HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.610 S West End St.0058.2005.ASLU
c
...'"
City of Aspen Community Development Dept.
CASE NUMBER
0058.2005.ASLU
PARCEL 10 NUMBER 2735-12-4-61-101
PROJECT ADDRESS 610 W WESTEND ST
PLANNER
JENNIFER
PHELAN
CASE DESCRIPTION PUD AMENDMENT
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN RICHMAN 920-1125
DATE OF FINAL ACTION 9113/2005
CLOSED BY Denise Driscoll
,
-.
r......
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
of the
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
/'"
This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070,
"Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to
the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall
also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall
expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building
permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension,
reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After
Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding
any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to
any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order.
This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific
development plan as described below.
Gant Condominium Association, 610 West End Street. Aspen, CO 81611
Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number
The Gant Condominiums, also known as 610 West End Street
Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property
The Gant Condominium Association ("Applicant") has applied for an insubstantial PUD amendment to 1 )
replace the existing canopv at the front of the main office with a slightlv larger canopv; and 2) make
landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around Buildings A. R C. J, and K of the
Condominium Complex
Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan
Gant Condominiums Insubstantial Amendment, Series of2005, 8/29/05
Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions)
September 11. 2005
Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.)
September 12, 2008
Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and
revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 ofthe City of Aspen Municipal Code.)
Issued this lih day of September, 2005, by the City of Aspen Community
Der~~~;~ctor.
Chris-B~ndon, Community Development Director
,....."
'-'
'"'
'-'
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
FROM:
Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner
RE:
Gant Condominiums Insubstantial PUD Amendment
DATE:
August 22, 2005
1111111111111111111111 ~;:~~~~!:1
SILVIR DRVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 0 0.00
:24l'
ApPLICANT:
Gant Condominium Association
LOCA nON:
610 West End Street
ZONING:
R-15 with a PUD Overlay
REVIEW PROCEDURE:
Insubstantial amendments to an approved PUD may be approved, approved with conditions, or
denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.445.100(A), PUD
Insubstantial Amendments.
REQUEST:
The Gant Condominium Association ("Applicant") has applied for an insubstantial PUD
amendment to 1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger
canopy; and 2) make landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around
Buildings A, B, C, J, and K of the Condominium Complex.
AUTHORITY TO ApPLY:
The Condominium Association has represented to Staff in the application that they have the
ability to represent the individual owners within the condominium complex pursuant to the
Ganl's condominium documentation. The Applicant has also represented in the application
that a majority of the unit owners within the Gant Complex voted in favor of making the
improvements proposed in this application. Therefore, pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26.304.040, Initiation of application for development order, the Applicant has the authority
to apply for a PUD amendment given that persons owning more than fifty (50) percent of
the property subject to the application have consented to making the improvements
requested herein.
BACKGROUND:
The Gant received an amendment to their original approvals in 1989 that provided them an
allowance to expand "non-unit" space by 2,500 square feet over what existed pursuant to City
Council Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989. According to the application and supporting
documentation, there have been three (3) expansions of "non-unit" space in the Gant since
Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989, was enacted. These above three (3) expansions totaled 2,118
1
r'
'-"
square feet, leaving 382 square feet of floor area still available for "non-unit" expansion. In
2004, the Applicant submitted and was approved an application for an Insubstantial PUD
Amendment for initial landscaping and building improvements around Buildings D, E, F, G and
H.
STAFF COMMENTS:
In reviewing the request to remove and replace the canopy, the proposed canopy is not to be
enclosed and would not count against the 382 square feet of available floor area referenced
above. The proposed landscape improvements incorporated in this application include 1)
enhanced landscaping around several of the buildings; and 2) new concrete pavers to replace the
existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings; and 3) new stone-faced concrete walls to
replace the existing railroad-tie walls; and 4) enhancement to the entry area will include a
snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature. These improvements will
be developed in phases in the next few years.
Staff consulted with the City of Aspen Parks Department, City Engineer, City Building
Department, and City Land Use Engineer (please see referral agency comments attached as
Exhibit "C"). The Parks Department has indicated that for each individual phase the project
manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree removals and excavation under the
drip line. Additionally the improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler Ditch
should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running. Staff has included conditions of
approval to this effect.
The Community Development Engineer and the City Engineer have been consulted on the
request and are requiring that the Applicant provide a drainage plan prepared by a licensed
engineer at the time of building permit submittal showing no increase in the historic runoff and
r-o-w permit if work is undertaken in the r-o-w. Additionally a detailed landscape plan showing
any grading changes will be submitted. Additionally the City Engineer is requesting that the
Applicant upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city's drainage inlet from the last
drywell behind their driveway on the north side.
Staff feels that the proposed landscaping and canopy improvements will enhance the aesthetics
of the property. The area that is proposed for snowmelt has been a problematic area for the Gant
and will provide additional driving safety. In total, Staff believes that the proposal meets the
review standards for approving an insubstantial amendment to a PUD as long as the conditions
of approval proposed herein are complied with.
RECOMMENDA nON:
Staff believes that the proposed application meets the review standards for approving an
insubstantial PUD amendment pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.100(A), PUD
Insubstantial Amendments. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Community Development
Director approve the proposed amendment to allow for 1) the replacement of the existing
canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) landscaping
improvements (both hardscape and softscape) around Buildings A, B, C, J, and K of the
Condominium Complex.
514269
Page: 2 of 6
o 0.00
2
.-"
""".
'-'
"-",,
ApPROVAL:
I hereby approve this insubstantial PUD amendment to allow for 1) the replacement of the
existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) the
proposed landscaping and site improvements to the Gant Condominiums at 610 S. West End
Street, with the following conditions:
1.
The Applicant shall provide a separate tree permit, for both tree removal and
excavation under the drip line for each individual phase the project.
2.
The Applicant's improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler
Ditch should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running.
3.
The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped
with the snowmelt driveway and the stone accent autocourt as identified on the
site plan titled: The Gant - Phase II-Ill Improvements - PUD Amendment. A
grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or improvement to
existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb, snowmelt
driveway, and the stone accent autocourt. Any improvements outlined in phase
II-III shall not increase the historic run-off.
4.
A r-o-w permit is required if work is undertaken in the r-o-w.
5.
The Applicant shall upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city's
drainage inlet from the last drywell behind their driveway on the north side.
6.
The Applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan to the Parks Department for
review and approval if any changes are proposed that are not shown on the
submitted plan or were not represented during the site visit.
7.
The Applicant shall apply for and obtain building permits prior to making any
improvements to buildings or retaining walls.
8.
All outdoor lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code pursuant to
Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. The Applicant shall
submit a detailed lighting plan including cut sheets of the proposed fixtures for
review and approval by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer in conjunction with
b,i1"o, pemri. ""fllvWl ~
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
Daub ~.tX
ACCEPTANCE:
I, as a person being or representing the Applicant, do hereby agree to the conditions of this
approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of my
knowledge.
1111111111111111111I II :;;~~~~:1
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 0 0.00
,)
:24P
I""'-
'--'
/,
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A --Review Criteria and Staff Findin s
ExhIbit B --Application g
Exhibit C --Referral Comments
11"111 "III "II" 11"11 III 11111" 11"1 III "III 1111 1"1 :;;~~~~~;1: 24P
SILVIA DFWIS PITKIN COUNTY co R 31.00 0 0.00
4
c
:)
:24P
Exhibit A
Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Insubstantial PUD Amendment.
1. A change in the use or character of the development.
Staff finding:
Staff does not believe that the proposal will significantly change the character of the
development. In fact, Staff feels that the proposal will beautify the aesthetics of the site by
updating many of the hardscape landscaping features. Moreover, the Parks Department has
reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and believes that it is appropriate so long as the
Applicant amends it per the concerns that were outlined in the decision notice. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the
land.
Staff finding:
The proposed improvements will not change the overall coverage of structures on land. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed
development, or the demand for public facilities.
Staff finding:
Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not affected by this amendment. Staff
finds this criterion not to be applicable to this request.
4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space.
Staff finding:
The amount of open space will not be reduced by the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space.
5
r"
'-'
,.....
........
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number of parking
spaces. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application.
6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-of-way for streets and easements.
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not proposing changes to right-of-way widths. Staff finds this criterion not
to be applicable to this application.
7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of
commercial buildings.
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not proposing to increase the gross leasable floor area of a commercial
building. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application.
8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the
development.
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not proposing a change in the residential density. Staff finds this criterion not
to be applicable to this application.
9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's
original approval or which requires granting a further variation from the project's
approved use or dimensional requirements.
Staff finding:
Staff does not believe that the proposed amendments are inconsistent with a condition of
approval or representation made in the property's original approval. Moreover, the Applicant
has not proposed to vary the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
11111111111111111111111 :~;~~~~~ :124P
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 0 0.00
6
c
/.,....,
arichman@sopris.net, 11:19 AM 8/26/2005, No Subject
To: arichman@sopris.net
From: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject:
Cc:
Bee:
Attached: C:\Documents and Settings~ennifep\My Documents\Current Planning\610 S. Westend
(Gant)\Staff Report.doc;
Alan - Chris asked me to make these changes. They are included in the attachment.
The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt
driveway and the stone accent autocourt as identified on the site plan titled: The Gant - Phase 11-
III Improvements - PUD Amendment. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or
improvement to existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb, snowmelt
driveway, and the stone accent autocourt. Any improvements outlined in phase II-III shall not
increase the historic run-off.
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
1
arichman@sopris.net. 10:43 AM 8/26/2005, No Subject
To: arichman@sopris.net
From: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject:
Cc:
Bcc:
Attached:
Alan - The engineer and I have been trying to come up with language that satisfies his concerns.
Here is what we came up with. You may want to speak to Alex Evonitz personally (429-2768) if
this won't work for your client.
The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt
and the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatibility or
improvement to existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb and gutter,
snowmelt, and the autocourt. If any improvements outlined in phase II-III, which are not included
in the drainage plan, are found to increase the historic run-off, a detailed drainage report shall be
required by the City.
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
1
Page I of2
X-Sender: alexe@commons
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 200510:36:55 -0600
To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: Alex Evonitz <alexe@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: drainage language
X - MaiIScanner-lnformation: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean
The language looks appropriate if we clarify the section referencing phases ii and iii as we discussed. As
I mentioned I will be glad to be the sounding board if question do arise...ave
At 09:30 AM 8/26/2005 , you wrote:
The eyes are glazing over...............
The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for the areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt and
the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verity compatibility or improvement to
existing drainage patterns with regard to the areas of new curb and gutter, snowmelt, and the auto court.
If any improvements outlined in phase II-III, which are not provided a drainage plan, are found to
increase the historic run-off, a detailed drainage report shall be required by the City.
At 08:34 AM 8/26/2005, you wrote:
Good Morning,
I did tweak things a little that I hope will ease some ofthe Owners anxiety. Let me know if they
would like to discuss the wording and or the intent...good luck!
ave
At 0 I :56 PM 8/25/2005 , you wrote:
What about this wording?
The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for all areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt,
including the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatability or
improvement to existing drainage patterns. If any modifications are found to impact the historic
run-off, a detailed drainage report may be required by the City. If this becomes necessary that
report will need to fulfil the standard requirements for the City of Aspen in the areas of
improvement/redevelopment.
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611-1975
Phone: (970) 429-2759
Fax: (970) 920-5439
Community Development Engineer
Office 429-2768
Jennifer Phelan
file:l/C:\DOCUME-l \jennifep\LOCALS- I \Temp\eudB.htm
8/31/2005
Alex Evonitz, 08:34 AM 8/26/1005, Re: drainage language
Page] of I
X-Sender: alexe@commons
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 08:34:54 -0600
To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: Alex Evonitz <alexe@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: drainage language
X-MaiIScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean
Good Morning,
I did tweak things a little that I hope will ease some of the Owners anxiety. Let me know if they
would like to discuss the wording and or the intent...good luck!
ave
At 0 I :56 PM 8/25/2005 , you wrote:
What about this wording?
The applicant will provide a site drainage plan for all areas being redeveloped with the snowmelt,
including the stone autocourt. A grading plan will also be required to verify compatability or
improvement to existing drainage patterns. If any modifications are found to impact the historic run-
off, a detailed drainage report may be required by the City. If this becomes necessary that report will
need to fulfil the standard requirements for the City of Aspen in the areas of
improvement/redevelopment.
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611-1975
Phone: (970) 429-2759
Fax: (970) 920-5439
Community Development Engineer
Office 429-2768
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
8/31/2005
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
FROM:
Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner
RE:
Gant Condominiums Insubstantial PUD Amendment
DATE:
August 22, 2005
ApPLICANT:
Gant Condominium Association
LOCATION:
61 0 West End Street
ZONING:
R -15 with a PUD Overlay
REVIEW PROCEDURE:
Insubstantial amendments to an approved PUD may be approved, approved with conditions, or
denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.445.100(A), PUD
Insubstantial Amendments.
REQUEST:
The Gant Condominium Association ("Applicant") has applied for an insubstantial PUD
amendment to I) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger
canopy; and 2) make landscaping improvements (both hardscape and vegetative) around
Buildings A, B, C, J, and K of the Condominium Complex.
