f'
OJ
OJ
>-
~'"
" 0'.
~
::;0'.
;00
<J'J
+"
\!\
::I
IS>
::I
-<
\!\
D
:;:
::0
o
U
<..:>
4-
4-
'"
l-
I-
l-
'l)
E
E
::I
<J)
~>-
~
~-"
~ ~
:> ~
<?;
><--
~O'
".
._oc
U:oe
>-
~'"
"O'
Vo .
~'"
~cb
>=
l:
o
.-
-
"'
u
o
...J
-
l:
:::
o
U
~
~
!::>...
\!\
-<
4-
o
>,
D
G
~
~
c..
.;;: ~
~ ~
~ ~
'" ~
S.J: 3:
~ ~ QJ
.<>m...
.~
-0
~~
';-g
~"
/
'-.,,/
#.
.,
"
'"
o
o
o
N'
N
.....
'"
N
....'
N
on
o
.....
'"
N
'"
'"
...
on'
N
N
.....
"1.
o
'"
'"
'"
"1.
o
'"
'"
.,
N
0'
'"
"g
~
u;m
~~
.- ~
~-;;
~lJ
'"
---
c:
.lS
'"
'tl
o
~
'"
'"
'"
.,'
-
.,
12
.,'
.....
*
0::
N
on
.,'
.....
.....
on
....,
N
.,
on
"'.
.....
N
....
....
.....
.....
N
~
o
O'
00
'"
o 0
'" 0
o 0
N' ~
.....
'" 0
'" oc
If'l on
r--.' N'
- -
...
.....
o
",'
.....
N
.....
-
0::'
12
"'
N
N
<:c
<r,
-
N
....
'"
"'
N
~
o
O'
d
O'
.,
O'
o
N'
.....
-
'"
o
r"
O'
'"
N
It":
-
.....
00
...
If'l'
-
'"
:g
If'l'
-
~
o
'"
00
o
.....
o
o
o
",'
N
0::
'"
",'
'"
.....
"
",'
.,
....
N,
o
N
'"
on
N'
-
'"
"
'"
d
"
.,
'"
N'
-
~
o
'"
"
....
o
o
.,
",'
....
....
'"
.....
....
.,
on
....'
....
o
'"
....'
'"
-
'"
on'
N
'"
on'
'"
.....
If'l
on'
~
o
....
N
o
.....
8
"
N'
t:::
'"
...'
on
'"
"
.....
'"
"
-
If'l'
....
'"
....
If'l'
'"
on
on
If'l'
....
"
"1.
If'l
~
o
"l
.,
.....
8
"<.
N
"
<:c
'"
N'
'"
If'l
<:c
N'
<:c
-
~
'"
-
.,
o
",'
N
'"
o.
'"
:5
.....
'"
~
e
.,
.,,;
If'l
8
'"
.....
'"
O'
....
",'
O'
'"
",'
on
O'
If'l
",;
<:c
on
'"
",'
o
'"
<:c
",;
If'l
on
....
'Ii
/.~,
,-."J
~
e
....
.,,;
....
o
o
.....
",'
'"
<:c
N
....'
'"
o
on
"",'
on
'"
o
....'
on
'"
....
....'
If'l
"
....
.....
'"
N
'"
....
#.
-
"
o
.....
8
"1.
'"
o
'"
-
",'
N
'"
If'l
on'
.,
N
"
",'
....
'"
0::
",'
.,
.....
O'
",;
o
on
'"
",'
~
e
'"
"
....
#.
=<
on
on
.....
~
,,'
o
o
N
",'
.....
.,
.,
.,'
o
N
.,
",'
O'
....
on
00
'"
o
"
",'
'"
.....
N
O"
'"
'"
'"
",'
N
'"
'"
='
.....
'"
-
.,'
'"
'"
'"
o'
.....
'"
...
O'
",'
'"
N
o
='
.....
.,
'"
"1.
0::
<0
~
..!!
<0
U
~
~
~
:l:
- ~
~ ~
...-
.~
-~
~J:
._"
.:'!~
.2:.<0
~ Vo
~ ~ ""C ~
:5 c_c:c::... cc:.... =cc
..... ... III ~ ~ l'U C .... l'tI 90!.." ~r; ~f,JJ III
- ~C:cEQ:;EJ: ....E""......;c>-:;;Q.I
t: :::;2 QI >.. '> >. a: >.. s: c -.- .... QI ::::
QI ~ 0... ~::r: f:c ~ >...... ~.:: a:;.~ 0):> QJ
g: "'0.... '" Qj .::.......::.o....=.w..::.;>..c
.:: .D;r: ~-g ~-g ?; c: ~"'2 Q.iU') a;O Cli""C a.i llJ
1: ~ ci-o .L l'tI fJ) to QJ ~ ....; (; ;:. -g >'1:1 ;:.. c:: ;:. c:
"-_C:~IIl~IIl.L_U')IIl<l'tI<~<~<QI
Vi Q.. ~ ra c: U c: . >.. r:: c: lo.. "'" Qj tlO Qj ~ -:::~
COO .::: QI ~32 :;:;: Ui:c c:32 ~2 c...c: 0....- ;;CJ
.-""O.~ o..a.. co..-""C Q.lo... oC: ......i: c.~ l-o""C
ct:c lo.Q.I \IlO.go ~_ t;o 0::; =:0.. Ol..o :::fc:
::;: <0 oz <J: ..oJ: ..0 " lJ= UJ: UU'J uo Cl ~
~
'"
~
~
-
<r,
'"
.2
u
~
<0
E
.i!e
~
c
u
C
(l)
",
~
<0
U
(l)
.L
'tl
2
'"
E
-:;;
~
*
"
'"
'"
-:;;
::;
"'"
::;
-<
u
-
'"
2
<0
'w
o
",
'"
-<
u
.~
-.:
<0
-
[j
>-
.L
'tl
(l)
u
'"
c..
(l)
u
c..
lkt~~ ~Ug~ r~ ft
Zf:9 Z~IS IOUI6uO , _'. 009'9~
rP ~ 1\\ ==:ifi} u-
[J D
'~b 10 0
I ~I h
l 0 """
cO Sr <")
f 3J "" CO
M C:1 <D
~ ......=- U1D[
Cr' ~L~ ~ r ~ .
- u,~,\
oL'v
009'9 'IS 6uudss 09'f:
[,;7'
(
"-
lil~
. ~~ ...r::;
I
-
~~
.-ii--
a tl=
t
Ie=:
OJ
)~ if.
<")
I'-
"<
~
""
7
,L
WF]
09'9
J
J 1
.,r
~
~~
'"
g.
C~
'1 n L..r"'
09'Z__
~-l~
.'
:::JU
o
""r
U l. ~ '
I ("- ~
....
W-q~
~ /'
7J
o
o
""
<01,.-
~
~Q:
co
!3C!.
OCD
/~
on
o ~J 1
!I~ _S
I 0
0
'"
1'-'
-
OOV'g
.... .
I~_-
Og'v .
I. ..,
] d
. .:
0
.
~ .
.
.
~") L
'l1
~ .J:r<l \D 'lJ
.. 'll,~ b~D ~ ~gll.uL
OOO'g
!!!!!!!J!gOB'9 IS J8lunfj S Oz'v~
: \3 t' h ~~ 1--
1 gl{1 ;Jg
f I ~ [ ~
. I --I1-
I
.8 ousleEl '8
m
i=J 7' 'r-
"?~ !,]~
II \ u; ~ 0 l.... r
""" ~ 0
J .ill ~.., f.--n- ~-I.i 'I!:
....\,~ '"
! r'lh/
. eu
:J
1.
I
I
I
00L'9
...
...
...
...
...
1. ..M
... I
...
...
....
J ...
...
~ III
I I ...
B01: L-Jinll
181/1Vl8 .
.
..
~
~
l_
'/J~
J"
I
~
-
11~
1;...,
.J~
b
~~ l-
II .,.
fir
:"'
..... ii
I
er
~
CD
"":. -'
co '"
P(lm
I., 0
l " h
L...r-
p
\v
~[
-
....
L --,-
\
~
~~~
~~I ~
In
iG[ n
'. '=['---
,."'." , [ J
" , - g
"""
0 LJ
0
r- U1
<D
f-; "
U~
~~I ""
~
~ "'-
11 0
<")
- I
. !
..\
r- - , r
I""
!.? I
., "9
t:I
.J
006'9
II,...., ..... ,....;
'->,--L,
OOg'g
]~
IJ \
"
D II g
~co
I '
c::::J . ~
w
9
J I
Oz'9
.'" ,
Ov'f:
rulF"
;J
'IS 4JJeuol"l '8
- [J I ~
J~ g
::'h
~'- L~O FD 1
. -6~g'9m r-
.8 uadsy 'S
r-. ~ L. _ ..: \-- .;.. 1 1_"lC::: I.
~
~
o
o
~
~;:;~
_J!lfi
~~
~
f' _ jL- I ,~
o
o
""
o
o
~
o
U1
o
tg)
~
~
i
'<
,
,"j
'"
;,~
\\\
',)
,)/
,
-
,....
.
...............
1/
I'
, I
,
I
i
I
;;
~
"
~
"
~~ II I I ;
i 'I i 1
zm ~,jo~",," .oo~;,
Or)O'9 "'! ~:':;'L 000;;'"
I: '
m~'~ I'll m~ ~ I
C" ~ ! 8 ~
! " ; I .!o I
/",",,",u
fl
I I, .:3 ~
/( I; ,~ ;:)
,~
i '/ '" "
) :1
JI no
--
/, 'lS JOIlunH'S -:>
I( "
'. J'
...-/, . ~
./ l~
.)\
',I
. ,. 'l,
. .. if
. ~
.- . 11
-..
. Ii
-',
1 .. ,
. 11'''11
r --I
I ~
~ J '"
'~
[ a
~ "!
l
.~
~ IlH:UVfjDIIII
. n- I I
,
g ! }Jj
~
"
f L ~
n ~IISV II
~
II m-~" m~'~
I \!! ~ 'I 8"
il L~i ',"
,,~,' "~ ''^^'n
."'.........,. '''--1.~'.- ~
NnJlt
'1..,.,.. ---1"'''''''''
. .< ....' I
'" :~
"0 :JI
q ~
,~.'~'."
Q_.:.\ ... : l."~~ - ,""
'----1 ~ -- ~ . ... ~ _.'
I':;~'':' , OCC'(
I II
i ~
I
,,-'"
" ,;
~.i~ ~
~ .~ -..:... III
H~ ~
~r; ~
~~~
.,.... ;.
'.. ~ '-
7"
Tn
-<
<E
-'"
:f....1
~~
J~
~
;jj
"'"
R ~
~ -
"-$
~;.
~
'"
,
~
b
~
e
:<
=
[/
H WHI:lII
~ ~
~ ~
q -
:i
"
,
'I
,
~
',~, ,.,-- ;
. .....~ ~ ,
C:::F~. "
,
,~
. .
, -
.
-
1>1
c;
.. ,.
l>'
R
o
,
Ii
"
"
"
-.l
t
Q
~ ---
: ;
I
... !~i
.'" "
2 a '>1
- I;l
~
~ ,
'" "0
a
q ~
IS NUl\'\
n
.
.
;
=
"
~';;; ()
::.
:: j ct
~ ., <:.<
>";' 0
" ""
~:l -n
~ s
-~ ,;: )>
':.:; '.!;) r r\
'n 'n \.J'
:::1 ~--cs
C\)
::s
(j)
c
:3
:3
C\)
l
<:::
CS\
=2:
::s
ct
C\)
l
(
:?:
C\)
C\)
^'"
s:J.....
~
<:.<
--\
l
~
-n
-n
()
n
o
c
::s
ct
'CJ
~
ct
~
09/15/2003 14:31
17734852438
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
PAGE 01
"
.....
,
, I
SpaceSaver Parking companye
September 4, 2003
City of Aspen, Colorado
Pl~nnin~ and Zoning Board
130 South Galena Street 3'" Floor
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Attn: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board
Subject: 707 East Hyman Ave.
A ntomated Car Parking System
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
We have been asked to provide manpower requirements relative to the operation of our
automatic car parking systems.
Most systems that we have installed are being used by rcsidents or employees. \7,'hcn the
users are penn anent there is no need to have attendants to operate the system. At best a
person to contsct for minor mis-operations or assistance in replacement ofloSt cards is
all that is required to operate the facility,
However, in Instanbul, Turkey we have installed a facility that is used primarily by ,
tranSient parkers. Tins operaiioii.reqiilres ciSiiiersan'd a:rnaiJaieras'tbere are caSh
transactions, lost card problems and ui general some assistance to those not being familiar
'with this type offacility.
, Below is a table providing the manpower requirements for several automated parking
facilities.
to".
,
Facility/Location Usage No. of SDaces No. ofEmolovees Soaces/EmoJovee
. Isntatibu!, Turkey Public 612 5 122
Duisberg, Getmany Employees 90 Contact Person 90
Summit Grand Parc Residents 74 Contact Person 74
, Wash. D.C.
Hamill, Germany Employees 211 Contact Person 21l
Wem. Austria Employees 80 CoD.fact Person 80
09/15/2003 14:31
17734852438
MIDAMERICAN ELEV
PAGE 02
. '
""
./
I h.op~ th~ abuv:: information is adcquaL:: lu auswC:1 )'ow ",meows. 'i~le resp:.Gd'ully ap::
available to assist you ~ith any further questions or information.
Sincerely Yours,
Spacesaver ~o., Inc.
~~~j?t=
~'Livingston V
Genera! Mgr.
'cc: 7348 corrcspnda.ncc
. , ~:
.'.' "
."..:
,"
",,\"
On ,', ,_,'~ .
".'
......~.
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
engineering paths to transportation solutions
September 15, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson, AICP, ALSA
Stan Clauson Associates, LLC
200E. Main Street
Aspen CO 81611
RE: Traffic Analysis
Park Place Parking Garage
FHU Reference No. 03-169
Dear Mr. Clauson:
Felsburg Holt & Ullevig has prepared this letter to summarize the traffic impacts associated with
the proposed 99-space Park Place Commercial Parking Facility (Park Place garage) to be
located at 707 East Hyman Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. This letter summarizes the existing
land use and traffic impacts associated with the small office building and parking area currently
on the site, the existing traffic volumes on Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site, the number
of trips forecasted for the proposed garage, and the traffic impacts to the adjacent streets
associated with those trips.
Existing Land Use
Currently, the site consists of a 927 square foot A-frame office building and small surface
parking lot that can accommodate approximately 15 vehicles. On a typical day, this lot is used
to capacity. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Sixth Edition was
used to forecast the existing daily and peak hour trips associated with the office building. The
existing parking iot trips were estimated based on information provided by the City of Aspen for
the Rio Grande Parking Garage. In that garage during peak times of the year, each space is
used approximately 1.5 each day, with the peak demand occurring between 11 AM and 2 PM,
which is outside of the morning and afternoon peak hours of adjacent street traffic (one hour
between 7 and 9 AM and 4 and 6 PM). Since traffic impacts are typically measured during the
peak hour of street traffic, it was estimated that approximately 15 percent of the total daily traffic
would occur during those morning and afternoon peak periods. These characteristics were
applied to the existing surface lot on the site.
Table 1 shows the number of daily and peak hour trips currently associated with the site. As the
table indicates, the existing land uses on the site generate approximately 85 daily trips, 12 AM
peak hour trips, and 12 PM peak hour trips.
303.721.1440
fax 303.72i.0832
tbu@fhueng.com
Greenwood Corporate Plaza
7951 E. Maplewood Ave, See, 200
G(eenwood Village, CO 80111
,"-"'"
September 15, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 2
Table 1
Existing Trips Generated by the Site
js;~!:~fR*Ii'i'X~,:PM:'~~aklt1C{~;'f:~~&~f~~~Jt~~~;. ,
Total: ~lribo'uYld: c:OLitbO'u'nd,
Ih6'oLiiid: i Ou"bo~uild;
4 1
6 1
10 2
5
7
12
1
2
3
4
5
9
Existing Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes on East Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site were obtained from the City.
Summer counts were conduced in 1997 and winter counts were conducted in 1994. These
counts were factored to 2003 conditions based on the traffic growth factor calculated by the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for Original Street (SH 82) immediately east of
the site. Based on this factor, Hyman Avenue currently experiences approximately 3,500
vehicles per day (vpd) in the summer and approximately 2,300 vpd during winter. The summer
volume on Hyman is1 ,700 to 1,900 vpd lower than the summer volume on either Cooper
Avenue (4,900 vpd) or Hopkins Avenue (4,700), one block north and south of the site,
respectively, and is approximately 3,000 vpd lower than the volume on Durant Avenue (6,500
vpd), two blocks north of the site. All four streets appear to have similar mixes of commercial
and residential land use. Thus, it appears that Hyman currently experiences traffic volumes that
are somewhat lower that the typical volumes on other local streets in the downtown area.
Proposed Land Use
As proposed, the site would be developed as a 99-space garage, with two affordable housing
units. The garage is consistent with the land use identified for the site in the Aspen/Pitkin
County Transit/Transportation Development Program, 1986-2000 (Leigh, Scott & Cleary, 1986),
which identified a 300-space parking garage for the site. To maximize space usage, a
mechanical system would be used to park cars. Drivers would park their car on one of two
mechanical lifts, exit the car, and the lift would move the car into an available spot.
Table 2 summarizes the trip forecast with the proposed land uses. ITE Trip Generation, 6th
edition was used to forecast trips associated with the affordable housing. As for the garage,
based on our understanding of the operation, all of the garage spaces would be available for
purchase or long-term rental by local residents. It was assumed that approximately 20 percent
of the spaces would be used by part-time local residents to store their vehicles when out of town
and thus would generally be unavailable for use on a daily basis. The remaining 80 percent (80
spaces) would be used on a daily basis by local residents, merchants, employees, and visitors.
These daily spaces would be in a manner similar to the Rio Grande garage; i.e., each space
used approximately 1.5 times each day, with approximately 15 percent of the daily demand
occurring during the moming and afternoon peak hours of the adjacent streets. Based on these
September 15, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 3
assumptions, the proposed land uses would generate approximately 250 daily trips, 37 AM peak
hour trips, and 37 PM peak hour trips.
Table 2
Proposed Park Place Trip Generation
..b Dally' F' ' ,~-" .:AMif',~ak'::tl~"ijl';~~~i,tr~~( ~I~ti'-~rJifi:~M'-:J:tEi~'k:Lt"o_4r;'~Ei:;~!E~ii,;>:~;,{\
t:iri~~~~~ .tlal'~" Inbound"i,Outbourid~.,,:riila'l~ ,;lriboLi'i!d4 "tOulbound C
10 1 0 1 1 1 0
240 36 29 7 36 11 25
250 37 29 8 37 12 25
Traffic Impacts
Table 3 summarizes the net trips generated by construction of the Park Place Garage. These
trips represent the trips generated by the garage, minus the existing trips from the site. The
total represents the new trips that would be added to Hyman Street. However, it should be
noted that these trips are not new trips to the downtown Aspen area, but rather represent
existing traffic that currently uses other p<lrking locations. In fact, construction of the garage
may result in a minor reduction in overall traffic in the downtown area, because some of the
vehicles that would use the garage currently circle the area in search of on-street parking. With
the new facility, these vehicles would drive directly to the lot and be removed from circulation.