AUTHORITY TO ApPLY:
The Condominium Association has represented to Staff in the application that they have the
ability to represent the individual owners within the condominium complex pursuant to the
Gant's condominium documentation. The Applicant has also represented in the application
that a majority of the unit owners within the Gant Complex voted in favor of making the
improvements proposed in this application. Therefore, pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26.304.040, Initiation of application for development order, the Applicant has the authority
to apply for a PUD amendment given that persons owning more than fifty (50) percent of
the property subject to the application have consented to making the improvements
requested herein.
BACKGROUND:
The Gant received an amendment to their original approvals in 1989 that provided them an
allowance to expand "non-unit" space by 2,500 square feet over what existed pursuant to City
Council Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1989. According to the application and supporting
documentation, there have been three (3) expansions of "non-unit" space in the Gant since
Ordinance No.4 I, Series of 1989, was enacted. These above three (3) expansions totaled 2,118
I
square feet, leaving 382 square feet of floor area still available for "non-unit" expansion. In
2004, the Applicant submitted and was approved an application for an Insubstantial PUD
Amendment for initial landscaping and building improvements around Buildings D, E, F, G and
H.
STAFF COMMENTS:
In reviewing the request to remove and replace the canopy, the proposed canopy is not to be
enclosed and would not count against the 382 square feet of available floor area referenced
above. The proposed landscape improvements incorporated in this application include 1)
enhanced landscaping around several of the buildings; and 2) new concrete pavers to replace the
existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings; and 3) new stone-faced concrete walls to
replace the existing railroad-tie walls; and 4) enhancement to the entry area will include a
snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature. These improvements will
be developed in phases in the next few years.
Staff consulted with the City of Aspen Parks Department, City Engineer, City Building
Department, and City Land Use Engineer (please see referral agency comments attached as
Exhibit "C"). The Parks Department has indicated that for each individual phase the project
manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree removals and excavation under the
drip line. Additionally the improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler Ditch
should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running. Staff has included conditions of
approval to this effect.
The Community Development Engineer and the City Engineer have been consulted on the
request and are requiring that the Applicant provide a drainage plan prepared by a licensed
engineer at the time of building permit submittal showing no increase in the historic runoff, a r-
o-w permit if work is undertaken in the r-o-w, and a detailed landscape plan showing any
grading changes be submitted. Additionally the City Engineer is requesting that the Applicant
upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city's drainage inlet from the last drywell
behind their driveway on the north side.
Staff feels that the proposed landscaping and canopy improvements will enhance the aesthetics
of the property. The area that is proposed for snowmelt has been a problematic area for the Gant
and will provide additional driving safety. In total, Staff believes that the proposal meets the
review standards for approving an insubstantial amendment to a PUD as long as the conditions
of approval proposed herein are complied with.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that the proposed application meets the review standards for approving an
insubstantial PUD amendment pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445. 1 OO(A), PUD
Insubstantial Amendments. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Community Development
Director approve the proposed amendment to allow for I) the replacement of the existing
canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) landscaping
improvements (both hardscape and sottscape) around Buildings A, B, C, J, and K of the
Condominium Complex.
2
ApPROVAL:
I hereby approve this insubstantial PUD amendment to allow for I) the replacement of the
existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy; and 2) the
proposed landscaping and site improvements to the Gant Condominiums at 610 S. West End
Street, with the following conditions:
I. The Applicant shall provide a separate tree permit, for both tree removal and
excavation under the drip line for each individual phase the project.
2. The Applicant's improvements to the entry of the Gant specific to the Wheeler
Ditch should coincide with the time the ditch is not actively running.
3. The Applicant shall provide a site drainage plan prepared by a licensed engineer
as part of the building permit submittal.
4. A r-o-w permit is required if work is undertaken in the r-o-w.
5. The Applicant shall upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to the city's
drainage inlet from the last drywell behind their driveway on the north side.
6. The Applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan to the Parks Department for
review and approval if any changes are proposed that are not shown on the
submitted plan or were not represented during the site visit.
7. The Applicant shall apply for and obtain building permits prior to making any
improvements to buildings or retaining walls.
8. All outdoor lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code pursuant to
Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. The Applicant shall
submit a detailed lighting plan including cut sheets of the proposed fixtures for
review and approval by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer in conjunction with
h,ildi"" pcrmi",hmi", . ~ o""'&1~1LV?
IS Bendon, Community Development Director
ACCEPTANCE:
I, as a person being or representing the Applicant, do hereby agree to the conditions of this
approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of my
knowledge.
Date
Molly Campbell, General Manager
Gant Condominium Association, Inc.
3
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A --Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B --Application
Exhibit C --Referral Comments
4
... "~.
"""'"
Exhibit A
Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Insubstantial PUD Amendment.
1. A change in the use or character of the development.
Staff finding:
Staff does not believe that the proposal will significantly change the character of the
development. In fact, Stafffeels that the proposal will beautify the aesthetics of the site by
updating many of the hardscape landscaping features. Moreover, the Parks Department has
reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and believes that it is appropriate so long as the
Applicant amends it per the concerns that were outlined in the decision notice. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on
the land.
Staff finding:
The proposed improvements will not change the overall coverage of structures on land. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed
development, or the demandfor public facilities.
Staff finding:
Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not affected by this amendment.
Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this request.
4 A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space.
Staff finding:
The amount of open space will not be reduced by the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading
,Ipace.
5
c
"
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number of parking
spaces. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application.
6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-of-wayfor streets and easements.
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not proposing changes to right-of-way widths. Staff finds this criterion
not to be applicable to this application.
7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area
of commercial buildings.
Staff finding:
The Applicant is not proposing to increase the gross leasable floor area of a commercial
building. Statf finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application.
8 An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the
development.
StatI finding:
The Applicant is not proposing a change in the residential density. Staff finds this criterion
not to be applicable to this application.
9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's
original approval or which requires granting a further variation from the project's
approved use or dimensional requirements.
Staff finding:
Staff does not believe that the proposed amendments are inconsistent with a condition of
approval or representation made in the property's original approval. Moreover, the Applicant
has not proposed to vary the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
6
krrAG\N\U~\ \::::, '-,'
~' ~ \0'-\\0t"
~~.~
.. ,
A~ i1<~'
<$",,% 36/3 rt4fu<<.. ~ F/6/2
'PM..e/7a.x (970)920-/ /25
~~...a
July 12, 2005
Mr. James Lindt, Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS
(PHASES 2 AND 3)
Dear James,
This is an application for an insubstantial amendment to the PUD approvals previously
granted to the Gant Condominiums. The Gant Condominiums is located at 610 West End
Street in Aspen, The property consists of approximately 5.5 acres of land, and is improved
with 143 multi-family residential dwelling units (305 bedrooms).
The purpose of this application is to (1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main
office with a slightly larger canopy; and (2) improve the landscaping features around the A,
B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant. The locations of these proposed improvements are
shown on the floor plans and landscape plan that accompany this application.
This application is being submitted by the Gant Condominium Association, Inc., the owner
of the property (hereinafter, "the applicant"). Proof of the ownership of the property is
provided by Exhibit #1, a letter from Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C, counsel to
the Association. Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the Gant
Condominium Association for this application is provided by Exhibit #2. This letter also
provides certification from the AssoCiation that the proposed improvements have been voted
on and approved by a majority of the owners.
I held a pre-application conference with you on July 12, 2005 (see Exhibit #3, Pre-
Application Conference Summary), At that time, you confirmed that these activities would
be processed administratively as an Insubstantial PUD Amendment, pursuant to Section
26.445.100 A of the Aspen Land Use Regulations.
The following sections of this application identify the standards of the Aspen Land Use Code
that apply to an Insubstantial PUD Amendment and provide a response to each standard.
First, however, a brief overview of past approvals given to the Gant Condominiums is
provided, which help to provide a context for this proposal.
,....."
/"'"",,
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Two
History of Prior Approvals
The Gant Condominiums was originally approved as a PUD by the Aspen City Council in
the early 1970's. The project was developed in three phases and the original plats for the
property document these phases. The plat for phase I (Buildings A, B, C, and D) is
recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 431 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
The plat for phase II (Buildings E, F, J, and K) is recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 499 of the
records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The plat for phase III (Buildings G, and
H) is recorded at Plat Book 5, Page 22 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder.
When the property was originally developed, it was zoned for accommodations and
recreation (AR-1) pursuant to the then existing Aspen Zoning Code. Shortly thereafter the
City implemented a major revision to its Zoning Code and Zoning Map and the property
was down zoned to R-15 PUD, making the condominiums a nonconforming use.
In 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the City of Aspen to remove the stigma
of nonconformity from the property and to make minor improvements to the office/reception
area and the entry to the complex, This application was approved pursuant to Ordinance
41, Series of 1989 (see Exhibit #4), which rezoned the property to R-15 (L) PUD, This
rezoning meant that the condominiums were no longer a nonconforming use, but were still
subject to the nonconforming structure regulations. Therefore, Ordinance 41 also made an
amendment to the nonconforming provisions of the Code, This amendment permitted
expansions to the facility's "non-unit space" by the lesser of 10% of the existing floor area
or 2,500 sq. ft. In the case of the Gant, 2,500 sq, ft. was the applicable limit, since the
existing improvements to the property were in excess of 150,000 sq. ft. in size.
Following receipt of these approvals, a 480 sq. ft. expansion of the office/reception area was
accomplished. Subsequently, in 1996, the City approved an expansion of the conference
center by 1,578 sq. ft. A letter from Nick McGrath to the Planning Office and a response
from Bob Nevins, City Planner, authorizing this expansion are attached as Exhibit #5.
In 2002, the applicant proposed another minor expansion of the non-unit space on the
property. The purpose of this 60 sq. ft. addition was to build an elevator to serve the 0
Building, The City approved an insubstantial PUD amendment authorizing this project and
it was subsequently constructed.
Considering the above, to date the applicant has utilized 2,118 sq. ft. of the 2,500 sq. ft. of
non-unit space available to this property, leaving 382 sq. ft. of floor area still to be
developed.
--
............
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Three
In July of 2004, the applicant submitted an application to the City for an Insubstantial PUD
Amendment for Phase 1 of the landscaping and building improvements at the Gant. The
activities covered by this application included a new walkway around the elevator of the E
Building and landscaping improvem.ents around the D, E, F, G, and H Buildings, This
application was approved by the City on August 3, 2004. The approved improvements have
since been installed by the applicant.
As part of the Phase 1 application, the applicant met with Ms. Sarah Oates, the City's
Zoning Officer, to review the building changes proposed at that time and future plans
(including the canopy proposed in the current application). Ms, Oates determined that since
all of these proposals were for unenclosed areas, they would be exempt from the City's floor
area regulations and would not count against the 382 sq. ft. non-unit space "reserve". A
letter confirming this determination is attached as Exhibit #6.
Insubstantial PUD Amendment
An insubstantial amendment to the Gant Condominiums PUD is requested to replace the
existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy and to improve
the landscaping features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant.
The proposed new canopy is depicted on the attached architectural drawings. The existing
canopy covers an area of slightly in excess of 180 sq. ft. The new canopy would cover an
area of almost 450 sq. ft. The canopy will not be enclosed,
The proposed improvements to the landscape features around the A, B, C, J, and K
Buildings are shown on the proposed landscape plan. The landscape plan shows that there
are several types of improvements proposed as part of this application. First, enhanced
landscaping is proposed around several of the buildings. Second, new concrete pavers will
replace the existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings, New stone-faced concrete
walls will also replace the existing railroad-tie walls around these buildings. The new pavers
and walls will match the pavers and walls that have recently been installed in Phase 1 of this
project. Finally, the entry area that leads visitors and guests to the office will be enhanced,
to include a snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature.
It should be pointed out that this Insubstantial PUD Amendment does not address the issue
of tree removal and replacement. Tree removal and replacement is not anticipated to be
as sensitive an issue for these phases of the project as it was for Phase 1, since the applicant
has designed the improvements in these phases to avoid all of the significant trees on the
property. The applicant hereby commits to continuing to work directly with the Parks
Department to ensure that any of the smaller trees on the property that may be diseased
or are otherwise determined to be in need of removal are properly replaced on the site.
-
,'....
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Four
This application also does not include any information regarding the planned replacement
of railings along the decks and patios in the complex. Staff has previously determined that
this is not a relevant issue for PUD review and can be handled with a building permit. The
staff can examine the decks that have already been modified within the complex to
determine whether any further review of the remaining decks is required.
Following are the applicant's responses to the standards by which the Community
Development Director may authorize these insubstantial amendments to the Gant
Condominiums PUD, as found in Section 26.445.090 A of the Land Use Code.
The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment:
1. A change in the use or character of the development.
Response: The Gant is a multi-family accommodations development. No change to the
existing character of this development will occur as a result of the proposed improvements.
Instead, these improvements will simply enhance the existing character of the development
and help to modernize this important part of Aspen's visitor accommodations inventory.
2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the
land.
Response: John Baker of Baker Fallin Architects calculated the existing footprint of all of
the buildings at the Gant and found the site coverage to be approximately 58,499 sq. ft.
Since the total land area of the Gant is 240,588 sq. ft., approximately 24.3% of the site is
presently covered with buildings. Following the recent changes to the walkways
approximately 74 sq. ft. was added to this footprint (new total of 58,573 sq. ft.) which still
comprises approximately 24.3% of the site. No changes to the footprint are planned in the
current phases.
3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed
development, or the demand for public facilities.
Response: The minor expansion of the arrival canopy and the proposed landscaping
improvements will have no effect on traffic generation, or create any demands for public
facilities,
4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space.