Table 3
Net Trip Generation from the Park Place Site
Pro osed Park Place Gara e
Existin Site Land Uses
Net Total Trips
~ff;#~j{L
250
85
165
~,;l'i;~R~!t'c,AM;,E1,~af(iflour;~iJ)ili'~~~l~~f~~~e.MJ..t'~a~fl,o'i.i'r21>";,~:,:~
iIlliaf'::ri'\boliriai!;fqUtDouiid~ fiT~liil)) i:;lnl):c.'!1riq1!~9uJ!ioiindt
37 29 8 37 12 25
12 10 2 12 3 9
25 19 6 25 9 19
As the table indicates, Hyman Street in the vicinity of the site would experience approximately
165 additional daily trips as a result of the Park Place Garage. This represents a five percent
increase over the existing daily traffic volume on that block. The total daiiy traffic volume of
3,665 vpd on Hyman Street would still be approximately 1,235 vpd less than the daily volume on
Cooper Avenue and 1,035 vpd less than the daiiy volume on Hopkins Avenue, one block north
and south of the site, respectively. Therefore, the parking garage would not change Hyman
Street's character as a lower volume local street in downtown Aspen.
...."'....
'-.
September 15, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 4
,"" .'>
Queuing
The estimated total time required to park each car using the lift system would be approximately
90 seconds (from the time the vehicle drives onto the lift to the time the lift returns for the next
vehicle); thus, with two lifts a total of 80 vehicles could be parked each hour (3,600
seconds/hour / 90 seconds/vehicle * 2 lifts" 80 vehicles/hour). A waiting area with room for
four vehicles would be provided on the site for vehicles entering the garage and waiting for the
lift. To minimize queuing, these entering vehicles would be given priority with the lifts, and
drivers would pay upon exiting.
Based on projected peak period arrival rates' and the lift processing time, during the morning
and evening peak hours of adjacent street traffic the maximum queue at the lifts would be two
vehicles, which would be contained within the four-car storage area. During the busiest hour of
the day (mid-day peak) during the busiest time of year, it is estimated that a maximum of half of
the daily spaces (40 spaces) would turn-over (40 trips in, 40 trips out). During these periods,
the maximum queue would be 4 vehicles, which also would be contained within the site.
Conclusions
Based on the results of the analysis, the proposed Park Place garage would generate
approximately 165 net daily trips from the site. This represents a five percent increase over
existing daily traffic volumes on that block of Hyman Avenue, but still would result in total daily
traffic volumes there that are significantly lower than the adjacent local streets. The garage
could also result in a lowering of overall downtown Aspen traffic by reducing the number of
vehicles circulating for on-street parking spaces. Peak period queuing by vehicles entering the
site would be contained within the waiting area provided on site.
I trust this information is sufficient for you to make an informed decision on traffic impacts
associated with the project. If you have any further questions, please call.
Sincerely
'-'""
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly fur visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their lots on and off the rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiurnized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to assist in reviewing the operational
characteristics, as well as the community value inherent in providing this facility.
Comoonents of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. The employee housing units will fully mitigate for any employee
generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility.
Use of Soaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production fur each owner.
~-,
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory ~y~tem_ Under thi~ ~y~tem, the owner'~ vehicle will be ~canned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrival. However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management intends to retain 19 spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to park their cars
for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will be a descending hourly rate. During the
shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell single parks in order to encourage persons to park and
leave it all day, i.e., come in the morning and leave it till the end of the day for one price
so long as they exit only once. Longer rentals such as weekly and montWy will not be
permitted since it could end up as simply a holding area for cars and it is conceivable that
all 80 space owners could come on any particular day limiting public usage.
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not sufficient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of 1 :00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past these
hours of operation during high season. Owners and users will be required to anticipate
closures in order to use their vehicles.
Parkin!!: Tvoes
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
. Hourly. There will be an hourly price schedule, although this is not the
most desirable method for Park Place. It will be more than double than the street
parking for the first 2 - 3 hours to discourage such usage. Hourly rates will be
descending over time in order to encourage users to take advantage of longer
stays. (I.e., 6 - 8 hour periods.)
. Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the preferred method of usage.
Examples of this include day skier parking, day business parking, and night
dining/shopping parking. The descending rate over time for parking facilitates
this.
."'"
Operations Prospectus
Page 3
. Off-season. During times oflow and off seasons, the intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a one-time park for the day. It will mirror
downtown fates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry and exit
for a fixed price of up to 11 hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This takes those
persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time limit and who
do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should also assist in
reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid parking areas in
the core.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces were sold, there would be an association created
for owners who would pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and other necessary
expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the space to
the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible that some buyers would buy
multiple spaces fmding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding current
yields on other investments.
Mana!!ement of buildilll~ bv the develooment !!rouo
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected that fees in the range of25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
The vast majority ofthe costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
Reolacement of the develooment !!rouo
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility. Any conditions imposed relative to the operation of
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
the facility would be assumed by subsequent owners ofthe management group or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage ofthe spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, there will be the investorlbuyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 ofthe
annual revenues.
.....
LAW OFFICES OF
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.c.
HERBERT S. KLEIN
hsklein@rof.net
LANCE R. COTE *
cote@rof.net
MADHU B. KRISHNAMURTI
madhu@rof.net
201 NORTH MILL STREET
SUITE 203
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
Telephone (970) 925-8700
Facsimile (970) 925.3977
September II, 2003
'* also admitted in California
Via Hand Deliverv
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Park Place Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Conditional Use, etc.
Dear Chris and Honorable Members of the Planning Commission:
I am again writing to you on behalf of the 700 E. Hyman Condominium Owners' Association
(the "Association") concerning the Park Place Commercial Parking Facility application for a parking
structure to be located at the corner of Spring St. and Hyman Avenue. At the last Planning
Commission meeting, the applicant provided a report on the noise associated with the parking
apparatus and a traffic study. Although the public hearing was closed, given the new information
provided, we believe it is appropriate for the Commission to consider our comments on these
reports.
1. The Noise Report. The applicant submitted a noise study dated Aug. 27, 2003, from
Gary Ehrlich, Senior Acoustical Engineer. The report was done on, what we are told is, the only
other facility in the U.S. using this technology. The equipment was located in a private parking
garage and sound measurements were taken near the garage overhead door. The equipment was
operated without any cars on the lift. On the last page of the report it states:
"It can also be seen that the sound level in the garage was typically between 50
and 65 dBA, and occasionally reached 70 to 80 dBA."
These sound levels exceed the maximum sound levels for this zone district allowed under the
City's Land Use Code ("Code"), thus, this project cannot be approved.
The relevant Code provisions are found in Article 18 (the "Noise Ordinance"). Excerpts of
these sections are attached. Section 18.04.040 limits the maximum allowable noise in the Residential
land use district (defined by Sec. 18.04.020(cc) as including the Office zone) to 50 dBA between the
hours of 10:00PM and 7:00AM and 55 dBA between the hours of7:00AM and 10:00PM. So when
the report says the sound level is "typically between 50 and 65 dBA," it is saying that the garage will
typically violate the Aspen Municipal Code noise ordinance! When the report says the noise levels
"occassionally reached 70 to 80 dBA," it is saying that occasionally the noise reached levels that are
,.....
City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
September 11, 2003
Page 3
turn. The entrance is close to the intersection and when cars are backed up at the entrance, these
vehicles waiting to enter will block traffic coming on to Hyman Avenue.
The report attempts to evaluate queuing and states that the time required to park each car is
90 seconds ".from the time the vehicle drives onto the lift to the time the lift returns for the next
vehicle," However, this does not take into account the'time it takes to unload people, skis, kids,
etc., nor the time it takes to check in or to retrieve forgotten items. These activities are clearly part of
the calculus of the time it takes a car to enter and clear the queuing area, but are totally ignored by
the report. We estimate that these activities will take three to five minutes, depending on how busy
the attendant is. Thus, the total time is more like five to seven minutes per car, not 90 seconds. The
report suggests that payment will occur on pick up, however, that takes time as well and when the
four spaces needed for queuing vehicles entering are full, cars cannot leave.
The report also assumes that 80% of the users will be members of the public, not owners of
the spaces, and that they will be parking for long periods of time, thus reducing the number of
operations and the traffic generation of the facility. The applicant has not proposed a method of
, assuring 80% public use, only that it will sell spaces for over one-hundred thousand dollars and try
to allow for public use when those spaces are not being used. At those prices, we can confidently
assume that the buyers are not going to sacrifice their ability to use the spaces whenever they want
in order to gain a few dollars per hour of parking revenue from public use, which income, is likely to
be exceeded by the cost of tax accounting for these meager sums. The notion of long term use of the
facility is not supported by any facts. These assumptions of the report are critical to its analysis and
are simply made up, having no reliable foundation.
We have previously expressed grave concerns about the location of this garage near the
intersection and its potential for grid-lock, snarling traffic and blocking turning movements. The
report has not alleviated these concems and its failure to account for the interference with existing
traffic flows by tuming movements, the actual time needed by each parking operation, unsupported
assumptions about the composition of users and the length of parking stays, renders its conclusions
erroneous.
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns.
Very truly yours,
HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASS~IATES, P.C.
'"
..../'''''
By: ag;:;2y~
'~H ert S. Klein
700 E Hyman condo assn\bendm-Lt4a.wpd
---------~- --r----.;.
r<Lge j or j
........
Remove highlighting.
Chapter 18.04 NOISE ABATEMENT*1 *2
Section 18.04.010 Declaration of policy.
The city council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of
environmental pollution that represents a present and increasing threat to the
public peace and to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of
Aspen and to its visitors. Noise has an adverse effect on the psychological and
physiological well-being of persons, thus constituting a present danger to the
economic and aesthetic well-being of the community. Accordingly, it is the
policy of council to provide standards for permissible noise levels in various
areas and manners and at various times and to prohibit noise in excess of
those levels. (Ord. No. 2-1981, 91: Code 1971, 916-1)
http://www.ordlink.com/cgi-binlhilite.pl/codes/aspen/ _ DA T AfTitle _18/04/01 O.htrnl ?noise
9/4/2003
~__n~..... .....v. ,............v ,v u.......UU<.L.lU.;l u.PPUl..-U.VJ.I..- LV a..u. I..>UaUlllUll<:.11 USt:S.
J:'age 1 of 1
,.....
Remove highlighting.
Chapter 26.425 CONDITIONAL USES
Section 26.425.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses.
When considering a development application for a conditional use, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable.
A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes. goals, objectives and standards of the
Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be
located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this Title; and
B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity
of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding iand uses, or enhances the mixture of
complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development; and
C, The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use
minimizes adverse effects, including vi Imp ts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicuiar
circulation, parking, trash, service deliv ,noise, vi ations and odor on surrounding properties;
and
D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but
not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks. police, fire protection, emergency
medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and
E. The applicant commits to supply affordabie housing to meet the incrementai need for
increased employees generated by the conditional use; and
The Community Development Director may recommend, and the Planning and Zoning
Commission may impose such conditions on a conditional use that are necessary to maintain the
integrity of the city's zone districts and to ensure the conditional use complies with the purposes
of the Aspen Area Community Plan, this Chapter, and this Title; is compatible with surrounding
land uses; and is served by adequate public facilities. This includes, but is not limited to imposing
conditions on size, bulk, location, open space, landscaping, buffering, lighting, signage. off-street
parking and other similar design features, the construction of public facilities to serve the
conditional use, and limitations on the operating characteristics, hours of operation, and duration
of the conditional use. . ,
http://www.ordlink.com/cgi-bin/hilite.pl/codes/aspen/_DATAlTitle_26/425/040.html?noise
9/4/2003
c ~
SpaceSaver Parking CompanyC
September 4, 2003
RECEIVED
SEP 1 6 2003
lJUILDlPJ^ AS/'l:.fV
'IU DEPAJm.err
City of Aspen, Colorado
Planning and Zoning Board
130 South Galena Street 3rd Floor
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Attn: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board
Subject: 707 East Hyman Ave.
Automated Car Parking System
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
We have been asked to provide manpower requirements relative to the operation of our
automatic car parking systems.
Most systems that we have installed are being used by residents or employees. When the
users are permanent there is no need to have attendants to operate the system. At best a
person to contact for minor mis-operations or assistance in replacement of lost cards is
all that is required to operate the facility.
However, in Instanbul, Turkey we have installed a facility that is used primarily by
transient parkers. This operation requires cashiers and a manager as there are cash
transactions, lost card problems and in general some assistance to those not being familiar
with this type offacility.
Below is a table providing the manpower requirements for several automated parking
facilities.
Facilitv/Location Usage No. ofSvaces No. ofEmvlovees Svaces/Emvlovee
Isntanbul, Turkey Public 612 5 122
Duisberg, Germany Employees 90 Contact Person 90
Summit Grand Parc Residents 74 Contact Person 74
Wash. D.C.
Hanau, Germany Employees 211 Contact Person 211
Wein, Austria Employees 80 Contact Person 80
820 North Wolcott Avenue' Chicago. Illinois 60622 . 773486-6900 Fax 773 486-2438
o
o
I hope the above information is adequate to answer your concerns. We respectfully are
available to assist you with any further questions or information.
0., Inc.
..#=
cc: 7348 correspndance
'SEP. 2.2003 3:S6PM
00 E MAIN ST ASPEN CO USA
NO. 357
P.2
'"
- , .-
-ril FELSBURG
,..HOLT &
ULLEVIG
<
-
-
engineering paths 0 transporwtion ,olutions
~ tS +.h
~\J lSt ()/\
1)06 wk ~~R .
~~ .k ~W\~v\
t/\fI^\V\;wv-.\ \~~ ~
'%fr:eef'" _
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson, AICP ALSA
Stan Clauson Aseoclate , LLC
200E. Main Street
Aspen CO 81611
RE: Traffic AnalysiS
Park Place P. nil Garage
FHU Reference 0.03-169
Dear Mr. Clauson:
Flllsburg Holt & Ullevlg as prepared this letter to summarize the traffic Impacts associated with
the proposed 99-spaca ark Place Commercial Parking Facility (Park Place garage) to be
loCAted at 707 East H n Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. This letter summartzes the existing
land use and trefflc 1m.. ~... .:..;;;;;:lated with the small office building and parking area currently
on tile site, the exlstlng mc volumes on Hyman Avenue in the vicinity of the site. the number
of trips forecasted for th proposed garage, and the traffic impacts to the adjacent streets
associated with those 9.
Existing Land Use
Currently, the site consi ts of a 927 square foot A.frame office building and small surface
parking lot that can a modate approximately 15 vehicles. On a typical day, this lot Is used
to capacity. The Instl of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trio Generation, Sixth Edition was
used to forecast the ex! ng daily and peak hour trips associated ~th the office building. The
!,xisting parking lot trips ere estimated based on information provided by the City of Aspen for
the Rio Grande Par1<lng arage. In that garage during peak times of the year, each space is
,used approximately 1.5 ac;h day;witI:t the peak demaRd occurnl1g between 11. AM-and 2 PM.
which is outside of the omlng and ~ernoon peak houl'$ of adjacent street traffic (one hour
between 7 and ~ AM a 4 and 6 PM). Since traffic impii!l~ are typically measured during the
peak hour of street , It was astlmated that approximately 15 percent of the total dally traffic
would occur durlng tho momlng and aftemoon peak periods. These characteristics were
applied to the existing rface lot on the site.
Table 1 shows the num r of dally and peak hour trips currently associated with the site. As the
table indicates, the exl ng land uses on the site generate approximately 105 dally trips. 12 AM
peak hour trips. and 1?, M peak hour trips.
303-7:1.),1440
flll< 303.7Z1.0632
t'huOfhueng.com
Greenwood Corpo.... Plaza
7951 E. MaplowOod Ave. Ste. 200
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
SEP.;.~~~;-'-~~~~PM --- ~0~'~-~AIN ST AS~~'~O USA
I
I
NO. 357
P.3
-
-
August 28. 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 2
I ~"'d,UH
Existing rip. Generated by the Site
, ',',' AM Peak Hour'"
Table 1
:rOllil
5
7
1:l
Inbound,
4
6
10
O.lltbOllnd
1
1
2
,PM~HJt
,lI'oll!1 "lllbou"d
5 1
7 2
12 3
our,
utbound
4
5
9
Existing Traffic Volum
Tra1'IIc volumes on East yrnan Avenue In the vicinity of the site were obtained from the City.
Summer counts were duced in 1997 and winter counts were conducted In 1994. These
counts were factored to 003 conditions based on the traffic growth factor calculated by the
Colorado Department 0 Transportation (COOT) for Original Street (SH 82) Immediately east of
the site. Based on this ctor. Hyman Avenue currently experiences lIpproximately 3.~
vehicles per day (vpd) i the summer and approxlmataly 2.300 vpd during winter. The summer
volume on Hyman is1.7 0 to 1.900 vpd lower than the summer volume on either Cooper
Avenue (4.900 vpd) or opklns Avenue (4.700), one block north and south of the site.
respectively. and is app x1mately 3.000 vpd lower than the volume on Durant Avenue (6.500
vpd), two blocks north the site. All four streets appear to have similar mixes Of commercial
and residential land us Thus. it appears that Hyman currently experiences traffic volumes that
are somewhat lower th the typical volumes on other local streets In the downtown area.
Propoud Land Use
As proposed, the sit.. v,,' ..,.. ~~ ":~v,":oped as a 99-space garage, with two affordable housing
units. The garage is sislenl with the land use Identified for the site In the AspenlPitkin
County TransitlTransp tion Development Program, 1986-2000 (Leigh. Scott & Cleary, 1986),
which Identified a 30 ce parking garage for the site. To maximize space usage. a
mechanical system wo d be used to pari< cars. Drivers would park their car on one of two
mechanical lifts. exit th car. and the 11ft would move the car into an available spot.
Table 2 summart/:e&..th trip Jore.cast with the proposed land L!Ses. -ITE Trio Generation,.et"
edition was used to fo 5t trips associated with the affordable housing. As for the garage,
based on our understa ing of the operation, all of the garage spaces would be available for
purchase or long-term ntal by local residents. It was assumed that approximately 20 percent
of the spaces would be by part-time local residents to store their vehicles when out of town
and thus would genera be unavailable for use on a daily basis. The remaining 80 percent (80
spaces) would be used a daily basis by local residents. merchants, employees,and visitors.
These daily spaces wo Id be in a manner similar to the Rio Grande garage; I.e., each space
used approximately 1. time each day, with approximately 15 percent of the daily demand
occurring during the m i~g and aftemoon peak hours of the adjacent streets. Based on these
. ,
SEP. 2.2003
*00 E MAIN~T ASPEN C~~~~~"'"
,
.......
3:57PM
NO. 357
P.4
-
August 28, 2003 --
Mr. Stan Clauson
Page 3
assumptions, the propo ed land uses would generate approximately 250 dally trips, 37 AM peak
hour trips, and 37 PM P ak hour trips.
Tabl1l2 Propose I Park Place Trip Generation
" , " , " ' , Dally,;' AM Peak' Hour ."~ !;;r :e!P..k Hour. I'
'. l-iind Use " ,. 511,
.~1'. ,,', ' i; ,~I .' T.rips Total InbllluiKI Outlifiurld lotal Inllound Outbo\lnd;
"
Affordable HouslM 2 nlt8 10 1 0 1 1 1 0
parklno Lot 81 Soaces 240 36 29 7 36 11 25
T otel TrillS 250 37 29 8 37 12 as
,
Tr~c Impacts
... .... -. .. ...