Response: Baker Fallin has also calculated the existing amount of open space at the Gant
and has found that approximately 48.4% of the site (116,427 sq. ft.) is open space. There
are no activities in these phases that would change the approved open space.
"'...'"
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Five
5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space.
Response: There will be no decrease in parking on the property.
6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-ot-way for streets and easements.
Response: No such reduction will occur as part of this project.
7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of
commercial buildings.
Response: No such increase will be caused by this project.
8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the
development.
Response: No change in density will occur as part of this project.
9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's
original approval or which requires granting a variation from the project's approved use
or dimensional requirements.
Response: The applicant is not aware of any condition or representation associated with the
original approval which would be affected by this proposal.
Conclusion
I believe the above responses provide the information you require to process this
application. If there is anything else you need, please do not hesitate to contact me,
Very truly yours,
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES
)..L R.:-A
Alan Richman, Alep
.-..
,
,",,,. ...
EXHIBITS
"'"'
,
'"
EXHIBIT #1
LAW OFFICES OF
OATES, KNEZEVICH & QARDENSWARTZ, P.C,
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PlAZA BUILDING
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
TELEPHONE (970) 920-1700
FACSIMILE (970) 920-1121
LEONARD M. OATES
RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH
TED D. GARDENSWARTZ
DAVID B KELLY
ImOBssl@okglawcom
OF COUNSEL:
JOHN T, KELLY
MARIA TICSAY
July 2, 2004
VIA HAND DELIVERY
(WITH Al'PLICA TION FOR MrNOR
AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTITHE GANT CONDOMrNlUMS)
Julie Ann Woods, Director
" City of Aspen
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Application for Minor Amendment to Planned Unit Development/The Gant
Condominiums
Dear Ms. Woods:
Please be advised that this firm of Attorneys acts as counsel for The Gant Condominium Association
("Association"). The Gant Condominiums ("Project") is a condominium project created under the Colorado
Condominium Act. The common elements of the Project are owned by all of the owners within the Project as tenants
111 common. Pursuant to the governing documentation for the Project, the Association is charged with the
administration of the affairs of the Project, acting by and through its duly elected Board of Directors and Officers.
Pursuant to the provisions of the condominium documentation for the Project, the Association is constituted
as the attorney in fact for all of the owners of condominium units within the Project to make and process land use
applications.
The Board of Directors by its actions has authorized Molly Campbell to act for and on its behalf in connection
with the processing of the present land use application for minor amendment to the planned unit development approval
for the Project.
If you should be in need of any further clarification or supplementation of this letter please give me a call.
Very Truly Yours,
OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
LMO/bab
Encl.
/ '
,
'.. ,;
EXHIBIT #2
Mr. James Lindt, Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS
Dear Mr. Lindt,
The Gant Condominium Association, Inc. hereby authorizes Alan Richman Planning Services
to act as its designated representative with respect to the application for an Insubstantial
PUD Amendment being submitted to your office for our property, located at 610 West End
Street in Aspen. Alan Richman is authorized to submit this application on our behalf. He
is also authorized to represent us in meetings with the City of Aspen staff.
I can also certify to you that the Condominium Association held a meeting to discuss the
improvements addressed in this application. A majority of the condominium unit owners
voted in favor of making these improvements.
Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this application,
please do so through Mr. Richman, whose address and telephone number are included in
the and use applic 'on.
ant Condomi IUm Association, Inc.
Molly Campbe I eneral Manager
610 West End Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
920-6070
EXHIBIT #3
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
OWNER:
lYPE OF APPLICATION:
DESCRIPTION:
James Lindt, 429-2763 DATE: 7/12/05
Gant Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment
Alan Richman
Gant Condominium Association
Insubstantial POO Amendment
The Applicant would like to make some amendments to the landscaping, entryways, and
walkways within the Gant PUD.
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.445.100 Amendment of PUD development order,
Review by: Staff for complete application, referral agencies for technical considerations, Community
Development Director for final approval unless the Community Development Director does not feel
comfortable approving the proposal administratively.
No, unless the Community Development Director does not feel comfortable approving the proposal
administratively.
Parks, Building Department
Planning Deposit $660 for 3 hrs of staff time (additional hours will be billed at a rate of$220 per
hour)
Public Hearing:
Referral Agencies:
Planning Fees:
Referral Agency Fees:
Total Deposit: $660
To apply, submit the following information:
I. Total Deposit for review of application.
2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and
telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
J. Completed Application fonn.
4. Signed fee agreement.
5. Pre-application Conference Swnmary.
6. A letter from the homeowner's association saying that they have approved the amendment.
7. Letter of authorization for representative to act on owner's behalf.
8. An 8 112" x II" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen.
9. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards
relevant to the development application.
10. Existing and proposed landscaping plans.
II. Existing and proposed site plan.
12. Applications shall be provided in paper fonnat (nwnber of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital
fonnats. Compact Disk (CD)-preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text fonnat easily convertible to
Word is acceptable.
13. ---1...Copies of the complete application packet (items 3-11)
Process:
Apply. PlaIU1er reviews case for completeness and sends to Parks for referral comments. Case Planner reviews application with remainder of Staff
and drafts a decision notice. Community Development Director reviews decision notice and signs if appropriate for approval.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is
subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that mayor may not be accurate. The summary does not create a
legal or vested right.
'"./
,<...."
~1J..nt't-"'"
BllOK b L PA~' 0 ,<
C~
.. :')
-:"r-:
0.:
" ',",
ExHIBIT #4
0:.lo .'"
"
- '0
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZ~NG "'THE' GANT
CONDOMINIUMS TO R-15 (L) POD AND AMENDING SECTION 9-105 OF THE
ASPEN lAND USE REGULATIONS TO PERMIT MINOR EXPANSIONS TO
NONCONFORMING HOTELS AND LODGES
ORDINANCE NO. If(
(Series of 1989)
~
t' .~
,-
~.J
._,.,..
r:=";:
,":. ~.:
f)(.,"J
:;"'1
'-r:~
u
WHEREAS, The Gant Condominiums (hereinafter,
"The
Applicant") is an existing multi-family/hotel development located
in the R-15 PUD zone district; and
WHEREAS, The Applicant submitted to the city of Aspen a land
use application requesting rezoning of its property and amendment
of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in order to make the project
conforming; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning commission
(hereinafter, "The Commission) held a.duly noticed public hearing
on June 20, 1989, to consider the applicant's request; and
WHEREAS, The commission recommends to the Aspen.City Council
(hereinafter, "The council") that The Applicant's property be
rezoned to R-15 (L) PUD and that Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land
Use Regulations be amended to permit minor expansions of
nonconforming hotels and lodges; and
WHEREAS, The Council, having received the recommendations of
The Commission, wishes to rezone the Applicant's property to R-15
(L) PUD and to amend the Aspen Land Use Regulations to permit
minor expansions of nonconforming hotels and lodges.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
r
\."
"........,
)
BOOH 611 PAGE619
section 1
That it does hereby rezone the property known as The Gant
Condominiums, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated by reference, to R-15 (L) PUD.
section 2
That the Zone District Map be and hereby is amended to
reflect the zoning described in section 1 and that the Planning
Director is hereby authorized and directed to amend said map to
reflect the new zoning.
section 3
That the City Clerk be and hereby 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 4
That Article 9, section 9-105 B, Lodqe and Hotel
Preservation, of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen, Colorado is hereby amended to read as follows:
.section 9-105 B, Lodqe and Hotel Preservation.
B. Increase in units or size. There shall be no increase
in the number of units in the lodge or hotel, &~-~he
~'ea-r- i!I !p:lare- -feet.e.~-e--i1'l--t;he- .;rooqe-~-ho te~ unl ess the
enlargement is for the purpose of constructing deed
restricted employee housing units accessory to the
principal use, consistent with the requirements of
section 9-105 C.
c
" "
"
BLJOK 611 PAGE620
Enlargement of the square footage of a lodge or hotel
shall also be permitted if the expansion shall be for
the purpose of improving the facility's non-unit space.
The enlargement for the purpose of improving the
facility's non-unit space shall be reviewed and
considered as a Development Application for Special
Review, pursuant to Art. 7 I Div 4.
In determining
whether to approve, approve with conditions, or
disapprove the application, the Commission shall ensure
all the following standards and requirements are met.
1. The lodge or hotel shall not be expanded by more
than ten percent (10%) of its existing floor area
or two thousand-five hundred (2,500) square feet,
whichever is less.
Enlargement which occurs in
phases shall not exceed these limits, measured on
a maximum cumulative basis.
2. The external floor area of the lodge or hotel
shall be equal to or less than 1:1 fOllowing the
enlargement.
3. The expansion may be in rental rooms, provided an
equal amount of existing square footage is
converted from rental rooms to non-unit space.-
""
'--"
/ ....
....../
BtJO~ 611 PAGE621
section 5
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or.
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
section 6
Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect any
right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to
the effective date of this ordinance, and the same shall be
continued and concluded under such prior ordinances.
section 7
A publ c hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the/~
day of
, 1989 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 once in a newspaper of general circulation within the
City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /~~ day of
~';J , 1989.
\,\I~ld"HIII"r, _..,
,.,":..01 el A.~ ....,..
" ".....T'JIES:rY ~ '.
,:' '., .......:'..
, :n
i .; .
. ....Kathryn
..
('I(jf~~t."
,......\'
c
",
" '"
BLlOK
611 PAGl622
/-i~ day of
FINALLY, adopted,
a~~, 1989.
passed and approved this
... ~ f.A s,. ""~"
~ ATTESt: '-,
('~:S~>>~)~ /~
'.\,' Kath~.~KoCh, City Clerk
'. (,;'n-;':~~~'
"'. -gam:orcf
~.// ~/ ~.
//'Z-~e-..... 0< .
william L. stirling, Mayor
rlom. ,Jonn 1'1., oaKer io: l'ilolly (..:ampoeu
/T. 3. 1996 11 ,25AMC /'X:GRRTH ASPEN CO
/
lJate: J/30/99 rime: 9: 15:' Ii ANI
r-age:loll
NO. 231
P.2
.,.{
EXHIBIT #5
/
J, NICHOLAS MCGRATH. P.C.
... PIO'->ona/ ~/o(l
Attorf'ley..l At Law
J. NlCtlo6Ql McGm1t1-
:Susan w. L.ocmon
DO'lo L. God'w'ln
.;..>>-'
600 ead ~'AvefllJ~
~ite::l03
~n. Colof'Odo &1611
TBI~on.. [970] 9$-2612
ToI8copidt [910f 92lS-4.4O::1
October 3, 1996
nlclOow@an.ner
~rve740:20.150
I MEMORANDUM
To:
Plarming Office, Cty of A&pen
Nick McGrath,. Esq.
Fnlm:
Re:
The Cant - Prop06€d Renovation of Conference Center
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
The Gant is considering. renovation and perltaps expansion of its
Confer-ence Center. W~ are submitting this tn.emorandum to you not asa fonnal
application, but simply to t'amilia.rize you with certain history of The Gant and the
possible alternatives it is currently revi~,
The Ganl: operateS as a condominium hotel. 'It has 1:'-3 ~bJ, 118 of which
are rented short-term. Historically, about 80 percent of ils uIUlS have been rented
as short-let:m tourist accomodations. The Gmt si.tB on approximately 5.2 acres,
In 1989, The Cant existed as a IlOIKanfOnning use. To solve that problem,.
The Cant petilianed the: AspenCtyCouncil to rezone The Gmt property so that
it would be a pemtitted u= ~ a result. CoUIlcil adopted Ordlna.nce 41 on August
14, 1989, rezoning The Gant from R-1S PUD lD R-1S(L) PUD. The enactment of
~ 41 made The Cant il conditional (permitted) use instead of a Mn-
coniomling use, while remaining a =fo.rmi;1g structure I as to FAR and
dena1ty ,
In addition,. at the same time in 1989, The Gmt desired to expand its office
4I1d reception area. At that time, Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the
.Codej did not allow any increase lrt Ictal sq=re footage in a lodge 01" hotel ^"
a part oi Ordinance ~, Sectton 9-10SB of the Code was amended to pennit
I Anonccn!crmmg atrudure.IMal'IB any structuze which W8.!I establiohed pun=t
Ic the zCll1ina and building laws in effect at tile tIIne of its development, but whlch does not
confcnn to tha dlmansIonal ~ imposed. by thi3 Code for the zone <tistrict in
which it ~ located. N Code 93-101. .
"'~ Ca:Ia, n?ltl, Co&/IIlO9J, <<w;Jo.c:.(JPdiJI.,
I
.
From: John R. Baker To: Mo~y Campbel
/{' 3. L9% 11:26AMC /"CGI1A11-I ASPEN CO
Date: 3/30/99 TIme: 9: 15; 18 M1
,. ,.,.~
t'll.231
/1
.'
MaInorand\DIl
Plaming Office, Gty of .Aspen
Re: The G4nt
0d0ber3,1996
Pa~2
,.~.
expansi.an for the purpose of improving the facility' 8 non-unit space. In.
aCt:llI'thnce with amended Section 9-1OSB, approval was granted to The Gant to
expand its office aIld lobby area by 480 square feet..
While Code Section 9-1OSB does allow expansion of non-unit 5pace, it also
limits that expansion to a 10 percent cumulative increase in existing floor area, or
a cumulative increase of 2,500 square feet, whichever is less.. After the 1989
expansio41. The Gant has 158,.243 square feet; 10 percent of that is 15,824 square
feet, so the 2.,500 5qUare foot limitation is the applicable standard, After Ita 480
square foot expansion in 1989, The Ga:nt still has 2,020 square feet available for
expansion before reachin& the 2,.5QO square foot cap.
Because The Gant wishes to contino,.e to be one of Aapen's finest
,
condaxninium properties, its Board wanted to cot\5idex a number of altema.tives
for' refurbishing the Conference Center which would add long tenn value to
homeowners. Currently under considera lion are the following:
1,
;
~ " . \
..'
.'
Plan 111- Complete Refurbi~hmenL
Under ttU.:l option,. The Gant would use the existing floor plans with
no major constructianimprovemet\ts, and would complete very high quality decor
and funUshing renovation. includ.ing carpet, furniture, remodeling of the bar and
fireplace in the lounge room. replacement of woodwork and doors, and
refw:biBhment of the rest rOOlIlll and dressing rooms. In addition, ne.:essary
repairs would be made to the upper bm:ace of the building, This work
cot}lE:mpIates no ~ of .interior lUl:a, and, we believe, does not need approvAl
for completion.
2. Plan If1. - Meeting Rnam Addition.
In addition to the worlc contemplated in Plan #1, this proposal would
add a meeting room on the existing open roof area oJ the facility at the level of the
parking lot:rea:t J-building. Further, there would be substantial renovation to an
existing rOOJ:l\ to provide for lobby space, the entire facility would be brought up
to the sta:ndards of the Americans with Disab~ Act, rest rooms would be
improved including replacing the saunas with 5team rooms, and an elevator
,
e
Page a at 7
P.3
~
~ram: Jal'\n 1(. Baker To: Molly Campbe~
6 II' ~ MCGRATl-I ASPEN CO
.LT. 3.199 . .'
//
Oa(e: 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 ANI
_h_....',
NO. 231
/
./' I
Memorandum
PlamUng Office, City of Aspen
Re: The Cant
October 3, 1996
Pa8"3
,.~.
would be added. The square rootage increase under this proposal la
appraximataly 1,100 square feet.
3, PI= iI3 - Meeting R.oom ;md Exerdse &>om Addition.
In addition to all items contemplated in P!arl tI'1., a 450 square foot
exercise roam would be added an the lower terrace. TIlls addition would also
allow for the expansion of the upper terrace by ayploximately the same square
footage M the exercise room. The kitchen would also be enlarged and remodeled.
The square footage incre4se contemplated by this pIan is approximately 1,550
square feet
The Cant is in a competitive market. CUJ:W:ltly it has the Lngest meeting
facility of any Aspen condominium property but those facilities fall short of the
loc.J. hotel competitms. While the addition of a meeting room and Conversion of
a:n existing rOOm to lobby space will not significantly increase the total square
footage available for meetings, the redesign of the rooms wP1<V1ow the facility to
better meet the expectations of meeting plannenl and wm,'improved overall
functionality, The enlargement of the deck area. if Plan #3 is approved will
sig:nificantly increase The Gant's summer capabilities for food and beverage,
meeting and specialty functions such as weddings and iamily reunions. The fact
that the tneel:ix1g facilities at all competitive properties are either new Or remodeW
pla= The Gant at an additioNl competitive disadvantage. Further, lUX10llg all of
The Gant's competitors, only one lacks even a rudimentary exerdae facility.
As to employees, The Cant believes that any proposed. expansion will not
necessitate hiring new employees. The board feels that: any increased 5erVices can
be bandied by lis current staff and the expansion will allow The Cant to employ
its exi,sting staff more l;egularly on a yeu-round basis,
. . The board of dire.ctoro of 'The Cant would like to mala. a dPrl~n1t as to
which alternative to p=e by early November. This would allow for a two phase
construction project, the first of which would be completed in the spring of 1997
and the second in the fall of 1997.
Molly Campbell. John Baker (The Gant's archirect) and. I look forward to
working with you on deve.Ioping this new project.
ill
Page 7 oi I
P.4
-+
)'
1\t:37~ ..;.0.\
M:- -h..........,,\ ,
{"(om: JOfln K. Ball.er To; IV\oUy Campoe~
Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM
Page J of 7
c
"""..,
lEe. 5. 19'35 11 : 52A1
MCGRATH ASPEN co
t'O.110
P.3
i I N ";''fIiiber ! 996
i
Mr. Nicholas McGracl1, P,C.
Attorneys As. Law
600 E..t Hapldns Avenue, Suite 203
Aspea; Colorado 81611
(970)925-2612
.
i
ASPEN . !'maN
Ci:lw&.n:Nm DnlLOr~olN'l' Oa,\rl'lIICm'
Re: The Ganc - ?roposed Conference Centet RenovatioJ1
Dear Mr. McGrarh:
. Having reviewed your memorandum of 2 October 19Y6, City files llIId applicabie
",ctions of the Ll1lld Use Regulations, r \\I.ould lib to caorum me following based ullon
the approval or Ordinance 41, Series' of 1996: .
. A. Currellt' zoning: R-15 (Lodge) Pl.:D
B. Density: No increase in the number ofumt.S in th:e lodge or hotefunless the
enlargement is f6r the purpose of conscrw:ting deed restricted employee hOllSing
units a.cc::.!sory co the principal ~e.
. .
C. EnIargemenc of squaro foocage: Lodge or bol:c:l s!w1 ~bt be e>:panded by more
than len percent (10%) of it.S exiJtiIlg floor area or twO thousand -five hundred.
(2,500) square feet, whichever is less, .Enlargement which oCCUFs in phases sholl
not eK=d these limit3, measured on a maximum cumulative ~asis.
D: Ei<:terna.l floor area: Lodg;l or hotel shall have an e>:tcrnaJ floor ard equal co
at less tlu1n I: 1 following the enlargemen~:
E, Ei<:pa.nsion: Rental rooms'may be expanded., provided a.aequaJ =unc of
existing ~quan: footage 13 conve~ed from rental rooms co tKln-lmit sPace.
F. Review procedure: Enlargement far the purpose of improving the facilicy".
non-unit space shiill be reVlewed and considered as .. Development Application
far Special Review, Att.. 7, I?\v. 4 (recodified as Chapter 26.64).
In regard& to the nan-unit expll11Sion of the Gant. the following conditions apply'
I. Pursuant CO OrdinaIlce 41-89, mnximuil1 tloor lITes-expansion of non-unitspnce~' .
at the Gant shall not e>:ceed 2,500 square feet. After the 480 square foot
eXl'ansion in 1989, the Gane continues to hoye 2,020 square feet of non-unit
expansion potential. .
JJJScl.ll'1'l~ASl'J'IIr' NnH.~,"gQ!luu.\'m. P'HoHI91O.910..3C9G. f~m.9'iG..s..J9
l'N"'_~~'
.
From: John R. Ba~: MoUy CampbeH r........
-, ./
Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9: t" "1,8 AM
Page 4 of 7
OCC. 6,19'36 11 :S2I'M
MCGRATl-I RSPEl'I CO
1'0,110
P.4
,
i
2, PursUllllt to Ordinance 4-1-89 ~o.apter 26.64. Special Review, an
amendmeot to the developmetU order s!l:lJ1 be submitted co the Community
Development Direccor for review and recommendation for approval', approval
with cOC1dicions or disapproval by the Pl.noing and Zoning Commission. It is a
onc.stcp review before che Commission at 0. pubIlc meeting.
3. The development application shall include existing and pr~d floor plans
and elevuions of the Conference Ce::lCer in llddicton to me general a.pplication
information and respoIlS03 to Section 26.64.090. Insubstancial amendment critena.
4. The development application requires a bl1.le fee deposit of S 1,0SO.QQ, Minor
Review, A.ny additional houn required by staff to process the development
...ppl1eatio;'l .hall be billed at .:, hourly r= of 5175.00.
.~
5. Once a complete development application is received by Co=unity
Developmenc. the matter should be brought before Planning and ZoninS
Commission within four to si-.: weeks. .
Bucd upon our review and current undorstanding. of the Gant's refurbishmenr/expaasion
plans, Community Development shall proe<:~ che development application as an
Insubstantial Amc:ndment subject to Special Review. The proposed non-unit space
expansion shall not require new employee mitigation.
If I can proVide futther informacion or clarification ccgll!'ding che.,tiry' 3 requir~m~nts and
review procedure for cbe propnsed expansion ond refurbishment'of the Gant's Don-unit
3pllCe, pLeuse coo~t me.
SiDcerely,
~.
Robert Nevins
City PllUlner
"
C
Ata<<, ;t:!~
EXHIBIT #6
.,
~~s~
go.... 3613 A~. ~ 5'1612
'PM-!7_ (970)920-1125
'"t<t:.......~...a
July 2, 2004
Ms. Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: GANT CONDOMINIUMS
Dear Sarah,
Thank you for taking the time to meet with Molly Campbell and me yesterday to discuss the
Gant's plans for improvements to its buildings and grounds in the upcoming years.
During the meeting we explained to you that only minor changes are being proposed for the
buildings, This year the Gant plans to add a covered, unenclosed walkway next to the
elevator that serves the E Building. This addition would be approximately 74 sq. ft. in area,
and would occur on each of the four levels of the building.
In the future, the Gant proposes to modify the canopy that covers the entry to the
OfficelReception Building at the entry to the complex. The existing square canopy would
be replaced with a new half-circle canopy that would cover approximately 300 sq. ft. more
in area. The canopy would also be an unenclosed space.
During the meeting you indicated that both of these areas would qualify as porches as
defined by the Land Use Code. Therefore, both areas would be exempt from the City's
floor area calculations and would not count towards the Ganl's remaining reserve of 382 sq.
ft. of "non-unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989,
If I have accurately summarized our meeting, I would appreciate it if you would sign in the
space below and return a copy of this letter to me for my files.
Very truly yours,
~;::;:; SFRTIC~
Alan Richman, AICP
....'......
"'....
Ms. Sarah Oates
July 2, 2004
Page Two
I concur that the two improvements proposed by the Gant (unenclosed walkway addition to
Building E and unenclosed canopy at the entry to the Office/Reception Building) qualify as
porches as defined by the Land Use Code and would therefore be exempt from floor area
calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reserve of 382 sq. ft. of "non-
unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989.
-=;' ~ ~/.2/0t-j
Sarah Oates, Zoning Enforcement Officer
r'
,,/
---
MAPS/DRA WINGS
,,-.
1...- /
~'.......
room #:
)
Original Street
phone ext:
Glory Hole Park
,0
, ~
I~
I~
I~
\.~)~
West End
r\
~I
, I
EI
11
II
.1l '
~I
To Tennis Courts
3, 4 and 5
.
1 Reception
Administrative Offices
2 Fitness
Dressing Rooms
3 Bike/Ski Racks
4 Guest Laundry
(basement level)
5 Guest Laundry
(2nd & 4th floors)
6 Guest Laundry
(ground level)
~Elevator
() Recycling Areas
The GANT parking lots and neighboring streets are permit
parking only. Please ask the front desk staff for assistance.
Valet parking is available.
lRE
GslNf
aspen
H91.S O~ 'N3dSY .133H.1S ON3 .1S3M 'S 01.9 '" ~
~ ~ ~
NOtl "IOOSS" 1\ i'l ~
q .
~ ~ ;j C'
wnlNIWOONOO .1N"9 3H.l o J' ",iil
~~ ~ l:/ a;': ~
~ iii ,,~ ,,~
~i' '-;=
S~N3W3^O~dWI33~H~3SVHd ~ a ~ ~ I ≪; ~
<3",
18 ~ 8:iJi
I I I
C
l J
1-- -,
.Stu~.,l
- I ~
L_, ~I
Q I '"0::"
..~.
I ,<n
~
.><
.;/ .
3; "
ill
cr.
, '~""
"-1'"
"
to.
o Z "
Iii
,13"
~~
~~
..'"
Q~,....:.
..~'"
~:!;"
wai~
,,~w
Z~N
~l/)t5
~!z:o::
~o~
W'"w
y"-"
:lli!"
~~i.
'"
"'
~~~
<~,..:.
>-u:lIIi!o
tL~:'I....
'i1i1!::l.,w
<3-'''0<;/
rre~t:s~
!i:d~~
w~:zgo
lfjtl.lffic~
~o~~~
o~-Jtr:~
wz~t:w
~~~5~
_. I
L_, ~
I
I
~
u:
o
o
"
~
~<!i
iIi~
"'~
~'"
;;~
"'~
~!l!
i~
>-
n..
o
z
<{
o
>-
a::
I-
Z
W
.' ,
I
I
i--.J
I
'"
~
w
'"
g
Iii
"'
~
~
iii
I.l
-
,
I~
111
,
'~
:~
'"
'q'
'0
'"
o
C)
Z
-
Cl
.....J.
_0
:J~
ron'
LL.I~
~
<CUi
- ~
- '"
I~I
- ----1
I
I
I
I
I
I
c
,.
m
m
9
"
'"
Iii
I.l
z
~~
~lU
., ~~~
(f) ~~~"'>'
~ ~!~~~
o "[;l"',,,~
:z ""il'iuo
--' ~~~~g:
C2 Si~~~
W b::>cooo-::
~ 8~Ui
C)...,....:C'>i
~ ~ (\
i ~~i~
I:j ....: 2: ~ ~
~ ~~~~
~ ..c. 2 ~
i':: ~,;p:< ~
gj ;;] ~ 9 e
g !qp:-
t- 8 0 ~ ~
;;; ~ M l!' ~
S! a:: >- 0 Ii:
g if; ~ ~ ~
Q. t: o:i! ~ "'"
il! !5 3; In ~
o ~mm~
~.,.,.' ..