Table 3 summarizes th net trips generated by construction of the Park Place Garage. These
trips represent the trips enerated by the garage, minus the existing trips from the site. The
total represents the ne trips that would be added to Hyman Street. However. It should be
noted that these trips a not new trips to the downtown Aspen area. but rather represent
existing trafflc that cu tIy uses other parking locations. In faet, construction of the garage
may result In a minor uetlon In overall traffic in the downtown area, because some of the
vehicles that would use e garage currently circle the area In search of on-street parking. With
the new facility, these V hlcles would drive dlreetly to the lot and be removed from circulation.
T.bla 3
unci
25
9
19
enaratlon from the Park Place Site
,,' "PM P.,k
Total 'Inbound
37 12
12 3
25 9
, ,,,..
~ '\ J
Land Use .'
, Peak H\lur, '
Inb unCi Out und,
29 8
10 2
19 8
, Poily
.TriPS
250
105
145
~
As the table Indicates, yman S In the vicinity of the site would experience approximately
145 additional dally trij:; _.. _ :::L:!~ of the Park Place Garage. This represents a three percent
Increase over the exlstl g daily traffic volume on that block. The total daily traffic volume of
3,645 vpd on Hyman S t would still be approximately 1,250 vpd less than the daily volume on
Cooper Avenue and 1. 50 vpd less than the dally volume Hopkins Avenue. one block north and
south of the 51te, respe . , y. Therefore, the parking garage would not change Hyman Street's
charecter as a lower v ume local street in downtown Aspen.
r
,\':
,.};,t
It"
P sed Park Place G
Existi Site Land Uses
Net Total Trl _
I '
SEP. 2.2003 3:57PM
~00 E ~~;~ ~;~~PEN C;;:~~
(~ "
, ,
NO. 357
P.5
".
...,
'"'"
.
August 28, 2003
Mr. Stan Clauson
page 4
Queuing
!
The estimated total tlm required to park each car using the lift system would be approximately
90 seconds (from the tl e the vehicle drives onto the 11ft to the time the lift returns for the next
vehicle); thus, with two I a total of 80 vehicles could be parked each hour (3600 secondslhour
I 90 second!/vehicle . 2 lifts = 80 vehicleslhour). A waiting srea with room for four vehicles
would be provided on t site for vehicles entering the garage and waiting for the lift. To
minimize queuing, thes entering vehieles would be gIVen priority with the lifts, and drivers
would pay upon exiting.
I
Based on projected pe period arrival rates and the lift processing time, durlng the momlng
and evening peak hou of adjacent street treffjc the maximum queue at the lifts would be two
whlcles, which would contained within the four-car storage area. During the busiest hour of
the day {mld-day peak g1he' buslest time of year, It'ls"esU.,...led that a-maximum of half of
the dally spaces (40 sp cas) would tum-over (40 trips in, 40 trips out). During these periods,
the maximum queue Id be 4 vehicles, which also would be contained within the site.
Conclusions
Based on the results of he cmalY5is, the proposed Park Place garage would generate
approximately 145 net ally trips from the site. This represents a three percent increase over
exlstlng dally traffic vol on that block of Hyman Avenue. but still would result in total daily
trmffle volumes there th t are significantly lower than the adjacent local streets. The garage
could also result In a 10 . erlng of overall downtown Aspen traffic by reducing the number of
vehicles circulating for n-street parking 5paces. Peak perIod queuing by vehicles entering the
site would be contalne within the waiting area provided on site.
I trust this information I sufficient for you to make an informed decisIOn on traffic impacts
associated with the p . If you haye any further questions, plesse call.
Slnc:erely
, LEVIG
Je ,P.E.
Senior Transportation nglneer
r
.
-
:>
~LfV11
Operations Prospectus
1.lb
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts oftown or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their lots on and off the rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will earn
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to assist in reviewing the operational
characteristics, as well as the community value inherent in providing this facility.
Comoonents of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management ofthe facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. The employee housing units will fully mitigate for any employee
generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision of the facility.
Use of Soaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production fur each owner.
,-
"""
Operations Prospectus
Page 2
(
,.._.- {VI
,""\
\1,';';
o,.y)<J cJ.,t..Jw~
{)/N;,."t,cC":, ~ pi ~
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces-2',
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when _
not using the facility. The implementation ofthis plan will involve a computerized
mventory system. Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a har
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehiCle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrival. !lowever, the requirement is placed on the
. owner to reserve their lL<;e and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management intends to retain 19 spaces which will be for
public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a public
parking function.
u.Jhp vW'M S
~
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to park their cars
for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will be a descending hourly rate. During the
shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell single parks in order to encourage persons to park and
leave it all day, i.e., come in the morning and leave it till the end ofthe day for one price
so long as they exit only once. Longer rentals such as weekly and monthly will not be
permitted since it could end up as simply a holding area for cars and it is conceivable that
all 80 space owners could come on any particular day limiting public usage.
, v
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when ;/1 ~,(I(YI.(;f;v\
demand is not sufficient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on (} 'b.
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours ofl:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m: 1/ki ~
Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend past these less hCilv') ,
hours of operation during high season. Owners and users will be required to anticipate I} r _ .
closures in order to use their vehicles. No IV! ~.st.<..
-of 21 ~r.
Parkin!! Tvoes
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
. Hourly. There will be an hourly price schedule, although this is not the
most desirable method for Park Place. It will be more than double than the street
parking for the first 2 - 3 hours to discourage such usage. Hourly rates will be
descending over time in order to encourage users to take advantage oflonger
stays. (I.e., 6 - 8 hour periods.)
. Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the preferred method of usage.
Examples of this include day skier parking, day business parking, and night
dining/shopping parking. The descending rate over time for parking facilitates
this.
c
""'\
'wi
Operations Prospectus
Page 3
. Off-season. During times oflow and off seasons, the intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a one-time park for the day. It will mirror
downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry and exit
for a fixed price of up to 11 hours or fro1ll7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This takes those
persons off the street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time limit and who
do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should also assist in
reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid parking areas in
the core.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces were sold, there would be an association created
for owners who would pay a quarterly fee for building maintenance and other necessary
expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily offset by providing the space to
the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible that some buyers would buy
multiple spaces finding the return on investment to be competitive or exceeding current
yields on other investments.
Manal!:ement of buildinl!: bv the develooment l!:J"OUO
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected that fees in the range of25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
The vast majority ofthe costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
Reolacement of the develooment l!:rouo
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility. Any conditions imposed relative to the operation of
1'"', """'
v .....)
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
the facility would be assumed by subsequent owners of the management group or by
subsequent management companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation of the
facility for its private owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, there will be the investorlbuyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 ofthe
annual revenues.
~~hvf ~- (hv.
· ~ -rn-: - ~(A d'{.
"''0..
\"
'. "
Operations Prospectus
Park Place Parking Facility
707 Hyman Avenue
Overview
Parking in the core area of Aspen can be difficult and frustrating at times; sometimes it is
downright impossible. Part-time residents and locals living on the outskirts of town or in
more rural regions need to have available parking for many of their day-to-day needs.
Particularly for visitors and part-time residents, commuting by public transit is not a
satisfactory solution, because of the need to carry equipment or supplies. However, on-
street parking is limited and the public parking facilities are frequently full during the
mid-day hours. The private parking lots that do exist are unavailable to visitors, even
when there are empty spaces, because these lots are not actively attended and managed.
Park Place will be a unique facility in Aspen, one that provides covered valet parking for
owners, along with the opportunity to have an income producing space during times that
their personal use is not needed. Since this is "come and get it" type renting, owners can
put their lets-spaces on and off the rental pool with little notice. The spaces will be
condominiumized in order for owners to hold equity and not simply spend money on
parking. There is every expectation that they will gain in value, since they will eam
income. This income may increase over time with parking fee increases and increased
demand.
The following information is intended to establish an operations plan and assist in
reviewing the operational characteristics, as well as the community value, inherent in
providing this facility.
Comoonents of the Facilitv
The proposed design provides for 99 parking spaces, an office of approx. 470 square feet,
and two employee-housing units. The office space on ground level is intended for
management of the facility, providing a waiting space while cares are delivered, handling
payment, etc. The employee housing units will fully mitigate for any employee
generation and provide for 24-hour on-site supervision ofthe facility.
Use of Soaces
Although many of the spaces will be purchased for the convenience of owners, it is
apparent that no owner will be in residence 100% of the time. During periods of vacancy
by owners, a plan will be implemented towards income production for each owner.
r
Operations Prospectus""'
Page 2
""""'"
"10".-'
This will be addressed in the owner's covenants, but in order to have as many spaces
serve the public as possible, an owner will generally be required to lease the space when
not using the facility. The implementation of this plan will involve a computerized
inventory system. Under this system, the owner's vehicle will be scanned with a bar
code in order to maintain location of inventory for arrival and departure. If an owner's
vehicle has not been scanned in for 3 calendar days, their space will automically be
entered into the public parking pool. Since the facility provides on-demand usage, spaces
can be taken from inventory easily in order to accommodate owners who did not
anticipate their need prior to their arrival. However, the requirement is placed on the
owner to reserve their use and the system makes it available all other times. It is also
important to note that the management intends teshall retain 19 spaces which will
be for public use all of the time. This reserve will ensure that the garage will serve a
public parking function.