.' t! "
0::
.~~
I.
.~~-,l
~
~ I '"
~
.me ---t
!t
Xl
~
'"
I-
..
--'
.o-Zl
tt
j-
~
r- - - l
~ J ..
'"
'. '" I I
L
I .llol',( 1
I. =
.'r .>>-s I
L ~
0
- ~ "
'''1' I
" 0
.' N .... I
'<C .:'
it
j-
','--":'"
l ..
. "
I
L - - ~
[
~ ~I
..
c ~ >- ~.
~
co
co
'\. 0
'\.
....J
'l
'l
'" I- Z
::>
0 <(
a..
rn
Z ....J
;?;
0 0..
Cl . .
. .
LL
0
'" 0
~
<r ,
t 0:::
~ ~
z >-
jj;!
::> 0.. b
"-
- I
0 ..-
~ BY JI
;" l:'I Z ~
.."'~ ..-
0 <( ~ [
--'
ZI- () C3
Z"'i't-
-I-::> en
_rn=:r
a~::>
C Z m(J)w . .
i"rnwz~ IL. CL . ,
'" .g~ o' 8~
Cl> Z 0::1
":zooi'j: <r~ <>=;:
a..i:i:et:
ooo..~o CL CL_
03: 0;;::
~~z<o I-z ....z
I- (,J o::a::z ~O ~O
>- _JL.LJ W ~
::> <t-~D 0- lr!j
~ ~tui1: ffi "-13
....w I-W
'" w:::;;!Cle:: Sl'" rnrn
z we::
~ ;::::_ww "e:: ;;::w
<cooo Cl~
wWj'liOZ 0....
Cl Z(f.) W::J I~ "'~
c
1<-
.. ....~~--
<ll
01:
<(
In
1-
<t:
--'
<t:
<J
iL
~
/"T"o.
i
2t~.:
J:> .
'" .
o .'
r<)'
<t.
f- i
.:....~~ 21~."
.~~..n
.~~-.~ ~
'!;f
. g
. <t....
"
~TC
~tCAL
~
,........,
Memo to the Jennifer P.
Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer ~
7-29-05
l
I t+-orc \"'c>tl.5 tf-8--?!> .
~<";!.....Q.. llo.~ T'tfo$ .
RE: Gant Condominium/ PUD Amendment
In doing my review additional details will be needed on a few things so engineering can
sign off when the time comes. It would appear that a full permit application for the
improvements would be our best avenue to follow. Including but not limited to the
following.
· A detailed landscape plan will need to be reviewed by parks, but also I would like
to see what grading changes that might accompany those improvements.
. Next, for the new snowmelt system, energy calc's must be preformed and I
believe a fee paid for that kind of improvement. The building folks have a much
better handle on that then I do.
. Also related to the snowmelt is the requirement that no runoff from the system be
released into the City ROW. Generally, an engineer is involved with the design of
such systems if it becomes necessary to install a drywell for the snowmelt.
. Drainage in the areas of enhanced / new patios could need to have the storm
runoff plan (drainage report) if any additional hard surface is part of the plan.
. If any walls are being modified so they are above 4 feet in height, from the
bottom of the footer to the top of the wall, an engineer will need to provide a
design. It's a code requirement.
. A building guru will need to comment on any stair changes that seem to be
proposed based on the drawings submitted.
. Lastly, Nick A. might require a ROW permit be issued for any work that might
take place in the ROW.
Generally, I don't see any specific reason why these improvements wouldn't be allowed.
The caveat is that a design effort will be required for some of the elements of this
proposal.
AVE
Page I of 1
X-Sender: nicka@sam
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:00:45 -0600
To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: Nick Adeh <nicka@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: Gant PUD Amendment
Cc: alexe@ci.aspen.co.us
X-MaiIScanner-lnformation: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailS canner: Found to be clean
Hello Jennifer,
I have reviewed the proposed enhancements to their site and in fact have met with The Gant manager
and their landscape architect and civil engineer. These enhancements seem to be adequately addressed
and my only suggestion would be to have them submit their drainage calculations for drywells based on
5-year storm return events. Please also ask them to upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to our
drainage inlet from the last drywell behind the their driveway on the north side. Their plan also lacks
scale and north arrow!!!
Thanks,
Nick Adeh, P.E.
At 08:50 AM 8/1/2005, you wrote:
Hi Nick and Brian - Just trying to wrap up this request for a minor PUD amendment up by the end of
this week....l'll be out of the office next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or
concerns by tomorrow. Otherwise, I'll assume that you are okay with what was proposed. Thanks.
Jennifer
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611-1975
Phone: (970) 429-2759
Fax: (970) 920-5439
file://C:\DOCUME- I \jennifep\LOCALS-l \Temp\eudI2.htm
8/23/2005
Page 1 of 1
X-Sender: brianf@commons
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:24:03 -0600
To: jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us
From: Brian Flynn <brianf@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Gant
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Jennifer, thanks for setting up the meeting today.
I) for each individual phase the project manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree
removals and excavation under the drip line.
2) the 2007 improvements to the entry way specific to the wheeler ditch should coincide at a time the
ditch is not actively running.
Brian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager
1 ~O South Galena St Aspen. CO ill 611 970-429-2035(P) 970-920-5l28(F)
.f,;lc>.//r.\lInrTTl\Jf~~l\i,,:>nroif'p.,...,\T nr h. T ,~l\Tpm'Y'l\p.llr1r"hTt-n
Rn?nnn,
l. ...
\..,,,....
Page 1 of 1
X-Sender: brianf@commons
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:24:03 -0600
To: jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us
From: Brian Flynn <brianf@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Gant
X-MaiIScanner-lnformation: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailS canner: Found to be clean
Jennifer, thanks for setting up the meeting today.
I) for each individual phase the project manager will need to file separate tree permits for both tree
removals and excavation under the drip line.
2) the 2007 improvements to the entry way specific to the wheeler ditch should coincide at a time the
ditch is not actively running.
Brian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager
130 South Galena St Aspen, CO 81611 970-429-2035(P) 970-920-5128(F)
file://C:\DOCUME-l ljennifep\LOCALS- I \ Temp\eudC.htm
8/22/2005
. Alan Richman, 04:20 PM 8/1~/2,005, Re: Gant Minor PUD Amendment,
>'
Page 1 of2
X-Sender: arichman@mail.sopris.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:20:26 -0600
To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: Alan Richman <arichman@sopris.net>
Subject: Re: Gant Minor PUD Amendment
X-Spam: [F=0.0002486082; B=0.500(0); BMI=0.500(none); S=0.010(2005081001); MH=0.500
(2005081606); R=0.024(sI00/n4074); SC=none; spf=0.500]
X-MAIL-FROM: <arichman@sopris.net>
X-SOURCE-IP: [216.237.72.68]
X-Brightmail- Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-MailS canner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean
Jennifer - My first reaction is that these comments are way beyond the typical detail of a PUD
amendment and are much closer to building permit level details. I will be passing this information along
to the landscape architect and will commit to the issues being resolved. But clearly comments about tree
protection fences and energy calculations have nothing to do with the standards for a PUD amendment.
We can certainly take parks out for a site visit. We did that last year for the first amendment and
everything proceeded smoothly from that point forward. We are not removing trees, so the types of
concerns that arose last year are not pertinent to this second amendment.
I would hope that we could get the PUD amendment approved with appropriate conditions to address
these issues so we can move forward with building plans that resolve each of these matters. Ifwe need
to sit down with you to discuss this we would be happy to do so.
At 12:00 PM 8/16/2005 -0600, you wrote:
Alan - I routed the request to engineering (comm dev and city engineer), parks for comment, and
building. Nick Adeh had no comments but parks and the comm. dev. engineer did (building is still
reviewing the proposal). I've included the comments below and would suggest that we meet this week
(with parks and engineering) for a site visit or meet at city hall to discuss in more detail the
improvements being proposed.
Parks:
1) A site visit is required to discuss and review all proposed enhanced landscaping
2) More detail on the enhanced landscaping plans will be needed for each area proposed for
improvements, include in this planting plan the existing trees and irrigation and how the new landscape
will not have an adverse affect on the existing trees.
3) all new concrete work and curb work will need to be staged outside of any planting beds, and
landscaping. All storage of materials, machines and such related materials will not be allowed under
and tree drip line.
4) the new plans showing more detail for the enhanced planting shall also show tree protection fences,
this should also be defined in the plans for the curb and entry way work
5) A tree permit will be required for any excavation under the drip line work and tree removals, these
should be identified on a separate site plan and also in the field during the site visit
Engineering:
. A detailed landscape plan will need to be reviewed by parks, but also I would like to see what
grading changes that might accompany those improvements.
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
8/17/2005
Alan Richman, 04:20 PM 8/1 ()!.~005, Re: Gant Minor PUD Amendment,.
I
Page 2 of2
. Next, for the new snowmelt system, energy calc's must be preformed and I believe a fee paid for that
kind of improvement. The building folks have a much better handle on that then I do.
. Also related to the snowmelt is the requirement that no runoff from the system be released into the
City ROW. Generally, an engineer is involved with the design of such systems if it becomes necessary
to install a drywell for the snowmelt.
. Drainage in the areas of enhanced / new patios could need to have the storm runoff plan (drainage
report) if any additional hard surface is part of the plan.
. If any walls are being modified so they are above 4 feet in height, from the bottom of the footer to
the top of the wall, an engineer will need to provide a design. It's a code requirement.
. A building guru will need to comment on any stair changes that seem to be proposed based on the
drawings submitted.
. Lastly, Nick A. might require a ROW permit be issued for any work that might take place in the
ROW.
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611-1975
Phone: (970) 429-2759
Fax: (970) 920-5439
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
8/17/2005
-Brian Flynn, 12:13 PM 8/8/200.5, Re: Gant PUD Amendment
,
'.
Page I of2
,~i
X-Sender: brianf@commons
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 200512:13:17 -0600
To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: Brian Flynn <brianf@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: Gant PUD Amendment
Cc: chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us
X-MaiIScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean
Jennifer, Gant PUD amendment.
1) A site visit is required to discuss and review all proposed enhanced landscaping
2) More detail on the enhanced landscaping plans will be needed for each area proposed for
improvements, include in this planting plan the existing trees and irrigation and how the new landscape
will not have an adverse affect on the existing trees.
3) all new concrete work and curb work will need to be staged outside of any planting beds, and
landscaping. All storage of materials, machines and such related materials will not be allowed under
and tree drip line.
4) the new plans showing more detail for the enhanced planting shall also show tree protection fences,
this should also be defined in the plans for the curb and entry way work
5) A tree permit will be required for any excavation under the drip line work and tree removals, these
should be identified on a separate site plan and also in the field during the site visit
I copicd Chris in thc evcnt someone ncedcd somcthing fi'om us prior to Jennifcr returning. Thanks sorry
Il)r the delay
At I I :55 AM 8/1/2005 -0600, you wrote:
Brian - 1 put the referral in the parks in-box at city hall on July 22nd. The Gant is interested in
receiving a minor PUD amendment to install a new, larger canopy, install snow-melt in part of their
driveway, replace some ofthe walkways with new stone pavers, replace some of the railroad tie walls
with stone walls, and install some new/additional landscaping. This is an administrative review so no
DRC meeting, but since they talk about landscaping I thought some initial feedback or any conditions
of approval that you would like to see should be included.
At I I :35 AM 8/1/2005, you wrote:
Jennifer I completely forgot what the PUD amendment was about, 1 think you said it was in your
office?
At 08:50 AM 8/1/2005 -0600, you wrote:
Hi Nick and Brian - Just trying to wrap up this request for a minor PUD amendment up by the end
of this week....l'lI be out of the office next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or
concerns by tomorrow. Otherwise, I'll assume that you are okay with what was proposed. Thanks.
Jennifer
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
8/16/2005
-Brian Flynn, 12:13 PM 8/8/2005, Re: Gant PUD Amendment
Page 2 of2
/
Aspen, CO 81611-1975
Phone: (970) 429-2759
Fax: (970) 920-5439
Brian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager
130 South Galena St Aspen, CO 816 11 970-429-2035(1') 970-920-5 I 28(F)
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 8161 1-1975
Phone: (970)429-2759
Fax: (970) 920-5439
!rian Flynn, Open Space & Special Projects Manager
30 South Galena St Aspcn, CO 81611 970-429-2035(1') 970-920-5128(F)
Printed for Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
8/16/2005
Page 1 of I
,.
...
"
X-Sender: nicka@sam
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:00:45 -0600
To: Jennifer Phelan <jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us>
Prom: Nick Adeh <nicka@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: Gant PUD Amendment
Cc: alexe@ci.aspen.co.us
X-MailS canner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailS canner: Pound to be clean
Hello Jennifer,
I have reviewed the proposed enhancements to their site and in fact have met with The Gant manager
and their landscape architect and civil engineer. These enhancements seem to be adequately addressed
and my only suggestion would be to have them submit their drainage calculations for drywells based on
5-year storm return events. Please also ask them to upgrade their storm line tie-in pipe section to our
drainage inlet from the last drywell behind the their driveway on the north side. Their plan also lacks
scale and north arrow!!!
Thanks,
Nick Adeh, P.E.
At 08:50 AM 8/1/2005, you wrote:
Hi Nick and Brian - Just trying to wrap up this request for a minor PUD amendment up by the end of
this week....I'II be out of the office next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or
concerns by tomorrow. Otherwise, I'll assume that you are okay with what was proposed. Thanks.
Jennifer
Jennifer Phelan
Senior Long Range Planner
City of Aspen
160 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611-1975
Phone: (970) 429-2759
Pax: (970) 920-5439
file:i/C: \DOCUME- I \j ennifep\LOCALS-l \ T emp\eud 12.htm
8/23/2005
r"'<
Memo to the Jennifer P.
Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer ~
7-29-05
t
:r:: I+-of~ '"\'t>I15 t-t6L--p!> .
!
~<">I..JJ.- """\ T'tpoJ .
RE: Gant Condominium/ PUD Amendment
In doing my review additional details will be needed on a few things so engineering can
sign off when the time comes. It would appear that a full permit application for the
improvements would be our best avenue to follow. Including but not limited to the
following.
. A detailed landscape plan will need to be reviewed by parks, but also I would like
to see what grading changes that might accompany those improvements.
. Next, for the new snowmelt system, energy calc's must be preformed and I
believe a fee paid for that kind of improvement. The building folks have a much
better handle on that then I do.
. Also related to the snowmelt is the requirement that no runoff from the system be
released into the City ROW. Generally, an engineer is involved with the design of
such systems if it becomes necessary to install a drywell for the snowmelt.
. Drainage in the areas of enhanced / new patios could need to have the storm
runoff plan (drainage report) if any additional hard surface is part of the plan.
. If any walls are being modified so they are above 4 feet in height, from the
bottom of the footer to the top of the wall, an engineer will need to provide a
design. It's a code requirement.
. A building guru will need to comment on any stair changes that seem to be
proposed based on the drawings submitted.
. Lastly, Nick A. might require a ROW permit be issued for any work that might
take place in the ROW.
Generally, I don't see any specific reason why these improvements wouldn't be allowed.
The caveat is that a design effort will be required for some of the elements of this
proposal.
AVE
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
I"'"
'-
/....
,
~...- ~
7 - 2'7 -0:;-
MEMORANDUM
Plans were routed to those departments checked-off below:
~...... City Engineer
L]$.../...... Co~unity Development Engineer ~
0......... Pol1ce Department .
o ........... Zoning Officer
o ........... Housing Director
X ........... Parks Department
0........... Aspen Fire Marshal
o ........... City Water
o ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
X........... Building Department
o ........... Environmental Health
o ........... Electric Department
0........... Holy Cross Electric
o ........... City Attorney
0........... Streets Department
o ........... Historic Preservation Officer
0...... ...City Parking Manager
o ........... Pitkin County Planning 8
Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Plarmer
Community Development Department
130 So. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611
Phone-429.2759 Fax-920.5439
610 S. Westend Street (Gant Condominiums) - Insubstantial PUD
Amendment
July 22, 2005
COMMENTS: Please review the attached application for an Insubstantial PUD
Amendment request. This is an administrative review and approval
process, so please have your comments in to me by Friday, July 29, 2005.
Thank You,
Jennifer Phelan
{/iJ(fV \~'{t L/V
k''Z
~s~
ritem ;e~C
<$'"", 36'3 rI~, ~ S'1612
'PM-I7= (970)92~' 125
~~...a
July 12, 2005
Mr. James Lindt, Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS
(PHASES 2 AND 3)
Dear James,
This is an application for an insubstantial amendment to the PUD approvals previously
granted to the Gant Condominiums, The Gant Condominiums is located at 610 West End
Street in Aspen. The property consists of approximately 5.5 acres of land, and is improved
with 143 multi-family residential dwelling units (305 bedrooms).
The purpose of this application is to (1) replace the existing canopy at the front of the main
office with a slightly larger canopy; and (2) improve the landscaping features around the A,
B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant. The locations of these proposed improvements are
shown on the floor plans and landscape plan that accompany this application.
This application is being submitted by the Gant Condominium Association, Inc" the owner
of the property (hereinafter, "the applicant"). Proof of the ownership of the property is
provided by Exhibit #1, a letter from Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.e., counsel to
the Association. Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the Gant
Condominium Association for this application is provided by Exhibit #2. This letter also
provides certification from the AssoCiation that the proposed improvements have been voted
on and approved by a majority of the owners,
I held a pre-application conference with you on July 12, 2005 (see Exhibit #3, Pre-
Application Conference Summary). At that time, you confirmed that these activities would
be processed administratively as an Insubstantial PUD Amendment, pursuant to Section
26.445.100 A. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations.
The following sections of this application identify the standards of the Aspen Land Use Code
that apply to an Insubstantial PUD Amendment and provide a response to each standard.
First, however, a brief overview of past approvals given to the Gant Condominiums is
provided, which help to provide a context for this proposal.
c
:)
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Two
History of Prior Approvals
The Gant Condominiums was originally approved as a PUD by the Aspen City Council in
the early 1970's. The project was developed in three phases and the original plats for the
property document these phases, The plat for phase I (Buildings A, B, C, and D) is
recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 431 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
The plat for phase II (Buildings E, F, J, and K) is recorded at Plat Book 4, Page 499 of the
records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The plat for phase III (Buildings G, and
H) is recorded at Plat Book 5, Page 22 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder.
When the property was originally developed, it was zoned for accommodations and
recreation (AR-l) pursuant to the then existing Aspen Zoning Code. Shortly thereafter the
City implemented a major revision to its Zoning Code and Zoning Map and the property
was down zoned to R-15 PUD, making the condominiums a nonconforming use.
In 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the City of Aspen to remove the stigma
of nonconformity from the property and to make minor improvements to the office/reception
area and the entry to the complex. This application was approved pursuant to Ordinance
41, Series of 1989 (see Exhibit #4), which rezoned the property to R-15 (L) PUD. This
rezoning meant that the condominiums were no longer a nonconforming use, but were still
subject to the nonconforming structure regulations, Therefore, Ordinance 41 also made an
amendment to the nonconforming provisions of the Code. This amendment permitted
expansions to the facility's "non-unit space" by the lesser of 10% of the existing floor area
or 2,500 sq. ft. In the case of the Gant, 2,500 sq. ft. was the applicable limit, since the
existing improvements to the property were in excess of 150,000 sq. ft. in size,
Following receipt of these approvals, a 480 sq. ft, expansion of the office/reception area was
accomplished. Subsequently, in 1996, the City approved an expansion of the conference
center by 1,578 sq, ft. A letter from Nick McGrath to the Planning Office and a response
from Bob Nevins, City Planner, authorizing this expansion are attached as Exhibit #5.
In 2002, the applicant proposed another minor expansion of the non-unit space on the
property. The purpose of this 60 sq. ft. addition was to build an elevator to serve the D
Building. The City approved an insubstantial PUD amendment authorizing this project and
it was subsequently constructed,
Considering the above, to date the applicant has utilized 2,118 sq. ft. of the 2,500 sq, ft. of
non-unit space available to this property, leaving 382 sq. ft. of floor area still to be
developed.
c
o
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Three
In July of 2004, the applicant submitted an application to the City for an Insubstantial PUD
Amendment for Phase 1 of the landscaping and building improvements at the Gant. The
activities covered by this application included a new walkway around the elevator of the E
Building and landscaping improvements around the D, E, F, G, and H Buildings. This
application was approved by the City on August 3, 2004, The approved improvements have
since been installed by the applicant.
As part of the Phase 1 application, the applicant met with Ms, Sarah Oates, the City's
Zoning Officer, to review the building changes proposed at that time and future plans
(including the canopy proposed in the current application). Ms. Oates determined that since
all of these proposals were for unenclosed areas, they would be exempt from the City's floor
area regulations and would not count against the 382 sq. ft. non-unit space "reserve". A
letter confirming this determination is attached as Exhibit #6.
Insubstantial PUD Amendment
An insubstantial amendment to the Gant Condominiums PUD is requested to replace the
existing canopy at the front of the main office with a slightly larger canopy and to improve
the landscaping features around the A, B, C, J, and K Buildings at the Gant.
The proposed new canopy is depicted on the attached architectural drawings. The existing
canopy covers an area of slightly in excess of 180 sq. ft. The new canopy would cover an
area of almost 450 sq, ft. The canopy will not be enclosed.
The proposed improvements to the landscape features around the A, B, C, J, and K
Buildings are shown on the proposed landscape plan. The landscape plan shows that there
are several types of improvements proposed as part of this application. First, enhanced
landscaping is proposed around several of the buildings, Second, new concrete pavers will
replace the existing sidewalks that connect the existing buildings. New stone-faced concrete
walls will also replace the existing railroad-tie walls around these buildings. The new pavers
and walls will match the pavers and walls that have recently been installed in Phase 1 of this
project. Finally, the entry area that leads visitors and guests to the office will be enhanced,
to include a snowmelt entry driveway, stone accent auto court, and water feature.
It should be pointed out that this Insubstantial PUD Amendment does not address the issue
of tree removal and replacement. Tree removal and replacement is not anticipated to be
as sensitive an issue for these phases of the project as it was for Phase 1, since the applicant
has designed the improvements in these phases to avoid all of the significant trees on the
property. The applicant hereby commits to continuing to work directly with the Parks
Department to ensure that any of the smaller trees on the property that may be diseased
or are otherwise determined to be in need of removal are properly replaced on the site.
o
o
Mr. James Lindt
July 12, 2005
Page Four
This application also does not include any information regarding the planned replacement
of railings along the decks and patios in the complex. Staff has previously determined that
this is not a relevant issue for PUD review and can be handled with a building permit. The
staff can examine the decks that have already been modified within the complex to
determine whether any further review of the remaining decks is required,
Following are the applicant's responses to the standards by which the Community
Development Director may authorize these insubstantial amendments to the Gant
Condominiums PUD, as found in Section 26.445.090 A of the Land Use Code.
The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment:
1. A change in the use or character of the development.
Response: The Gant is a multi-family accommodations development. No change to the
existing character of this development will occur as a result of the proposed improvements.
Instead, these improvements will simply enhance the existing character of the development
and help to modernize this important part of Aspen's visitor accommodations inventory.
2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the
land,
Response: John Baker of Baker Fallin Architects calculated the existing footprint of all of
the buildings at the Gant and found the site coverage to be approximately 58,499 sq. ft.
Since the total land area of the Gant is 240,588 sq. ft., approximately 24.3% of the site is
presently covered with buildings. Following the recent changes to the walkways
approximately 74 sq. ft. was added to this footprint (new total of 58,573 sq. ft.) which still
comprises approximately 24.3% of the site. No changes to the footprint are planned in the
current phases,
3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed
development, or the demand for public facilities.
Response: The minor expansion of the arrival canopy and the proposed landscaping
improvements will have no effect on traffic generation, or create any demands for public
facilities.
4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space,
Response: Baker Fallin has also calculated the existing amount of open space at the Gant
and has found that approximately 48.4% of the site (116,427 sq. ft.) is open space. There
are no activities in these phases that would change the approved open space,
o
o
Mr. James Lindt
July 12,2005
Page Five
5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the oft-street parking and loading space.
Response: There will be no decrease in parking on the property.
6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights-of-way for streets and easements.
Response: No such reduction will occur as part of this project.
7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of
commercial buildings.
Response: No such increase will be caused by this project.
8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the
development.
Response: No change in density will occur as part of this project.
9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's
original approval or which requires granting a variation from the project's approved use
or dimensional requirements,
Response: The applicant is not aware of any condition or representation associated with the
original approval which would be affected by this proposal.
Conclusion
I believe the above responses provide the information you require to process this
application. If there is anything else you need, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES
).L /L.A
Alan Richman, Alep
o
:)
EXHIBITS
o
EXHmlT #1
:)
LAW OFFICES OF
OATES, KNEZEVICH & QARDENSWARTZ, P,C.
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
THIRD FLOOR. ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
TELEPHONE (970) 920-1700
FACSIMILE (970) 920-1121
LEONARD M. OATES
RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH
TED D. GAROENSWARTZ
DAVID S. KELLY
ImoaaatCokglaw_com
OF COUNSEL:
JOHN 1. KELLY
MARIA TICSAY
July 2, 2004
VIA HAND DELIVERY
(WITH APPLICA nON FOR MINOR
AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTfTHE GANT CONDOMINIUMS)
Julie Ann Woods, Director
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Application for Minor Amendment to Planned Unit Developmentffhe Gant
Condomininms
Dear Ms. Woods:
Please be advised that this firm of Attorneys acts as counsel for The Gant Condominium Association
("Association"). The Gant Condominiums ("Project") is a condominium project created under the Colorado
Condominium Act. The common elements of the Project are owned by all of the owners within the Project as tenants
111 common. Pursuant to the governing documentation for the Project, the Association is charged with the
administration of the affairs of the Project, acting by and through its duly elected Board of Directors and Officers.
Pursuant to the provisions of the condominium documentation for the Project, the Association is constituted
as the attorney in fact for all of the owners of condominium units within the Project to make and process land use
applications.