The plan calls for the system to act as a daily public parking facility, with the emphasis
placed on all day parking availabilitv. The parking scheme will encourage patrons to
park their cars for longer periods (6 - 8 hours), as there will onlv be a dailv rate for
parking. be a eeseElnding hearly rate. During the shoulder seasons, the plan is to sell
discounted single-dav parkings in order to encourage persons to park and leave their
vehicles it-all day, i.e., come in the morning and leave it till the end of the day for one
price so long as they exit only once. Longer rentals to non-owners. such as weekly and
monthly rentals, will not be permitted. Such rentals would interfere with the dailv
parking function. and potentiallv obstruct availabilitv of spaces for owners, sinee it
eellld end IIp as simply a helEling area fer sam ane it is seneeivable tkat all 89 spase
e',vners eellld eeme ell any partielllar day limiting pHillie IIsage.
Hours of operation should be sufficient to service all guests/owners. However, when
demand is not sufficient to staff the facility, it will be closed. By observing activities on
the streets, management anticipates closing between the hours of IQ:OO p.m. a,nr.-and
7:00 a.m. Hours may be more limited during lower season times but should never extend
past these hours of operation during high season. unless reviewed bv the Citv to
accommodate some special need. Special longer hours mav be established for event
parking in coniunction with Citv parking and traffic management activities, Examples of
these special events would be New Year's Eve and Fourth of Julv fireworks. Owners and
users will be required to anticipate closures in order to use their vehicles.
Parkin!! Tvoes
The different types of parking available to the public should include the following:
o Rellrl)'. There will be an hellrly priee sehedllle, althellgR this is lIet the mest
eesiFllille methee fer Parle Plaee. It will be mere than deHille tkan the street
parking for the first 2 3 hellrs te diseellrage slleh Ilsage. Hellrly rates ';:ill be
,j~'"
Operations Prospectu~
Page 3
/
" ,
aeseellaing ever time in enler Ie eacellrage IIsers te take aavantage ef lellger
stays. (I.e.,6 8 hellr perieas.)
fJ-Daily. Daily rates for parking will be the ~method
of usage. Examples of this include day skier parking, day business parking, and
night dining/shopping parking. Nineteen of the 99 total soaces shall be available
at all times for dailv parking. Other spaces shall also be available when not in use
bv their owners. The aeseellaiag rate aver time fer parkillg flleilitates this.
. Off-season. During times oflow and off seasons, the intent of management is
to offer an opportunity to purchase a discounted one-time park for the day. It will
mirror downtown rates for leaving a car on the street all day and allow one entry
and exit for a fixed price of up to II hours or from 7:00 am till 6:00 pm. This
takes those persons offthe street who are not accommodated by a 4-hour time
limit and who do not have to use their car during the course of the day. It should
also assist in reducing parking in the close-in residential areas to avoid paid
parking areas in the core.
. Lonl!er-term. Owners and non-owners mav occupv UP to 80 of the 99 spaces
overnight or for extended periods as needed. However. this longer-term parking
mav not be held emptv for extended periods of time and shall be available for
public dav perking when not actuallv in use bv owners.
Owners Association
As soon as a specific number of spaces are were-sold, there will welila be an Owners'
Aassociation created for owners who will v.'allla pay a quarterly fee for building
maintenance and other necessary expenses. It is expected the fee will be low and easily
offset by providing the space to the rental market even just occasionally. It is possible
that some buyers would buy multiple spaces, finding the return on investment to be
competitive or exceeding current yields on other investments.
Manal!ement of buildinl! bv the develooment I!rouo
At the time of sale of the spaces, all sales contracts will include a provision that any
rental of spaces would occur through the management company created to handle this
business. It is expected that fees in the range of25% of income would be appropriate.
Further, the purchase contracts will include a provision that the management company
would also handle all subsequent sales and determine an appropriate fee. This insures
that after initial sales have completed, the development group continues to have a role in
the on-going success of the project.
"
"......
Operations Prospectus
Page 4
'.
The vast majority of the costs associated with the structure such as parking attendants,
utilities, etc. will be covered by the association fee. The 30% fee will have very little
expenses associated with it. One on-site manager collecting fees and directing parking
attendants and some accounting would be the only costs associated. With an office space
in the building and guaranteed continuing revenues, this business would also be saleable
for the development group.
Reolacement ofthe develooment I!rouo
It is possible that at some point in time the current development group principals may
choose to vacate their interest in the parking operation. At such time, the management
entity may be purchased by others or a substitute entity set up to take over the affairs and
management of the parking facility. :\flY eSHditislls imflssed relativs te tile speFatisll sf
tile faeility wallie Be assllmed BY swselllleRt aWllers sf the mllllagemellt
~Subsequent owners of the management group would assume anv land use
conditions imposed relative to the operation of the facilitv or by subsequent management
companies, ensuring the continuing appropriate operation ofthe facility for its private
owners and the public benefit.
Potential Investors and Users
For any investor who may be interested in spaces purely from the prospective of return
on investment, it would be necessary to make some assumptions on who and how the
entire space is utilized in order to estimate returns to investors based on the predicted
parking revenues annually.
First, there will be a percentage of the spaces sold to individuals who will use those
spaces full time and will not be participating in any parking revenues. It is anticipated
that 20 or so spaces will be utilized in such fashion.
Next there will a percentage that will purchase for personal convenience when in town.
These spaces will be part of the rental pool when their owners are not in residence in
Aspen. These owners will tend to be in Aspen during high seasons and therefore not
participate in rental income during the highest seasons and heaviest parking times. It is
expected that 40 or so purchasers will buy under this assumption.
Finally, there will be the investor/buyer. Not using the space, always in the rental pool
and looking to maximize their annual gross. I anticipate selling those remaining 40, less
any retained by the development group in this fashion.
Although all these numbers are estimates since this style parking system has never been
used in such a way, it is assumed that the 40 space owners with part time income will
Operations Prospectus
Page 5
collect 1/3 of the expected annual revenues and the full time renters will earn 2/3 of the
annual revenues.
Amendment of Operations Plan
The Operations Plan defined in this prospectus mav be amended through the Citv of
Aspen Land Use Code conditional use amendment process.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Al!I'eement for Pavment ofCitv of Aspen Develonment Annlication Fees
CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and John Cooner. Man.Ping Partner. Hvman Avenue Holdings. LLC
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for
Parl: Place-Commercial Parking Facilitv. 707 East Hvrnan Avenue. Asoen
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of
2000) establishes a fue structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing tees is a
conditioo precedent to a determinatioo of application completeness.
3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the
application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT
make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on
a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additiooal costs may a=ne following their hearings and/or
approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make
additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are inCWTed. CITY
agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process
APPLICANT'S application.
4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete
processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Cmmcil to enable the
Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration,
unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision.
5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to
collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial
deposit in the amount of$ 2.520 which is fur 12 hours of CommImity Development staff
time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shan pay additional monthly
billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including
post approval review at a rate of$205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments
shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that fuilure to pay such
a=ned costs shall be groImds for suspensioo of processing, and in no case will building pmnits be issued
until all costs associated with case processing have been paid
CITY OF ASPEN
APPLICANT
By:
By:
Julie Ann Woods
Community Development Director
Date:
:\support\formslagrpayas.doc 6105/03g
Bil6ng Address and Telephone Number:
Reauired
John Cooner. Manal!'inl! Partner
Hvman Avenue HoJdinfJS. LLC
402 Midland Avenue Asoen 81611
379-3434
r"
....
....,
..........~
ATTACHMENT 7
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
, Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
,200_
STATE OF COLORADO )
) 55.
County of Pilliin )
I,-.::IO lA/\ -C2.5 G \./( C' ~ ~ (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspel1 Land Use Code in the following manner:
-4- Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice sectio~ of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached he(eto.
_ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from tl{r
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,
waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide
and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not
less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of
,200_, to and including the date and time of the public
hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
,
_ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first clas:j,postage
prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government,
school, service district or other govemmental or quasi-governmental(:tgency that
owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the
development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than
sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and
governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
...... . ~
"
,
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: PARK PLACE AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL PARKING GARAGE
CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), REZONING FOR
A PUD OVERLAY, SUBDIVISION REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW,
AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION REVIEW.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August
19, 2003, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission, at the Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado in the
Sister Cities Room, to consider an application submitted by Hyman Avenue Holdings,
LLC, for a consolidated planned unit development (PUD), rezoning for a PUD Overlay,
subdivision review, conditional use review, and growth management exemption review.
The property is described as Lots A, B, C, and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of
Aspen, and more commonly known as 707 East Hyman Avenue, currently an "A-Frame"
structure, and 300 South Spring Street, an office building also known as the "Hannah
Dustin" building. The proposal includes the construction of an automated commercial
parking facility housing ninety-nine (99) cars, an accessory office, and two affordable
housing units on the A-Frame site and no changes to the Hannah Dustin building. For
further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community Development
Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO. (970) 920-5072.
s/Jasmine TVl!re. Chair
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on August 2, 2003
City of Aspen Account
c
o
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Lots A. B. C. D Block 105. Citv and Townsite of Aspen.
707 East Hvman Avenue. and 300 South Sonne: Street
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 19 AU2Ust 2003
STATE OF COWRAOO )
)ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, CF.L.) Stan Clauson (name, please print)
representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I
have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the
Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
-.-L Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
1 Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,
waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide
and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not
less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 1st day of
AUlUJst .2003, to and including the date and time of the public
hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
~ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(EX2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid u.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government,
school, service district or other governmental or quasi-goverrunental agency that
owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the
development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than
sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and
governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
c
,""'"
",,.J
"~/ r;,,\.
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: PARK PLACE AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL PARKING GARAGE
CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), REZONING FOR
A PUD OVERLAY, SUBDIVISION REVIEW, CONDmONAL USE REVIEW,
AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION REVIEW.
--', r. .1-
\Jt:"~\ C
\
I 2
I '
I ~.! I
>. c> !