The Board of Directors by its actions has authorized Molly Campbell to act for and on its behalf in connection
with the processing ofthe present land use application for minor amendment to the planned unit development approval
for the Project.
If you should be in need of any further clarification or supplementation of this letter please give me a call.
Very Truly Yours,
OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.c.
LMO/bab
Ene!.
C'(.MOOila & Forll\6'llala'Oiao~IoWood,7.1.~,v.vd
o
8
EXHmlT #2
Mr. James Lindt, Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: INSUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE GANT CONDOMINIUMS
Dear Mr. Lindt,
The Gant Condominium Association, Inc. hereby authorizes Alan Richman Planning Services
to act as its designated representative with respect to the application for an Insubstantial
PUD Amendment being submitted to your office for our property, located at 610 West End
Street in Aspen. Alan Richman is authorized to submit this application on our behalf. He
is also authorized to represent us in meetings with the City of Aspen staff.
I can also certify to you that the Condominium Association held a meeting to discuss the
improvements addressed in this application. A majority of the condominium unit owners
voted in favor of making these improvements.
Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this application,
please do so through Mr. Richman, whose address and telephone number are included in
the and use applic 'on.
ant Condomi IUm Association, Inc.
Molly Campbe I eneral Manager
610 West End Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
920-6070
o
EXHIBIT #3
o
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE.APPLlCATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
OWNER:
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
DESCRIPTION:
James Lindt, 429-2763 DATE: 7/12/05
Gant Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment
Alan Riclunan
Gant Condominium Association
Insubstantial PUD Amendment
The Applicant would like to make some amendments to the landscaping, entryways, and
walkways within the Gant PUD.
Land Use Code Section(s)
26,445.100 Amendment of PUD development order.
Review by: Staff for complete application, referral agencies for technical considerations, Community
Development Director for final approval unless the Community Development Director does not feel
comfortable approving the proposal administratively.
No, unless the Community Development Director does not feel comfortable approving the proposal
administratively.
Parks, Building Department
Planning Deposit $660 for 3 hrs of staff time {additional hours will be billed at a rate of $220 per
hour}
Public Hearing:
Referral Agencies:
Planning Fees:
Referral Agency Fees:
Total Deposit: $660
To apply, submit the following information:
I. Total Deposit for review of application.
2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and
telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant
3. Completed Application fonn.
4. Signed fee agreement
5. Pre-application Conference Swnmary.
6. A letter from the homeowner's association saying that they have approved the amendment
7. Letter of authorization for representative to act on owner's behalf.
8. An 8112" x II" vicinity map localing the subject parcels within the City of Aspen.
9. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how 8 proposed development complies with the review standards
relevant to the development application.
10. Existing and proposed landscaping plans.
II. Existing and proposed site plan.
12. Applications shall be provided in paper fonnat (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital
fonnats. Compact Disk (CD)-preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word fonnat is preferred. Text fonnat easily convertible to
Word is acceptable.
13. --...L.. Copies of the complete application packet (items 3-11)
Process:
Apply. PlalUler reviews case for completeness and sends to Parks for referral comments. Case Planner reviews application with remainder of Staff
and drafts a decision notice. Community Development Director reviews decision notice and signs if appropriate for approval.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The sununary is based on current zoning, which is
subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that mayor may not be accurate. The sununary does not create a
legal or vested right.
MIBIT #4
BllOi\ Git PAG,6tO
C'~ .. , .,
.-
.-., r"':
ro-
o <...L
(.;~
, ,-
... , '......J
.;::- , <
,., "
".:'"-! ., O:.,")
.....:"00. ,
"
. "
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZ~NG '" THE GANT
CONDOMINIUMS TO R-1.5 (L) PUD AND AMENDING SECTION 9-1.05 OF THE
ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS TO PERMIT MINOR EXPANSIONS TO
NONCONFORMING HOTELS AND lDDGES
ORDINANCE NO. Ifl
(Series of 1.989)
c..J"
WHEREAS, The Gant Condominiums (hereinafter,
"The
Applicant") is an existing multi-family/hotel development located
in the R-15 PUD zone district; and
WHEREAS, The Applicant submitted to the City of Aspen a land
use application requesting rezoning of its property and amendment
of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in order to make the proj ect
conforming; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
(hereinafter, "The Commission) held a duly noticed public hearing
on June 20, 1989, to consider the applicant's request; and
WHEREAS, The Commission recommends to the Aspen city Council
(hereinafter, "The Council") that The Applicant's property be
rezoned to R-15 (L) PUD and that Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land
Use Regulations be amended to permit minor expansions of
nonconforming hotels and lodges; and
WHEREAS, The Council, having received the recommendations of
The Commission, wishes to rezone the Applicant's property to R-15
(L) PUD and to amend the Aspen Land Use Regulations to permit
minor expansions of nonconforming hotels and lodges.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COlDRADO.
o
o
BOOK 61 t ~AGE619
section 1
That it does hereby rezon'e the property known as The Gant
Condominiums, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated by reference, to R-15 (L) PUD.
section 2
That the Zone District Map be and hereby is amended to
reflect the zoning described in Section 1 and that the Planning
Director is hereby authorized and directed to amend said map to
reflect the new zoning.
section J
That the City Clerk be and hereby 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 4
That Article 9, Section 9-105 B, Lodqe and Hotel
Preservation, of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the city of
Aspen, Colorado is hereby amended to read as follows:
.section 9-105 B, Lodae and Hotel Preservation.
B. Increase in units or size. There shall be no increase
in the number of units in the lodge or hotel, &~-~ne
-ee~a-}.-l!ll!l1:letre--foottlfle-';'1'l--tlhe- -3:-0dqe-~-hcter, unl ess the
enlargement is for the purpose of constructing deed
restricted employee housing units accessory to the
principal use, consistent with the requirements of
section 9-105 C.
o
J
BtJO~ 61 1 PA~l620
Enlargement of the square footage of a lodge or hotel
shall also be perlllitted if the expansion shall be for
the purpose of improving the facility's non-unit space.
The enlargement for the purpose of improving the
facility's non-unit space shall be reviewed and
considered as a Development Application for special
Review, pursuant to Art. 7, Oi v 4. In determining
whether to approve, approve with conditions, or
disapprove the application, the Commission shall ensure
all the following standards and requirements are met.
1. The lodge or hotel shall not be expanded by more
than ten percent (lot) of its existing floor area
or two thousand-five hundred (2,500) square feet,
whichever is less. Enlargement which occurs in
phases shall not exceed these limits, measured on
a maximum cumulative basis.
2. The external floor area of the lodge or hotel
shall be equal to or less than 1: 1 following the
enlargement.
3. The expansion may be in rental rooms, provided an
equal amount of existing square footage is
converted from rental rooms to non-unit space."
o
o BOOK 611 PAGE621
section 5
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or.
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
section 6
Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect any
right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to
the effective date of this ordinance, and the same shall be
continued and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 7
A
c hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the /~
day of
, 1989 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 once in a newspaper of general circulation within the
City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
by the city council of the City of Aspen on the /~~ day of
r7f ' 1989.
\\,1\\01'"11",/.', .,.,
."., .., eF A.~ -"""
/',,\A~ES~,.~ .....
{.(~.J~"~ J/~
\\~thryn~. .<Koch, city Clerk
('''tn..~~':..''','
. > . . ' ~. , \
- II' -h'aeIGassma, -MayorPr-0 Tern
o
:)B130K
611 PAlit 622
/"y~ day of
FINALLY, adopted,
a~.MU' 1989.
passed and approved this
, tf A"~,,.
~ ATTEst: \
{'~:SE>>~J ~ /~
'...... Kath~'#KOCh, City Clerk
(~~:.a:'
.~.// ~/ ~
/'?ff~h. c>( . '
William L. stirling, Kayar
,(om. ..OM tI,. oaKer i 0: Mo"y l,,;.ampoe~
Wale: JlJU/98 rIme: 9:15:1dANI
r'age::l or i
/T. 3.1996 1I:2EA10/'X:GRATH ~ CO
,
/
''')
'..,
NO.231P.2
/
EXHmIT #5
..,.{
/
J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH, P.C.
A P-"",-kXI
AttQlne~ At La...,
J.NICnCllQ,"'_-
Susan 'N. locmcn
DIana L GodW1t1
.;,.>>-'
6aJ ~ Iiopltrn ,.......I"ll.le
.!k.l/hll ~03
~. Colorocso 51611
rol8o/lan.oI970] <25-2612
loiIIc;opiet ["OJ 92~
nJckJoWC!an."er
~rve 7A020.1SO
October 3, 1996
MEMORANDUM
To:
Pl.amdng Office, City of Aspen
Nlck Mct;rath. Esq.
mm:
Re:
The Cant - Proposed Renovation of Conference Center
The Gant is considering renovation and peWPS expansion of its
Conference Center. We are submitting this memorandum to you not as.a fonnal
applica.tion. but simply to €unillarize you with certain history of The Gant and the
possible alternatives it is currently reviewing.
The Gam: operateS as a condaminiwn hotel. 'It bas Ie units, 118 of w.hich
are rented short-term. Hlstorica.Uy, about 80 pen:ent of its ucii$ have been rented
as short-tenn tourist accom.odAtions. The Gmt sits on approximalely 5.2 acres.
In 1989, The Gant existed as a non<anfonning use. To solve that problem.
The Gant petitioned the Aspen City Council to =one The Gant property so that
it would be il pemtit:ted use. k a result. CoU11cil adopll!d Ordina.aA:e 41 on August
14, 1989, rezonh1g The Gant from R-1S POD to R-15(L) PUn. The enactment of
0rcImance 41 made The Cant il conditional (permitted) use instead of a non-
coniomting use, while remaining a nancoofo~ structure' as to FAR and
density.
In addition,. at the same time in 1989, The Gmt desired to el<pand its offic:e
and. reception area. At that time, Section 9-105 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the
.CocIe") did not allow any increase In total SqUMe fooiage in a lodge OJ: hotel As
a part of Ordinance 41, Section 9-105B of the Code was amended to pennit
1 AIlOllaJrIionnlnatruc!uze"lNNN any structure whJch wu esbi!illshed pursuant
to the %OrIing and lru.i1ding lawsln effect at the tlIne of its development, but which does not
conform to tha dlmez1sionaI ~ imposed. by thia Code for: the zone district in
which it is Ioated. H Code 53-10L .
..~ 0.:.. a"l1. CCI&"..". ~D.C.(JP441_'
.1
.
From: John R. Baker To: MOUy CampbeM
3.t996 11:26AM ~~TI-! ~5PEN CO
Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9: 15: 1 a NIt
....."
,.l
~.231
./(
./1
/
Memorandum
Planning Office, Cty of A5pen
Re: The G.Int
<:Jcfcb.... 3, 1996
Pa~2
,.~.
expanstan for the purpose of improving the fadEly'8 non-unit space. In
acmrd.mce with amended Section 9-105B, approval was granted to The Gant to
expand its office and lobby area by 480 square feet.
While Code Section 9--1OSB does allow expansion of non-unit space, it aJso
limits lhat el<p'UlSion to a 10 pen:ent cumulative increase in existing floor area, or
a cumulative increase of .2,.500 square feet, whichever is less. After the 1989
expansion, The GiUlt has 158,243 square feet; 10 percent of that is 15,824 square
feet, so the 2.,500 square foot limitation Is the applicable standard. After ilB 4a0
square foot expansion in 1989, The Gmt still has 2,020 square feet available for
expansion before rea~ the 2,so0 square foot cap.
, Because The Gant wishes to continue to be one of Aspens finest
condominium properties, ita Board wanl2d to con.si.der a number of altematives
for'returbishiIlg the Conference Center which wou1c\ add long term value to
homeowners. Cu=tIy'U1:lde1- cOIt$ideratian are the following:
1.
i
~ "\
'"I
Plan Irl- Complete RefurbirhmenL
Under thi.1 option. The Gant would use the existing floor plans with
nomajot' constructianimprovements, am would cmnpletevery high qlali!y decor
and furnishing l'I!I\OVatian,. iI1duding cupet, furniture, remode1lng of the bar and
firepla.ce in the lounge room. replacement of woodwork and dooIll, and
refurbishment of the rest rOOIIlB and dre9Slng rooms. In addition, necessary
repain would be made to the upper terrace of the building. This work
COXJlemplates no inc;r~ O!.interior lUea, ~ we believe, does not need approvAl
for completion.
2. l'lan #2 - Meeting Romn Addition.
In addition to the worIc contemplated In PIan #1, this proposal would
add a meeting room on the existing open roof area of the facility at the leve1 of the
parking lot near J-building. Further, there would b. substantial renovation to an
existing room to provide for lobby space, the entire facility would be brought up
to the standlll'ds of the America.t1s with DisabiJi..tia Act. rest rooms would be
improved including replacing the saunas with steam rooms, and an elevator
,
.,
Page S of 7
P.3
~
trom: Jonn Ro. Baker To: Molly CampbeU
, 11 : 2--"'" ~TH ASPEN CO
..cr. 3.19'36 ~
/
/
Date: 3/30/99 Time: 9:15;18 AM
:~)
..,
NO. 231 . P.4
/'
./' I
Memo.andum
PIamUng Office, City of Aspen
Roo: The Cant
0cl0ber3,1996
Page 3
,..;g,.'
would be added. The square footage mcrease under this proposal is
appra:dmate1y 1,100 square feet.
3, Pl= /13 - Meeting Room md Exercise Roo", Addition.
In addition to all items C'Onrempla~ in Plan tt1., a 450 square foot
exercise room would be added on the lower terrace, nus addition would also
allpw for the expansion of the upper betrace by aY.I'loAimately the same square
fOotage ad the exercise room. The kitchen would alae be enlarged and remodeled.
The square footage iI1cre4lSl! contemplated by this plan is approximately 1,5S0
square feet.
The Cant is in a competitive market Cummtly it has the largest meeting
facility of any Aspen ccndominium property but those facilities fall short of the
loo1 hotel competltors, While the addition of a meeting room and Conversion of
an existing room to lobby space will not significantly increase the total square
footage available for m.eetinss, the redesign of the rooms w,illapow the facility to
betrer meet the expec:tations of meeting planneIll and WiU"lmproved overall
functionality, The enlargement of the deck area if Plan #3 is approved will
significantly incrcMe The Gant's SUD1.Ii1er capabilities for food and beverage,
meeting and specialty functions such as weddings and fAmily reunions. The fact
tMt the IMeting facilities at all competitive properties are either new or remodeled
places The Cant at an additiot1al competitive disadvantage, Further, among aU of
The Cant's competitors, only one lacks even a rudimentary exercise facility,
As to employees, The GlInt believes that any proposed. expansion will not
tIeCe86i~te hiring new employees, The board feels that any increased 5erVices can
be handled by its current &tait and the expansion will allow The Cant to employ
its exi,sti:ng staff more I:'egularly on a ~round basis.
The board of, directors of 'The Gant would like to I1Ulke a ti...-l.,;nn 1I4 to
which' alternative to pursUe by early November. This would allow for a two phase
corwtruction project, the first of which would be completed in the spring of 1997
and the second in the fall of 1997,
Molly Campbell, John &leer (The Cant's architect) ancl I look forward to
working with you 01\ developing this new project.
,
Page 7 oi I
I 7
1 ,"37.!:> ~.V
~k....,<
nom; JOM I"L BaKer To: Moay CampoeQ
Date: 3/30/99 lime: 9:15:18 AM
Page J of 7
o
"1.,,,
tEe. 6.1996 l1'52FN
MCGRAlH ASPEN CO
1'0,110
P.3
i I N O'V'finber 1996
/
Mr. Nicl1.o1as McGrWl, P.C.
Attorneys Ac Law
600 EllSt Hopkins Avenue, Suite 203
Aspen; Colorado 81611
(970) 925-26l2
.
ASpeN' Pmlli
~ Dsvu.ot"".-.T Ocro\liTloll.'CT
R.: The GanC - !?roposed Coeference Centet Renovation
Dear Mr. McGrarb.:
. Having reviewed your memorandum of 2. OctOber 1996, City file.! and applicable
""ctions of me Ll1l1d Uso Regulations, r .,.ould lib [0 conf= me followin; based upon
<he approval of Ordinance 41, Soonos' of 1996: .
. A. Cutrentzoning: R-15 (Lodge) PUD .
B. Density: No in=ose in the number ofuuits in ttte lodge or hotcfunless the
enlargement is f6r the purpose of conmucting deed restricted employee housing
unitS acce.ssory to the principal use.
; .
C. Enlargement of sq= foacage: Lodge or botel shilll\bt be elt;panded by more
than ten perceDt (10%) of i13 elUsting floor area or twO <housnnd -five hundred.
(2..500) square feet, 1l<l:tichever is 1051. .Enlat!ement wbicb. ocCll;ts fu phases shllll
not ox=d these limit!, measured on a awdmwn cumulative .basis.
D: El<tcmal floor area: Lodge or hotel shall hnve an elt;tcmal floor are:!. equal to
or less than I: I following me enlargemen~ .
E, El<p"'!sion: Rental roo!D.I'may be expl.llded, provided l.ll equal ~unt of
existing square footage i.s convel'led from rental rooms to non-imit space.
F, Review procedure: Enlargement for chc purpose of improving me fllCility"s
non-unit space shall be reVIewed and consi~d as a. Development Applie.tion
fOf Special Review, Art. 7, I?iv. 4 (recodified as Chapter 26.64).
In regarcl& to the non-unit ~xpansjon of <he Gont, the following conditions apply:
1. Pursuant [0 Ordinance 41-89. maximu~ floor area. expansion of non-unit space <?
a.t the Gant shall not exceed 2,500 square feet. Aitor the 480 square foot
elt;t'ansion in 1989, the Gant continues to heyc 2,020 square feet of non-unit
expansion potential. '
131 Sc:vtl'l~" Sl'lIUT . AJifOt, Cc..cIl\GIO tUU.1.915 . P"YtM 91l1.no.JG9Q . f~ V1'Q.91O.s.ut
t'RoooJ_~~'
.
c
Date: 3130/99 Time: 9:15:18 AM
:J
"'-.,,,;
Page 4 of 7
From: John R. Baker To: MoM)' Campbel
occ. 6,19'36 l1:S2R1
MCGRATJ; ~ CO
1'0.110
P.4
/
2. Pursunnt to Ordinance 41-89 ~o.apter 26, 64, Special Review, an
.-ndment to the develovme'C.t order sholl De submitted to the Community
Development Director for review and recommendation for approval:, approval
with conditions or disapproval by the Planning and Zoning Coromission. Ie is a
one-step review before the Commission at n pubelc meeting.
3. The development application shall include e;tisUng and proposed floor plans
and elevations of the Conference Ce:ucr in Ildclic:on to the gener;U .pplic,uion
information llIId responses to Section 26.64.090, Insubstaecial amendment cdteri.,
4. The development applico.cion requires a bll.le fee deposit of S I,OSO.CO, M'lIlor
Review. _A..oy additional boun required by s",ffto process the development
.application .hall De billed ut..., hourly rate of S [7S.00.
S. Once a complete development application is received by Community
Development. the matter should be brought before Planning and Zoning
Commission within four to si~ weeles. .
Ba.sed upon our review and current undentanding. of the Gaet's refurbishlIlCnrle"PllOsion
plans, Community Development shan proce<lo5 the devetopment application Il.l an
Insubstantial Amendment subject to S!",cial Review. The proposed non-unit space
expansion snail not require new employ"" mitigation.
It I cnn proVide further information or clarificwon regllrrling cher,Oty's rcquizements and
review procedure for the proposed expll!lsion Dnd returbisbmentof the Ganr's non-unit
sp..:e, plellSe cooract me,
Sincerely,
~.
Robert Nevins
City Plonner
.
ri~ ;e~ c
EXHIBIT #6
~s~
1$'"" S61S rl4{UH. ~ 8'1612
P~/7- (970)920-1125
~...a
July 2, 2004
Ms. Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: GANT CONDOMINIUMS
Dear Sarah,
Thank you for taking the time to meet with Molly Campbell and me yesterday to discuss the
Ganl's plans for improvements to its buildings and grounds in the upcoming years.
During the meeting we explained to you that only minor changes are being proposed for the
buildings. This year the Gant plans to add a covered, unenclosed walkway next to the
elevator that serves the E Building. This addition would be approximately 74 sq, ft. in area,
and would occur on each of the four levels of the building,
In the future, the Gant proposes to modify the canopy that covers the entry to the
Office/Reception Building at the entry to the complex. The existing square canopy would
be replaced with a new half-circle canopy that would cover approximately 300 sq. ft. more
in area. The canopy would also be an unenclosed space.
During the meeting you indicated that both of these areas would qualify as porches as
defined by the Land Use Code. Therefore, both areas would be exempt from the City's
floor area calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reserve of 382 sq.
ft. of "non-unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989,
If I have accurately summarized our meeting, I would appreciate it if you would sign in the
space below and return a copy of this letter to me for my files.
Very truly yours,
J4;;: i:/ SERTIeES
Alan Richman, AlCP
c
:)
Ms. Sarah Oates
July 2, 2004
Page Two
I concur that the two improvements proposed by the Gant (unenclosed walkway addition to
Building E and unenclosed canopy at the entry to the Office/Reception Building) qualify as
porches as defined by the Land Use Code and would therefore be exempt from floor area
calculations and would not count towards the Gant's remaining reseIVe of 382 sq. ft. of "non-
unit space" that was originally approved by the City in 1989.
_..~.:; ~ 7/:2/0~
Sarah Oates, Zoning Enforcement Officer
c
o
MAPSIDRA WINGS
r
~
o
1 Reception
Administrative Offices
2 Fitness
Dressing Rooms
3 Bike/Ski Racks
4 Guest Laundry
(basement level)
5 Guest Laundry
(2nd & 4th floors)
6 Guest Laundry
(ground level)
~Elevator
e) Recycling Areas
room #:
)
Original Street
phone ext:
Glory Hole Park
,0
\:::
,~
I:.
I:::
I~
,>
,<
1!2
~'~
, ~
\ ~)ii
West End
:Ef'
" ,
~i
ill
Iii
'1) ,
, I
~.
To Tennis Courts
3, 4 and 5
.
The GANT parking lots and neighboring streets are permit
parking only. Please ask the front desk staff for assistance.
Valet parking is available.
lRE
GlNr
aspen
'-l../
:t
"
n
)>
r
!'j
~
;!::
'10
u>
. .
]
- tIl:'..
~
... ~tl! ~~...... ... ~ .... .. .1 =t~
} ~ 11'-11' }
. .')>
~
t.'
11'-11'
]
", .
-'
." ()
~
~ )>
~ Z
~
Ii 0
~
I - '1J
q
-<
;0
0
0
"T1
'1J c
r 0
::;;
z
)> (J)
."
0
Z c
-j
z5 z~
~~ ~~
f8rn ~rn
m..--oi m.....
~~ Q."
0- oQ
z3 ZZ
::;;0 ::;;-j
_." _0
:;: :;:'"
~8 ~8
. ." . "'TI
cm;U(J)z
zo;>-mrn
000;;:'"
mm-o:.,<
e!0i!=;:!11
~~~~~
c:mm.("')
Z::II:IJ;o>
O)>-~Oz
o~"'Ooo
~oiH1~
zO<G:l
i!i::;;oCn~
mzmrn>
(f.JCJ>>Z
;g !: (J);: 9
cr-
~-<-
......:...z
-jZ
o
o
~
z
(J)
@
."
C
f!!
~
~
~
;U
i!
r.'
~A!:k
.... ... '0/
. .
.'
r
.' 0 "
"
OJ 9'
OJ
-<
~
I~
~
I
I
L
...""",
....l
,
_.~
.,
+
~
I
L-r
I
I
.'/':'
" I"\J ,"
", ,
..f>.'"
~
+ !
L___J
~..
f
".
,.~' '.,)
12'~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ !11 ~ I;g
::!! 0 '-< :a
@ ~ l'l ~
;:;: CD ~ 8
- ::; !;1 i'i
~ ~ ~ ~
,.. 6; 9? &;
"""4 O:;Jo ~
&; rii ~ ;>
;r: il ;>1 ~
;;: ~ ~ ~
~ ~ g g
51 "
~ i"
~;~~ 0
ill
~
"
m
;:
I;g
~
~
:;/
~
m
'"
"'
m
m
'f'
m
m
~
~
to':-'" G)
~:;gffi8 m
ooiRr-z :z
>3:2:00
~osa;ii-tm
~~~!~ ~
;ll~,,~m r-
Q~~~~ :z
~~U~ ~
. gi5"'~ en
z~,. ,.
h~
~m~
fii
z
~
n
)>
r
)>
-i
~
III
tI. r
+---- ."~
I~I
"~
" -
~~
-
~2
"OJ
of
;jj~
~~
~~
z,.
o~
~z
c:!Ji
i'i!'i
'z
ill
-<
:0
o
o
'"
o
"
Ii :
'"
~
~OJ
~c
,
0-
'r
o
-
z
G)
~ ,
a; ,
,
" I
~
,- ,
o
,
~
I
I-~
I
I
m
z
-I
::0
-<
()
)>
z
o
"'U
-<
CCi:I(!Itnm
~c6:;!8
~~~~m
C);U:tlZ~
~~~Ci)z
~o~~~
og~:!!::m
~!~ffi~
~~eil'!'i
lil"i:;:~i5
6f5:!l~
Zi'i~"
z'
mOO
~~
oo
Z
l;;"''''
od!D
"'ill!;
~~m
'll;oj~
fl1~~
fTt~(i)
."mm
;;;.":~
~~;o
"'-C:(5
;;'"
~~
~~
~
in
~
Z
o
g
oo
!!l
o
:0
m
~
z
'. ~"
'u;
.,:.~. .
.0
"
, ~
. .0'
....~. '
~ ".,'
. '"
, i>.
^
~
I
I
L_J
I
CJ
~
~
I~
I
I
L_,
I
. (fl"
'~'.
..:;;U."
Z.
g)
..,
r-1~.
r
--~
1
'-
I I I I I .
~ ~~ ~~:: 1ll !:J PHASE THREE IMPROVEMENTS
!!J[!j ~ '" ~~ 15 ~
".... .. ;;~ f!l ~
~ ~". ".
~"
"'0: 1:\ :d~ THE GANT CONDOMINIUM
~ o;~ i ~
"
"" t';) ; ASSOCIATION
" , "
'"
" tll ~
..a-. ~ ~ r;l 610 S. WEST END STREET ASPEN, CO 81611
il; ~