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August
19, 2003, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.rn. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission, at the Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado in the
Sister Cities Room, to consider an application submitted by Hyman Avenue Holdings,
LLC, for a consolidated planned unit development (POD), rezoning for a POD Overlay,
subdivision review, conditional use review, and growth management exemption review.
The property is described as Lots A, B, C, and D of Block 105, City and Townsite of
Aspen, and more commonly known as 707 East Hyman Avenue, currently an "A-Frame"
structure, and 300 South Spring Street, an office building also known as the "Hannah
Dustin" building. The proposal includes the construction of an automated commercial
parking facility housing ninety-nine (99) cars, an accessory office, and two affordable
housing units on the A-Frame site and no changes to the Hannah Dustin building. For
further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community Development
Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO. (970) 920-5072.
s/Jasmine Tvl!re. Chair
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on August 2, 2003
City of Aspen Account
c
:)
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of; and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall
be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amend/So
Signa
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 19th day
of August. 2002-> by (E.L.) Stan Clauson.
cm
/lHEP
~HE}
I~
I
I
I
i
/
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: 21 November 2005
-==
Smooth Feed Sheets™
312 HUNTER llC 50%
CIO CAROLYN A BARABE
790 CASTLE CREEK DR
ASPEN, CO 81611
ALEXANDER THOMAS l
715 E HYMAN AVE # 27
ASPEN, CO 81611
ARTLA L TO PARTNERSHIP
WM C KING
31 WINDING WAY
VERONA, PA 15147-3853
ATHLETIC CLUB MGMT SYSTEMS INC
, 720 E HYMAN AVE
SUITE 001
! ASPEN. CO 81611
BELL MOUNTAIN QUALIFIED
RESIDENCES
CONDO ASSOCIATION llC
320 S SPRING ST
ASPEN. CO 81611
BERSCH BLANCHE C
TRUSTEE OF BERSCH TRUST
9642 YOAKUM DR
BEVERLY HillS. CA 90210
BOGAERT FAMILY TRUST
PO BOX 300792 .
ESCONDIDO, CA 92030
BROWN SCOTT M REV TRUST 50%
320 N 7TH ST
ASPEN. CO 81611
CAlGI RAYMOND D & ANNE A
134 TEWKESBURY RD
SCARSDALE. NY 10583
CAVES KAREN WHEELER
1 BARR ENGER CT
NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92660
SAVcRY@
Adflrp~q r "npl~
o
610 EAST HYMAN LLC
CIO KRABACHER LAW OFFICES PC
201 N MILL ST STE 201
ASPEN, CO 81611
ANDERSON ROBERT M & lOUISE E
1021 23RD ST
CHETEK, WI 54728
ASPEN B COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
, EMMY LOU BRANDT CIO
316 SOPRIS CIR
BASALT, CO 81621
BARTLETT KA TY I
715 E HYMAN AVE #18
ASPEN, CO 81611-2066
BELL MTN lODGE llC
320 S SPRING ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
BERSCH TRUST
9642 YOAKUM DR
BEVERLY HillS, CA 90210
BRADLEY MARK A
PO BOX 1938
BASALT, CO 81621
'i I
I
, I BRZOSTOWSKI ROBERT
715 E HYMAN AVE - APT 20
ASPEN. CO 81611-2096
CAMERON JAMES 77.5%
4504 BELCLAIRE AVE
DALLAS. TX 75205
CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A llC
BlDG 421-G AABC
ASPEN, CO 81611
o
Use template for 5160@
AJAE l TD PARTNERSHIP
1501 N PIERCE #112
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72207
APPEL ROBERT
APPEL HELEN IN JOINT TENANCY
700 PARK AVE 18-A
NEW YORK, NY 10021
ASPEN SQUARE VENTURES LLP
CIO M & W PROPERTIES
205 S MILL ST STE 301A
ASPEN, CO 81611
BAUM ROBERT E ASPEN RES TRST
PO BOX 1518
STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262
BERMAN PETER J & ROCHEllE l
10021 ORMOND RD
POTOMAC. MD 20854
BISCHOFF JOHN C
502 S VIA GOlONDRINA
TUCSON, AZ 85716-5843
BREMER DR MALCOLM MD
3263 AVALON Pl
HOUSTON. TX 77019
BUCKHORN ARMS LlC
730 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
CARR WILLIAM F TRUSTEE
64 DOUBLING POINT RD
ARROWSIC. ME 04530
CHOOKASZIAN DENNIS
1100 MICHIGAN
WilMETTE, IL 60091
, -- ~--
_.... ...~115'l
Smooth Feed Sheets™
FIVE TREES LOT 15 LLC
C/O FOUR PEAKS DEVELOPMENT
1000 S MILL ST
ASPEN, CO 81611-3800
FLY MARIE N
7447 PEBBLE POINTE
W BLOOMFIELD, MI 48322
GILBERT GARY
1556 ROYAL BLVD
GLENDALE, CA 91207
HABER WILBUR A
HABER SANDRA
20409 KISHWAUKEE VALLEY RD
MARENGO, IL 60152
HEMP SUZANNE H & MARLY P JR
TRUSTEES
FOR THE SUZANNE HEMP LIVING
TRUST
15470 POMONA RD
BROOKFIELD, WI 53005
HOFFMAN JOHN S III
715 E HYMAN AVE #16
ASPEN, CO 81611
HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP
C/O M & W PROPERTIES
205 S MILL ST STE 301 A
ASPEN. CO 81611
JOHNSON BARBARA WEAVER LIVING
TRUST
PO BOX 3570
LAS CRUCES. NM 88003
KASHINSKI MICHAEL R
0343 GROVE CT
ASPEN. CO 81611
KELLY SIMON P TRUST 50%
corrHE BUCKHORN ARMS LLC
ATTN: JOHN HOFFAMN III 732 E
COOPER AVE
ASPEN. CO 81611
~AVERY@
Address L"hpl~
I'"
\..../
FLINT MARILYN TRUSTEE
3945 KIRKLAND CT
BLOOMFIELD HILLS. MI 48302
FURNGULF L TD
A COLO JOINT VENTURE
616 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
GODBOLD EDMUND 0
524 COLONY DR
HARTSDALE. NY 10530
HAYLES THOMAS
715 E HYMAN AVE #5
ASPEN, CO 81611
HENDIRCKS JOHN AND BONNIE 1/2 INT
254 N LAUREL AVE
DES PLAINES, IL 60016
HUNKE CARLTON J
4410 TIMBERLINE DR SW
FARGO, ND 58103
JACOBS NORMAN & JERI
2105 HYBERNIA DR
HIGHLAND PARK. IL 60035
JOYCE EDWARD
11 S LA SALLE ST STE 1600
CHICAGO. IL 60603-1211
KEENAN MICHAEL E & NOLA
265 S FEDERAL HWY BOX 332
DEERFIELD BEACH, FL 33441
KIEFER KAREN B TRUST 1/4
2130 NW 95TH ST
SEATTLE, WA 98117-2425
--.
Use template for 5160@
, ,
FLOWERS JUDY R
715 E HYMAN AVE #1
ASPEN. CO 81611,2063
GARRISON LELAND M TRUSTEE
4802 E SECOND ST SUITE 2
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE
455 CITY FRONT PLAZA
CHICAGO,IL 60611
HELLINGER PROPERTIES L TO
1849 WYCLIFF DR
ORLANDO. FL 32803
HENDRICKS SIDNEY J
6614 LAKEVILLE HWY
PETALUMA, CA 94954-9256
HUNT SARAH J
715 E HYMAN AVE #22
ASPEN. CO 81611
JOFFE LIVING TRUST
21320 DEERING CT
CANOGA DARK. CA 91304-5017
KANTAS NICOLETTE
715 E HYMAN AVE #15
ASPEN. CO 81611
KELLY NORA D TRUST 50%
C/O THE BUCKHORN ARMS LLC
732 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
KOPP ROBERT L 50%
34425 HWY 82
ASPEN, CO 81611
[ -.........
,....,n,(ii)
Smooth Feed Sheets™
KRAJIAN RON
617 E COOPER AVE #114
ASPEN, CO 8161,1
lANDRY ELIZABETH J
PO BOX 3036
ASPEN, CO 81612
LEMOS BARBARA LIVING TRUST 1/3 INT
PO BOX 321
ASPEN, CO 81612
lOUDERBACK JACQUELINE M & JOHN
719 E HOPKINS AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
MAYLE KENNETH 0
715 E HYMAN AVE #3
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
MOEN DONNE P & ELIZABETH A
, 8 CABAllEROS RD
ROLLING HillS. CA 90274
N S N ASSOCIATES INC
11051 W ADDISON ST
FRANKLIN PARK, Il 60131
NELSON BRYAN lEE
715 E HYMAN #21
ASPEN, CO 81611
NIELSON COl STEVE & CAROL 0
501 S FAIRFAX
ALEXANDRIA. VA 22314
PEARSON REBECCA J
1610 JOHNSON DR
STillWATER, MN 55082
..a ll\FI:OV@
Arlrl..",......... I -'lh.....I...
"...:.
" .1
KUTINSKY BRIAN
7381 MOHANSIC DR
BLOOMFIELD HillS, MI 48301
LAZY J RANCH llC
C/O W R WALTON
PO BOX 665
ASPEN, CO 81612
L1EB MADELINE TRUST
800 E HYMAN AVE #A
ASPEN. CO 81611
MARTEll FRED & BARBARA
702 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN. CO 81611
, MCFADDEN GORDON K
, , 18519 E VAllEY RD
KENT, WA 98032
MONGE EDWARD P & VICTORIA l
23284 TWO RIVERS RD #11A
BASALT. CO 81621
NATIERER HELEN
57 BURN BANK ST
NEPEAN
ONTARIO K2GOH2 CANADA,
NETHERY BRUCE
715 E HYMAN AVE #25
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
NOONAN JOHN C
715 E HYMAN AVE #9
ASPEN. CO 81611
; , ' PETERSON CHRISTY
, 62 lAKE SHORE DR
RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270-4054
,..........)
"- ".1
Use tempLate for 5160@
lANDIS JOSHUA B
715 E HYMAN AVE #4
ASPEN. CO 81611
lEGNAME RUDI
202 STANFORD AVE
Mill VAllEY. CA 94941
lONG GERALD P & PATRICIA 0
TRUSTEES
490 WilLIAMS ST
DENVER. CO 80218
MAVROVIC ERNA
530 E 72ND ST APT 15-C
NEW YORK. NY 10021
MIKI
PO BOX 566329
MIAMI, Fl 33256
MYSKO BOHDAN 0
C/O ABERCROMBIE & ASSOC
418 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN. CO 81654
NELLIS CHAD
13316 BEACH AVE
MARINA DEL RAY. CA 90292
NEUMANN MICHAEL
7381 MOHASNIC DR
BLOOMFIELD HillS. MI 48301
, PATIO BUilDING COMPANY llC
, PO BOX 1066
, ASPEN, CO 81612
!
!
PHilLIPS STEPHANIE
985 FIFTH AVE
NEW YORK. NY 10021
=
Smooth Feed Sheets™
PITKIN EXCHANGE HOLDINGS OF
ASPEN LLC
601 E HOPKINS 3RD FLOOR
ASPEN, CO 81611
RED FLOWER PROP CO PTNSHP
545 MADISON AVE STE 700
NEW YORK. NY 10022
ROARING FORK PROPRIETARY LLC
2519E21STST.
TULSA, OK 74114
RUBENSTEIN ALAN B & CAROL S
57 OLDFIELD DR
SHERBORN, MA 01770
SAKSON DREW
POBOX 1625
CARBONDALE, CO 81623-4625
SCHNITZER KENNETH L & LISA L
4023 OAK LAWN AVE
DALLAS, TX 75219
SHARP TERRI L
715 E HYMAN AVE #12
ASPEN. CO 81611
SIMMONS RICHARD P & DOROTHY P
1500 LAKESHORE DR APT 18 A
CHICAGO, IL 60610
STETSON SUSAN
715 E HYMAN AVE #11
ASPEN, CO 81611-2063
TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO 1/2
489 ROSE LN
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
~ ft'-I~__=
^ J...L._..._. r .
c'
PORTE BROOKE
3520 PADDOCK RD
WESTON. FL 33331-3521
REICH DANIEL S TRUST 20%
6 RINCON ST
IRVINE. CA 92702
ROGER RICHARD R
4300 WESTGROVE
ADDISON, TX 75001
I
I'
RYERSON GEORGE W JR
715 E HYMAN AVE #17
ASPEN. CO 81611
SANDIFER C WESTON JR & DICKSIE LEE
2836 WOOD DUCK DR
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
SEGUIN JEFF W & MADALYN B
PO BOX 8852
ASPEN, CO 81612
SHERWIN GREGORY
2990 SHADOW CREEK DR
BOULDER. CO 80303-1751
SMART EDWIN J
PO BOX 799
ASPEN, CO 81612
,I
I' STRIBLING DOROTHY &
WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135
PO BOX 40062
JACKSONVI LLE, FL 32203-0062
TERMINELLO DENNIS J & KERRY L
656 RIDGEWAY
WHITE PLAINS, NY 10605-4323
.-
....J
Use template for 5160@
RAHLEK LTD
DOUGLAS ROGERS
2200 MARKET ST
GALVESTON. TX 77550-1530
REICH MELVIN L TRUST 80%
4609 SEASHORE DR
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
ROSS JOHN F
7600 CLAYTON RD
STLOUIS.MO 63117
SAHR KAREN M
715 E HYMAN AVE #8
ASPEN. CO 81611
SCHEINKMAN NANCY
715 E HYMAN AVE #23
ASPEN. CO 81611
SEGUIN MARY E TRUSTEE OF TRUST
4944 CASS ST #1002
SAN DIEGO. CA 92109-2041
SHUMATE MARK
1267 STILLWOOD DR
ATLANTA. GA 30306
SPRING STREET PO
C/O GULFCO L TD
616 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN. CO 81611
TAYLOR E NORRIS 1/2
602 E HYMAN AVE #1
ASPEN, CO 81611
TREUER CHRISTIN L
981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N
LITTLETON, CO 80122
Smooth Feed Sheets™
TROUSDALE JEAN VICK
611 E HOPKINS AVE
ASPEN. CO 81611
VOTIS GEORGE T
GALT INDUSTRIES C/O
767 5TH AVE 5TH FL
NEW YORK. NY 10153
WALLING REBECCA
350 BLANCA AVE
TAMPA. FL 33606
WEIGAND FAMILY TRUST 23/100
, 150 N MARKET
WICHITA, KS 67202
WElL NANCY
1404 23RD AVE
GREELEY. CO 80634
WILLOUGHBY MARIAN V TRUST
12322 RIP VAN WINKLE
HOUSTON, TX 77024
WOODS FRANK J III
205 S MILL ST STE 301A
ASPEN, CO 81611
YOUNG RICHARD C 1/3
C/O CORTRIGHT REAL TORS
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO,IA 50701
Q AVl==r?V@
-
\. ,/
VICENZI HEATHER L
715 E HYMAN AVE #10
ASPEN. CO 81611-2063
WACHTMEISTER EDWARD TRUST
6223 WHITEHALL FARM LN
WARRENTON. VA 20187-7247
I
i I
" WARNKEN MARK G
, ! 1610 JOHNSON DR
,; : STILLWATER. MN 55082
WEIGAND N R
WEIGAND M C
150 N MARKET
WICHITA, KS 67202
WHITTENBURG J A III 80%
620 S TAYLOR
AMARILLO, TX 79109
WITHAM RICHARD 1/3
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO, IA 50701
YERAMIAN CHARLES
PO BOX 12347
ASPEN, CO 81612
I ZENSEN ROGER
ZENSEN MARl ANN
, 313 FRANCES THACKER
, WILLIAMSBURG. VA 23185
ArJrlrAC:C:: r ::thole:
,-.
Use template for 5160@
,. ,.,<'
VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC
C/O GARFIELD & HECHT PC
601 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN. CO 81611
WALLEN MERT
. 36 OCEAN VISTA
, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
WAVO 1998 TRUST
C/OWMVAN ORSDEL
443 SW 6TH ST
DES MOINES. IA 50309
WEIGAND NESTOR R III 50/100
C/O J P WEIGAND & SONS IND
150 N MARKET
WICHITA. KS 67202
WILKIE MICHAEL 1/2 INT
254 N LAUREL AVE
DES PLAINES. IL 60016
WITHAM RICHARD J 1/3
CIO CORTRIGHT REALTORS
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO.IA 50701
YOUNG RICHARD 1/3
3806 PHEASANT LN
WATERLOO, IA 50701
_ ~ ;_ID\
'"..".
P<t2:: e,/,"'I I Z-ao3
~
ATTACHMENT 7
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
'DD","O"RD"RTY 701 zt7z ~~I!\
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: ~ 0'
, Aspen, CO
,200_
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, .~~ VV\ v:;J <::: i--t ~II- (name, please print)
being or repres~nting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certifY that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
~ublication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
_ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained'from the
Commmuty Development Department, which was made of suitable,
waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide f
and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not
less than one'inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days l
prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of
,200_, to and including the date and time of the public
hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
_ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal govemment,
school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that
owns property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe property subject to the
development application. The names and addresses of property owners t, tall be
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no mo e than
sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the own rs and
governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
~.,.-
"
.....,~
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall
be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
· --rh
The fi\going "Affidavit of Notice" was ackn,owledged b~for~ ~ day
of V~l:Si7 ,200~by r~S J..-...l
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: 'f/d)-3/ d-~
PUBUC NOTICE
"".. ~'CE,AIJf, OM.< J'EI) COMMERCIAL,
PARKING . CONSOLIDATED PLANNED
UNIT . . MENT (PUD), REZONING FOR A
PlIO , SUBOMSlON REVIEW, CONDI-
TIONAL' , AND GROWIll MANAGE-
MENT EXEMPTION REVIEW.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
wiD be held on Tuesday, August 19, 2003, at ,a
meetibg to beglri at 4:311 p.rn. befOre the Aspen
Planning and Zotilng Commission, _at the Aspen
City Hall, 130 SoUtlt Galena Street, Aspen. Colora-
do In the SIster Cities Room, to cons1der an applI-
cation submitted by Hyman ,Avenue HoldIngs,
u..c. for .a consolidated pJanned IUllt ~evelop-
ment (PUD), rezoning for a PUD Overlay,. subdivi-
sion review, condltlOnal' use review, and growth
management exempttort review. 1beproperty is
described as Lots A, 8, C, and D 01 Block 105, CIty
and: TownsUe 01. Aspen,~'ana more conHRonIy
. trtoWn'li& 707f,ast tfyQtanAven1le. 6JiteotIy-an
;"'.=~=::,=.:::::=~= 'RAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
.. tln:'_I:Juik!ll:!,g.., The proJMlSilllncludes the cQnStruc~
tlon of an automated commercial parldng faclUty
::.,o:,':d ':'..'1:';;':>h=';',;"~~e ':t AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
Frame site ~ no ~ to the HAnnah Dustin BY MAIL
building. ~
Fo, Iurt.... ~1ont.ct Cbrio Bendon"
the CIty of Aspen '. - Ullity Development I)e:.
partment, 130 8. , . .. Aspen, CO. (970) 920-
5072. .f. . . .
sf Jasmine 1'ygre, Chair
Aspen Planruog and Zoning Commission
Published In 1be Aspen Times on 'August 2, 2003:
(0654) .
Notary Public
A TT ACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION