The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.HP.409 E Hopkins Ave.HPC22-92409 EAST HOPKINS; Baldwin 2737-073-39-004 HPC22-92 -@11~1~8/L-4....2.,1.Li,A 11.4.220...,661-kL.LL'.' Â· 6~Lur,. , j 4 Â»Ill \ H P L AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C. Attorneys At Law 600 East Hopkins Avenue Suite 205 Ronald D. Austin Aspen, Colorado 81611 Telephone (303) 925-2600 Frederick E Peirce FAX (303) 925-4720 Thomas Fenton Smith April 9, 1993 Rhonda J. Banl 1. 02 1 3. f7 ; 3 rh' i Historic Preservation Commission APR, 1 2 1993 c/o City of Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street .....- - I -------U--. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 409 East Hopkins Project Dear Members of the Commission: I represent Kandycom, Inc., a Colorado corporation, which is the present owner of the 409 East Hopkins property in the City of Aspen. The property is subject to an HPC Conceptual Approval, obtained by my client's predecessor in interest, which expires on May 12, 1993. Kandycom has not yet determined how it wishes to proceed relative to the development of the property. Accordingly, I am submitting this request for a one (1) year extension of the approval of the conceptual development, as provided in Section 7- 601(F)(3)(c), of the Land Use Regulations of the City of Aspen. This request is based upon Kandycom's recent acquisition of the property, and the fact that it is evaluating its options with respect to the development and disposition thereof. The Code does not specifically address criteria for the granting of such extensions. If additional information is required, please let me know. Also, I would request notice of the date that this is scheduled for hearing before the HPC, and obviously, we hope that this will occur before expiration of the conceptual approval. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C. By: D u -~v Thomas Fentorranith TFS/hs CC: Kandycom, Inc. Richard S. Cohen, Esquire .. CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee DATE RECEIVED:r 05/04/92 1 CASE NUMBER: HPC22-92 DATE COMPLETE: PARCEL ID: 2737-073-39-004 PROJECT NAME: 409 East Hopkins Project Address: 409 East Hopkins; S 20' Lot E; S20' of E of Lot D, Block 88 APPLICANT: Harley Baldwin Applicant Address: REPRESENTATIVE: Joe Krabacher; Krabacher, Hill & Edwards Representative Address/Phone: 201 North Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 925-6300 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: 3 STEP: Description Extension of Conceptual Development Approval; $0 HPC Meeting Dates: d'/-3-~24 3-21,9< 3-97.9 I 5*33, 9-091 -*> P&Z Meeting Date: CC Meeting Date: Historic Preservation Officer: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date: REFERRALS: Planning Building Zoning City Engineer Parks Dept. City Attorney DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: FINAL ROUTING: ~ DATE ROUTED: (7 -<- 9,2/ INITIAL: ~'6<-<~ City Atty l/ City Clerks Office Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: COMMENTS: , 7 .. 1~ kj MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer k Re: Conceptual Development approval extension: 409 E. Hopkins St. Date: ~ May 13; 1992 ~ SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a one year extension (to July 1, 1993) of the Conceptual Development approval for the proposed project 409 E. Hopkins pursuant to Section 7-601(F) (3) (c) . The reason is economic based, discussed in the application letter attached. PREVIOUS HPC ACTION: On August 28, 1991, the HPC granted a 10 month extension of the Conceptual Approval. A copy of staff's review memo from that meeting is attached for reference. STAFF RESPONSE: The applicable section of the Land Use Regulations states: "Application for a Final Development Plan shall be filed within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Unless an extension is granted by the HPC, failure to file such an application shall render null and void the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan previously granted by the HPC." This language does not specify how long the HPC may approve a Conceptual Development extension for, nor how many extension approvals may be granted by the HPC. In the past, staff has recommended extensions for periods no longer than six months, however, this may be a case where a longer extension is appropriate, since the HPC unanimously approved the Conceptual Development plan. This project has previously received two Conceptual Development extensions since it was first approved by the HPC; one on July 10, 1991 for 60 days; the other was made on August 28, 1991 for 10 months. The downside to the HPC granting such a lengthy extension of a conceptual application of a commercial GMQS project lies in potential changes in development policy as a result of the revised community master plan. Currently this parcel is partially undeveloped, if you are to consider the sculpture garden "open space". A building permit must be applied for prior to the 1 .. expiration of the project's three-year GMQS time allocation. OTHER COMMISSION ACTION: The GMQS allotment was allocated in January of 1991, which is good for three years from that date. The applicant has already purchased affordable dwelling units to meet a large portion of their employee housing requirements. They intend to develop the parcel, and are aware that any HPC extension does not alter or extend their three year allocation under the GMQS provisions. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC grant a twelve (12) month extension effective from the date of extension approval. memo.hpc.409eh.exten.2 -leÂ© drlatit 2 .. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Conceptual Development approval extension: 409 E. Hopkins St. Date: ~ August 28, 1991 j~ SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting an extension to July 24, 1992 of the Conceptual Development approval for the proposed proj ect 409 E. Hopkins pursuant to Section 7-601(F)(3)(c). Should the HPC approve this request, the deadline for submission of a Final Development Plan would be prior to the expiration of that extension date. STAFF RESPONSE: The applicable section of the Land Use Regulations states: "Application for a Final Development Plan shall be filed within one(1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Unless an extension is granted by the HPC, failure to file such an application shall render null and void the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan previously granted by the HPC." This language does not specify how long the HPC may approve a Conceptual Development extension for, nor how many extension approvals may be granted by the HPC. In the past, staff has recommended extensions for periods no longer than six months, however, the HPC granted two six month extension on the 612 W. Main project prior to the Final Development approval being finalized. This project received a sixty day extension on July 10 of this year. The applicant had anticipated filing for Final Development approval prior to the expiration of that extension, however, have changed their minds for apparent economic and market considerations. That extension has expired, and they are requesting a one year extension from the date of the expiration of the original Conceptual Development approval (approximately July 25, 1991). The downside to the HPC granting such a lengthy extension of a conceptual application of a commercial GMQS project lies in potential changes in development policy as a result of the revised community master plan. Currently this parcel is partially undeveloped, if you are to consider the sculpture garden "open space". The HPC may wish to grant an extension fox six months, 1 .. which bears a relationship to the amount of time anticipated to completed the Aspen Area Community Plan. Some discussion has been given to the protection against loss of pocket parks and open space within the city. Please refer to the applicant's request letter regarding their sincere intent on developing the parcel. They have already purchased affordable dwelling units to meet a large portion of their employee housing requirements. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC grant a six (6) month extension effective from today's action (to February 28, 1992, for the Conceptual Development approval of the project at 409 East Hopkins. memo.hpc.409eh.exten 2 .. LAW OFFICES KRABACHER, HILL & EDWARDS APR 27 PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 201 NORTH MILL STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 B. JOSEPH KRABACHER TELEPHONE THOMAS C. HILL (303) 925-6300 JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, 111 (303) 925-7116 TELECOPIER OF COUNSEL (303) 925-1181 JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, JR. Allk April 23, 1992 . Roxanne Eflin Historic Preservation Planner Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office 130 South Galena, Third Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 409 East Hopkins - Extension of Conceptual Development Approval Dear Roxanne: This letter is written to request an extension of the conceptual development approval for 409 East Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado. At the present time, the owner of the project has determined that it will not be proceeding with construction of the project during 1992. The reasons are as follows: First, the owner paid approximately $1.9 million for the property. As a part of the GMQS approval for the project, the owner was required to provide employee housing since the City Council was unwilling to accept a cash-in-lieu payment. The owner purchased the Smuggler Mountain Apartments and donated them to Pitkin County to satisfy the employee housing requirements. Although the cash-in-lieu payment was $772,800, the owner paid $925,000 to provide actual housing -- or $152,200 more than the cash-in-lieu payment. The owner wants to preserve the HPC conceptual approval previously received, but given the extraordinary amount paid for the property and the employee housing exactions, it is not economically viable to build the project in 1992. Second, the design approved by the Historic Preservation Committee ("HPC") was extremely well received by the HPC and we believe that it is an excellent design solution. As you may .. Roxanne Eflin April 23, 1992 Page 2 recall, the prior owner proposed a three story building and the current owner has conceptual approval for a two story building. The two story building will be a benefit to the community since it is more in keeping with the historic character of the commercial core of Aspen and compliments the National Register Brand Building and Collins Block. To require the owner to reapply for HPC conceptual development approval could result in a less desirable design solution. Third, the economics of Aspen's real estate and rental market do not justify building the project in 1992. Accordingly, we are requesting an extension of the HPC conceptual development approval for a period of 12 months. The present conceptual development approval expires on June 1, 1992. Should you need any additional information or documentation to support this request, please let me know and I will provide it immediately. We would like to have this matter heard on the HPC's agenda for the May 13, 1992 meeting. Thank you for your attention to this matter. KRABACHER, HILL & EDWARDS, P.C. By: C BJK/ch B. Jos4il Krabacher CC: Kandycom, Inc. Richard S. Cohen, Esq. Bill Poss & Associates itakura~ltrs~eflin.1 ./. .. \ A lilli 11I ~ '111 lilli h il I. lilli 71 1 4 - 7- 5 9/ \Illw r:J li , 1 4 - . bc.*er. 1~â€¢06- --1 $ i L 29Â« & -Men- - _L 1 .11 -- . 1 -mr./.1=.....Â·:=U= â€žP 1.i':11 :!/ tin:i 1 1- - Ii - 6./eeÂ· efAÂ¢* -33C - It 20 7 0 1 . Aup -21_ It 4,20140 | 6%|T *,TAIF. / 111 L.KAâ‚¬+ 4~*t 9 ' er,-CÂ» 1 ' -1?4~ itlilli I immi(-It 1 111! ' 1:Â·* ~- T- ne-Â¢410(h FMP 6.044Ttow ' 111 ' i ~i i 16 j '!1,11 1, ! : il 2 1 1 11 MA-1-KI- D-EVE-11--7L-A-N -- -- - 72_-7--UFFES -LEYEL F LAN- Â· -401- EAST INe --- I<ANCrr'COM --1115 , . and associates i ~00~1 7--0. _--CONDEFTUAL -ATTMVAL AME,NOMENT- --4 9Â· I+1L -, 4. GAUIB Â¥d,~ty#lf = . 0 . .. . - - T-= T- 1 -4, --Â«.~M= Ay .C.. 4 / * . - - . 4 /**Â·ili --- 1 - - - -- , - A . - -I=I- - : -"=27=-=--Fli.=222-4-E u_â€ž__,-1- . i#jvzr,EL=&:d.{ 1- tf 2_1-- ---_-- 1, t, , t" ith #4 n li ~u Â»i,- 1 1 ~ Fi- +0 -- -. - i . 9*%L..11 .MlmiÂ·- -1 -?1! ~*1E1#[~~CRE*IBLEC*- in H ti- _33 7--t i - -- , i - - 7* --3---2 I IL h E==== 9*1 9-= ... ===.=.6 - - 62- LU E *7- 'FildLE Opm * T - 1 111 - 1. -W=14=- O 111 -TEÂ« 1 2 Ill 111 5.3 31 1 124 *4 4 1 4 1 ---.-.i- -ill 1 - . 2.-)4. A. ~ fi .4Â·< luXUL~ 4.,A J -:i .- . HOATH C> l., C> 4 P: 1 IUM - kÂ¥1 401 -1 f EAOT -1 1-(Of?KING- -- - --- -KANOYCOM/158. ,1 ~ and associates -H_Â£0.-- CONDEFTUAL __-_AIFFF-OVAL AMENOMENT; f -e- [4Â·11 1 14- I 9 4 141 ' rr)- 57 Â» 52 n u..,-,i r.-5-Â· 71 ! t I AUG - 5 1991 7 j ; and associates i \1 1 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 - -- - TELEPHONE 303/925-4755 FACSIMILE 303/920-2950 h August 5,1991 . Roxanne Eflin Aspen Planning Department 133 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 409 East Hopkins/HPC Final Approval Dear Roxanne: Kandycom, Inc., the owners of 409 East Hopkins, are requesting vested final development approval by the HPC. As the architects of the project we will deliver to your office a final development application no later than Monday August 12th. Please begin the Public Notice process prior to our presentation of the application, so that the project can be on the August 28 agenda. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. Please call should you require additional information. Sincerely, 1 ki (fidtmÂ« 1 David J. Rybak 1-1) Project Architect DJR/twk cc: Warren Ryan .F A /v. %' f Cot 6 + E, 1 6 -6 Lof K #Â£ - 68, 11,41024 .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 409 E. Hopkins Ave., Vested Property Rights NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, August 28, 1991, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee in the Second Floor Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application by Kandycom, Inc., represented by Bill Poss and Associates, requesting site-specific vested property rights approval, for the parcel located at 409 E. Hopkins, described as follows: The North 80 feet of Lots D and E, and all of Lot F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office at 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. (303) 920-5090. s/William J. Poss. Chairman Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Published in the Aspen Times on August 8, 1991 1 City of Aspen account pub.notice.409eh.vr ~ and associates LETTEROFTRANSMITTAL ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C. Â· 605 E. MAIN Â· ASPEN, CO 81611 - TEL. 303 925 4755 Â· FAX: 303 920 2950 ~INÂ©[81]91.-3 [Al DATE â€¢ 7/30/91 .1 1 lili 11 PROJECT â€¢ 409 E. Hopkins 4\ i .]11 3 0 1991 ; 1 : 11) TO 1 Kim .Tnhn son , Dave Rybak FROM NO. OF PAGES i IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, CALL IMMEDIATELY. DESCRIPTION â€¢ Conceptual Approval Amendment Submittal A. Letter of Explanation B. Eighth Scale Plans & Elevation C. Reduced Drawings for your packages - .L Li Vi ' \ w 1 - ./7 ko n A 34 ~ <" b ,~k'.rvr\\ A}â€¢ \ 1 1 16 4 \.v ./ l.~\ l' 1 V '42. 1 COMMENTS â€¢ Kim, ~ ~U lup<th As we discussed last week we are submitting for a minor revision at the Q< Aug. 14 meeting. In the event it is not seen as minor, we would like to gubmit simultaneously for a public hearing on Aug 28th, the Aug 14th meeting would then act as a review with H.P.C. Thank You Dave WI 0 0 ; and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 303/925-4755 FACSIMILE 303/920-2950 Ms. Roxanne Elfin Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 409 East Hopkins Aspen, Colorado Dear Roxanne: Please accept this submittal to revise the conceptual approval granted by the H.P.C., August 8, 1990. During the past year this property and project have changed ownership and they would like to present this revised design to the H.P.C. , which will be a more compatible neighbor to the historic landmark Brand and Collins Block buildings. The revised building design maintains the two story building and stepped massing of the Hopkins Avenue facade as previously developed with the H.P.C.. We would like to amend the approval by reorienting the second floor plaza to be centralized along Hopkins Avenue and relocate the stair to be within the central bay of the facade, creating a four storefront plan. The major building materials will be brick and sandstone with a metal trellis connecting the street level and stair with the second floor plaza. Review Standards: A. The building setbacks will remain as developed with the H.P.C. The east and west most bays will be on the property line, flush with the adjacent buildings. The center two bays and stair will step back in varying depths from the property lines. As with the approved design we have kept the building height below the height of the adjacent Brand building, a strong sandstone base, horizontal accent courses, and complimentary windows, doors and storefronts enhance its harmony with the landmark neighbors. 141 .. ~ and associates Ms. Roxanne Elfin July 29, 1991 Page two B. The neighborhood compatibility is enhanced by the introduction of the plaza opening on the second floor. The ability to see the vegetation within the plaza from the street will maintain the existing park character of the site. This void in the facade reduces the perceived mass of the building creating a cornice line variation and separation common within the commercial core. C. The subtracted mass along Hopkins Avenue diminishes visual competition with the historical neighbors allowing them to continue aesthetic domination of the street. D. Review standard D does not apply to this block. The introduction of the plaza to the street will reduce the apparent massing of the new building to lessen any competition with the Brand or Collins block building. This new opening will also allow the view of Aspen Mountain from this location to be maintained. The proposed revisions to conceptual approval will produce a building whose scale, massing, character and materials will enhance Hopkins Avenue and the historical anchors of this block. Sincerely, David J. Rybak Project Architect cc: Warren Ryan, Kandycom I I , t MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Clarification on Conceptual Development approval: 409 E. Hopkins, demolition of non-contributing building Date: ,~*March 27, 19914, SUMMARY: On behalf of the applicant, consultant Joe Wells has asked for and HPC clarification on the previous Conceptual Development approval action taken on 409 E. Hopkins. A final development application has not been submitted for HPC review at this time, however, it is staff's understanding that this application is currently in the process of being prepared. The clarification is requested due to the current demolition code provisions in Section 7-602 that require the applicant to comply with all demolition review standards in order for the HPC to grant demo approval for structures located within an "H" Historic Overlay District or for Landmarks. Please refer to Joe's letter (attached) for additional information. The purpose of the exemption clause is to allow a non-historic, non-contributing structure that is found to not contribute to the overall character of the district to be exempt from the strict demolition standards, but not exempt from HPC review and approval. As you recall, this code amendment is necessary for three current project: The.Lane Parcel,,(Collins Block out- parcel, Final Development approved), 409 E. Hopkins (Conceptual approval only) and the Lily Reid project (Conceptual approval only). RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC take action on the following motion: "The HPC granted Conceptual Development approval for the redevelopment of the parcel located at 409 E. Hopkins, recognizing that a code amendment for Section 7-602 was necessary in order for the demolition of the non- contributing structures to be approved under an "exemption" clause. Such amendment language has been prepared by the Planning Office, reviewed and approved by the HPC, and -has- -O-teen-forwarded-to the Planning and Zoning Commission -fer ee prior to first reading by Council. "In order for the HPC to grant Final Development and Demolition approval for 409 E. Hopkins, the code amendment . .. F , f must be adopted by Council in order to create the exemption provisions that would apply to this proposal and others pending in the Commercial Core Historic District. The HPC understands that final adoption may occur in May, 1991. "As an element of Conceptual Development approval, the HPC finds that the existing structure at 409 E. Hopkins meets the proposed criteria for *Exemption" under Section 7-602 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. Final Development approval is pending." memo.hpc.409eh.code.clar 0 K.Â» UiLÂ» 4 02_-9 GALLAJbwixi Â»1". G wm etÂ»vtÂ© 43 Â»- nut t.k,LU . d .. Joseph Wells Joseph Wells, AICP Land Planning and Design IA- March 1, 199]UI Ms. Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Aspen CO 81611 Re: 409 East Hopkins Dear Roxanne: As you know, the City granted a Commercial GMQS allocation to the 409 East Hopkins project several months ago. Further work on the project has been delayed, however, pending the approval by the City of the project's employee housing proposal (which we believe will occur very soon) and revision of the demolition provision. It is my understanding that the minor changes to the City's land-use code regarding demolition of existing structures within an Historic District which were recommended for approval previously by the HPC is not scheduled for discussion by P&Z until March 19. Because City Council must consider an amendment to the text at a first and second reading of an ordinance, there will be no final action on these amendments until some time in April, at the earliest. Because of the delays in the consideration of these code changes, it is necessary that I request time on an HPC agenda during March to ask the HPC to make the necessary findings to approve the demolition of the existing non-historic structure at 409 East Hopkins. This is necessary in order to permit further work to proceed on the project so that construction of the project approved conceptually for the site by the HPC can begin as soon as possible. In my own recollection, the City has been aware of the problem created by this language at least since the consideration of the Collins Block/Lane Parcel project well over a year ago, but has not yet taken the necessary steps to correct the problem. 130 Midland Park Place, Number F2 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Telephone (303) 925-8080 Facsimile (303) 925-8275 0 0 Ms. Roxanne Eflin March 1, 1991 Page Two The HPC has had several Code discussions regarding problems in present Code language, including the apparent confusion in the demolition standards which requires that a finding be made that a building is not structurally sound in order to approve demolition, regardless of the historic significance of the structure in question. Staff has recommended that this provision be amended to allow demolition if a finding is made that the structure in question is "non- contributing." The structure on the site which is proposed to be demolished is not identified in the Historic Inventory as a contributing structure, and therefore would be eligible for demolition once this provision is amended. In the meantime, however, we believe that the necessary findings can be made if HPC wishes to resolve the problem so that the approved project can proceed. In order to permit the HPC to make the necessary findings, I am forwarding our responses to the various review criteria: i. The structure proposed for demolition is not structur- ally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure. If the HPC takes into account the project approved for the site, the structure to be demolished is not structurally sound, because in order to implement that plan, it is not possible to utilize the structural system of the existing building. In other words, the present building is not "structurally sound" for the use envisioned for the property. ii. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on-site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property. The reuse of the existing non-contributing structure would prevent implementation of the plan approved for the site. iii. The structure cannot be practicably moved to another site in Aspen. There are no available sites to relocate the existing structure, nor is the building suitable for such an effort. 0 0 Ms. Roxanne Eflin March 1, 1991 Page Three iv. The applicant demonstrates that the proposal mitigates to the greatest extent practical, the following: (a) Any impacts that occur to the character of the neighborhood where demolition is proposed to occur. The impacts of the project on the character of the neighborhood are positive. The approved project complies to a much greater degree with current historic guidelines than does the existing structure. (b) Any impact on the historic importance of the structure or structures located on the parcel and adjacent parcels. The impacts of the project on the historic importance of structures off-site are positive because of the sympathetic design of the proposal which relates very well to the historic structures on either side of the proposal. (C) Any impact to the architectural integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel and adjacent parcels. The impacts of the project on the architectural integrity of structures off-site are positive for the reasons stated above. We appreciate HPC's consideration of this proposal in a timely minner so that design development can proceed on the project without further delay. Sincerely, r--0- - - .rr -/ Joseph Wells, AICP 3'14 / b 19# ' . 4> // ~ and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 July 10, 19900 TEL: (303) 925-4755 Ms. Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Alpine Bank Site/Donnelly Property 409 East Hopkins Street Aspen, Colorado Dear Roxanne, Please accept this revised HPC Submittal, including revised conceptual drawings, for the above referenced property. This project has gone through numerous design changes in response to HPC's concerns. We feel that the revised design effectively addresses both the review standards and the HPC guidelines. The revised concept in design of this property focuses on creat- ing a structure which is harmonious in design and scale with the adjacent historic Brand Building and Collins Block. The build- ing, as redesigned, is a two story brick and sandstone structure that will have five retail shop facades at the street level of the building. The second floor, because of FAR restrictions, will be second floor commercial space with a center courtyard area that is not visible from the street. Review Standards: A. The proposed building is set back approximately five feet, at the closest point, from the property line. We feel this setback provides the most compatible rela- tionship to the designated structures located east and west of the property. A strong historically accurate sense of streetscape will be created by the contiguous street front facade along this block of East Hopkins Street. In addition, the horizontal lines created by facade details and awnings on the Brand Building and Collins Block are also allowed to carry through on the proposed structure. Materials to be used on the new structure are primarily of brick and sandstone with 141â€¢ â€¢ ; and associates Ms. Roxanne Eflin July 10, 1990 Page Two complimentary windows, doors and storefronts. These materials are complimentary, compatible and historical- ly accurate to those employed in the construction of the neighboring landmarks. B. With respect to neighborhood compatibility, the major issues are height and massing. With respect to height, the top of the parapet is approximately 28 feet above existing grade. This height is a significant reduction from the originally proposed height of 39'8". Thus, it is approximately equal to the parapet height of the Brand Building and is approximately 4 feet below the parapet of the Collins Block. The new building's height is significantly below the 40 foot height limit in this zone. It is also important to note that the historic portions of the Collins Block are separated from the proposed structure by a one story building which acts as a buffer between the two larger build- ings. A number of buildings directly across the alley from this project approach the full height limit of 40 feet. For the above reasons, we feel that the two story design of this structure is very compatible with the predominate historic structures along this block of East Hopkins Street. With respect to massing, we believe that it is most appropriate to present two story facade rather than the originally proposed third floor facade on this struc- ture. Through the use of multiple streetscape windows and retail storefronts we are able to further reduce the perceived mass of the structure. C. The proposed development does not detract from the cultural value of the designated historic structures located on the parcels east and west of this site. The westerly portion of the Brand Building is currently occupied by a restaurant and other commercial uses. The property to the west of this site, the Collins Block addition, is currently being leased for commer- cial use. Therefore, commercial use on this site is consistent with the uses of both historic properties WIâ€¢ â€¢ ~ and associates Ms. Roxanne Eflin July 10, 1990 Page Three located east and west of this site. Additionally, the properties located to the south of the property, across the alley, are of commercial use and of very limited visual appeal. The proposed use of the property would not detract from the surrounding area and would quite possibly be an enhancement to the historic cultural value of the adjacent parcels. D. Review Standard D does not apply to this property. In summary, we feel that the revised design of this property, compared to that which was previously submitted to the Historic Preservation Committee is a significant improvement over the original design and reflects many of the concerns and objectives of the HPC as reflected during preliminary review of the proposed development. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact either myself or Mac Cunningham. Sincerely, le=\ -9 il KW/cd CC: Cunningham Investment ABP.024 "/9/ G 77 ?8 2: 9 9 SCI 10 10 It li 12 ' (S PA) 1 496 8 PUB - 3 4 . ' 1 NC i (SPA) (S PA) 1 * 8 1 RIO GRANDE # PLANNG RELD b.- - 08 \. 1 PARKING LOT 0 . A 1 -C-- --1 1- J 1 1/Â« 0 1 \ :Â£ 2 B C i- 1 1 J v 1- - -- 0 z Z 63 0 | H H 1 1 H 1 1_1-- 1 " 1PUR~ 11! - Il- VP / 1/-819/414 6-2---- 2 0 OE 30OE'.- 40OE 1 . , 7-- - IMY-ko O P- C 61 m v ..1 n -' -1--*. ~~ E -- H - H1 F , 1% Jfil\Â· .... . ... 0 . a. . 00.--69--4 A i_J n E -1 . .....6 r---u . |LP P 1 1 IH Â¢ tx - i . iwn,---1 1 ------- / Aeo/?\ 100000. Cil ~ d u F . .1 /4 H.0 m 12 - â€¢ Z - Z. 2 W' H 1 4 0 WAGNER E. ~d~ER AVE. L/TR t P 1| Illl- I 1 b ILAI IL i FIT-F M (D,I,H) ' 1 1----1 e t--- 112] Ls-ASPEN -ST. .. CUNNINGHAM INVESTMENT CO., INC. SUITE 201 121 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925-8803 JUL 6 890 ~i July 3, 1990 * Ms. Roxanne Eflin Historic Preservation Committee Planner City of Aspen Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: HPC Conceptual Approval Review 409 East Hopkins Street Property Lots D, E, and F, Block 88 Aspen, Colorado Dear Roxanne, Pursuant to our discussion of today we are requesting that the aforementioned project designed by William Poss & Associates, Architects now be reinstated for public hearing in front of the Historic Preservation Committee. This project had previously been reviewed on May 9, 1990 by the HPC and final conceptual approval review was originally scheduled for May 23, 1990. We are now requesting that the public hearing and conceptual devel- opment review be scheduled for the August 8, 1990 HPC meeting. The appropriate revised plans are enclosed as part of the submis- sion. We believe that the concerns previously expressed by the Commit- tee relative to design on this property have generally been met as evidenced in the revised plans. We look forward to meeting with the Committee on August 8th. Should you require any addi- tional materials prior to the hearing please contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, //57 fl ......55(i.Ii.L~..Si.ic.:..61/12555$). /.9557 3. _F.#ir.. ~ ~.0 44â€ž *4*Gs*+md President Fi / \/ \ f UÂ»'AÂ« Cunningham Invest-m'ent Co., Inc. IMC/cd CC: William Poss & Associates Architects Enclosure ABP.022 -.. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development: 409 E. Hopkins, the Alpine Bank parcel, Public Hearing Continued Date: ~ May 23, 1990' PREVIOUS HPC ACTION: On May 9, 1990, the HPC reviewed and tabled the conceptual development application and public hearing for 409 E. Hopkins, Lots D, E, and F, Block 88, to May 23. The purpose of the tabling was to allow the applicant additional time to restudy a number of issues on the project, specifically massing, scale, height, storefront and facade treatments and setbacks. REVISIONS PRESENTED AT THIS MEETING: The applicant studied the HPC's recommendations, and has returned with a substantially improved infill structure, in staff's opinion. These changes may be summarized as follows: Setback: The central portion of the facade will be setback 8', while the two flanking entranceways will be setback 5'. This change is the result of a majority discussion of the HPC. Staff concurs that this revised setback is more appropriate in the district, however, we are not convinced 8' is the appropriate dimension. The HPC should continue to consider this strongly. 3rd Floor Massing: The result of HPC's discussion is the step back of some 20' Of the third floor, which staff supports. The parapet articulation has not changed, however, it appears less noticeable when pushed some 28' from the sidewalk edge. The interesting aspect of this 3rd floor stepback is that suddenly the recessed portion of the East wall of the Collins Block begins to read through again, allowing light and views to occur (a concern on that property owner). This also aligns with the mid-point breaks in both the Brand and the Collins Block, when Birds-eye viewed using the model. Staff is generally supporting of these third floor massing changes. Storefront and Facade: Most importantly is the bay- articulation of the facade. Aspen's commercial core is comprised of a variety of buildings, but the clear landmarks are those that relate to their neighbor, their block and the entire district in rhythm and fenestration pattern. Heights .. and materials vary, but the one consistent element tying them all together is their ability to be different within their own set of vertical bays. The Brand, Elks and Cowenhoven Blocks are excellent examples of defined vertical bays establishing the pattern, with varying window and door shapes within. Staff feels the applicant has incorporated this vertical bay treatment very well within the infill context. The bays are defined as A-B-C-B-A, and relate well to one another, and happily to the one story Collins Block infill facade, a nice bonus. The finer details of kickplate dimension and upper window height have been amended, which staff supports. A wrought-iron railing is proposed at the second floor parapet, which the HPC should consider as a compatible design feature. The second floor parapet is articulate to relate to the 3rd floor. This railing is apparently necessary by code for the second floor deck, now facing north. Residential Entries: Staff's concerned at the last meeting was that these entrance doors appears far too "residential" in nature, and incompatible for the extreme commercial nature of the core. These have been redesigned to appear as almost mini-storefronts, complete with side lights and transoms. The HPC should consider whether the architect has gone too far the other way now in this design - possibly a better solution involves less transparency in these entries. Alley (south) elevation: Staff's request to the applicant to restudy this elevation with the goal of having it relate somewhat to the facade has been accomplished. The 12 vertical double hung windows are paired. The window style and overall treatment of the third floor are improvements conceptually, in our opinion. We Still feel additional study is necessary to make some overdue and significant improvements to this alley as a whole. As this project will take up the majority of the alleyscape, we encourage a more creative and aggressive design solution to solve the trash problems. Sidewalk Landscaping: Staff feels that the general failure of "vest pocket parks" in the commercial core is due to minimal attention to landscaping, maintenance and other pedestrian features. The loss of the previously proposed 15' setback and "plaza" space could only considered such if the core were to be losing a particularly interesting landscaped feature (not in reference to the Sculpture Garden proposed for removal). Therefore, the four trees proposed 2 .. at the sidewalk level are very necessary and should be carefully considered in the plan. Additional low landscaping treatments should be studied for inclusion in this setback area, to help break the pedestrian perception of hard surfaces the entire distance between Galena and Mill. SITE, AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Due to GMQS competition forthcoming (application deadline is June 1), the applicant has not supplied the Planning Office with FAR figures for HPC's review. Once the GMQS applicant has been submitted, staff may be bringing the project back to the HPC for revised conceptual approval. EXISTING CONDITIONS: A number of uses currently exist on this parcel, which are all slated for removal: One story Alpine Bank building (non-historic) Sculpture Garden (waterfall and Meadow in the Sky sculpture) Garden seating area for the Smuggler Land Office restaurant Note: At the last meeting, the applicant stated they would be sponsored a code amendment changing Section 7-602 D. of the Land Use Regulations, adding paragraph #6 to include an "Exemption" clause for non-historic, non-significant structures within a historic district for demolition or relocation. At this time, no demolition application, per se, has been submitted to the Planning Office for the existing conditions. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: Please refer to the applicable Guidelines, which are found in Section IV. Commercial Buildings - New Construction beginning on page 35. The Development review standards are found in Section 7-601 of the Land Use Code. (Note: These were reviewed in staff's memo of May 9. Please refer to this memo.) ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the Conceptual Development as submitted 3. Approve the Conceptual Development with conditions, to be met at Final Development review, such as 4. Table action to a date specific, to allow the applicant further time to restudy the proposal again. 5. Deny Conceptual Development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. 3 .. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC grant conceptual development approval, subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant sponsor a code amendment changing Section 7-602 D. of the Land Use Regulations, adding paragraph #6 to include an "Exemption" clause for non-historic, non-significant structures within a historic district for demolition or relocation. 2) The Final Development applicant memo.hpc.409eh.3 4 4 Â£Â£~7*L<A-). Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 rear of the building with a redesign to be approved by monitor and staff. Les second. Glenn: There are a number of discrepancies as to how the exterior stair on the east elevation works. Roxanne: With the number of discrepancies this needs to be tabled. We need corrected elevation, site plan and roof plans. Dennis: We are going to have to redraw the east elevation anyway to take out the handicapped ramp, could we make it subject to a redrawing of the east elevation otherwise the same motion. Georgeann: The problem is whether you go through the project monitor or come back. Bill: The plans indicate that it is not there. AMENDED MOTION: Georgeann made an amended motion that approval is contingent on approval of the correction in the drafting error changes on the east elevation to indicate the elimination of the roof and stairs so that the facade under the main dormer of the east elevation will only have windows in it and this needs to be approved by monitor and staff. Les second with all in favor of Â·-u,as - motion and amended motion. Georgeann is monitor of 132 W. Main. 409 E. HOPKINS - ALPINE BANK - CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT-PH Charles reseated. Bill stepped down. Public Hearing opened. Roxanne Eflin, Preservation Planner presented the over-view of the project as stated in records (memo date May 9, 1990). This is conceptual development for an infill structure. A single use commercial on the main floor with free market and deed restricted affordable housing on the second floor and free market housing on the third floor. An auto lift is proposed off the alley accessing below grade parking. Six affordable units are proposed .~ for the second floor and those would be incorporating the previously approved Lane Parcel units. The existing conditions are slated for removal: One story Alpine Bank building, sculpture garden, garden seating for Smuggler Land Office. I have used the guidelines very closely in dealing with this large infill project. 3 .. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 We need to look at setback. The guidelines state that plazas or courts that break the continuity of the facade alignment should be avoided, design should maintain the general alignment. A court yard maybe considered if it has an active function or gives desired relief for the purpose of allowing historic landmark to stand out more prominently. The Brand Building and the Collins Block are on either side. The HPC should consider the 15 foot setback carefully and see how they function. In the commercial core there is a 25% open space requirement and this would require a cash in lieu mitigation of 10% of that which is a City Council decision not an HPC decision because this is not a landmark parcel. The alignment and rhythm of the face blend well except for the following: The bulkhead panel (kickplate) which appears to thin. The main floor doors appear too "residential". The second floor seems too narrow and thin and out of balance with the adjacent structures. The banding between the second and third floor appears heavy and out of scale. t i. 9 That the second floor windows servicing the stair tower on each 1 1 end are extremely narrow and appear incompatible. The parapet is too heavily articulated. The proposed building and awning materials do appear compatible. The Planning Office feels restudy of the massing is appropriate with the third floor, whether it should step back or remain as is. The storefront appears to meet the guidelines but we are recommending a submittal of more detailed storefront plans. The second floor windows appear too short in relation to the two historic buildings on either end of the block and need restudied. The alley elevation windows have no relation to the facade. They appear deeply recessed. The materials chosen are appropriate but we need to be careful of the texture Of those materials. The Hotel Jerome viewplane appears to be unaffected. From a cultural value we find that there is argument as to the impact of a structure this size and its effect on the two adjacent national registered buildings. The Planning Office is recommending that conceptual development be tabled to a date certain to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal and revise the setback, massing, height, parapet and the second floor fenestration and submit a complete 4 .. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 application requesting demolition of the existing improvements on the parcel. No conceptual approval may be granted for the redevelopment of the parcel without the HPC's review and approval of a demolition or relocation application. Kim Weil, architect: The third floor needs to be of a certain size that makes it virtually impossible to hide because of its openness. There are options to moving the building back and creating a space in front which tends to set off the corners. We can also slide the building up to the property line and keep the third floor essentially in the same position which would give it a 15 foot setback to the upper floor. The windows will evolve and are not as critical as the massing. We can work with the fenestration. Gideon Kaufman, attorney: We have an uniqueness with the bank as a tenant. We are open to discussion, the moving forward of the building and the possibility of adjusting the upper level. If the HPC does feel we should eliminate the plaza then we would like to work with you on sponsoring a code amendment that talks about when the HPC makes you move and doesn't want the open space then the fee should be waived. Kim: On the decks we are limited to 500 sq. ft. for each deck and the rest wood be roof. The mechanical will be hidden by the parapets on either side which are required by code, fire walls which have to go 2 1/2 feet above the roof. Gideon: Our intentions is to put the majority of the employee housing for this building and the Lane parcel in here. Gideon: We have presented the building with the plaza but if HPC would rather see the building move forward then the options become twofold or if you would want it moved back how far back. Kim: If we move the building forward and some arrangement is made for the $250,000 that it would cost us to do that, do we keep the third floor as is, a portion of the third floor or create pockets at the corner? MASSING Charles: I would like to see the second floor go to its parapet height, get higher and move the massing of the third floor back so the horizontal capping line of the building would more align with the Collins Block and the Brand building and would seem more like a two story building predominantly. The third level would be set back from the street. 5 .. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 Glenn: There is a lot to be said for having buildings on the street. What towns are about is having buildings on the lot line. I would like to see it pulled to the property line and find someway to fund the $250,000. In general the density of this area can go one way or another and I am in favor of moving the third floor to the property line. Joe: I prefer to see it read as a two story building. If there is no way to accommodate that I would be in favor of setting it back the way it has been presented. I am not in favor of bringing the building up to the property line and leaving the facade unbroken up to three stories. I would prefer a two story that would be on the property line, have a strong second story line so that we have some consistency to the block and step back the third floor to the south of the parcel so that it would read to a pedestrian as a two story building. Les: I like pockets and feel it is not necessary to have the building come to the property line. I do have a problem with 40 and 42 feet. I would like it to read lower. Site lines from 4(~:Lj1% across the street are still critical. Maybe we can drop the .Â·if front down, set it back so that the mountain can still be read ...=SZ from across the street. I have a problem with the transition into the Collins Block, it is a little strong and needs set back, or a step down a little. No problem with materials but massing too heavy. Jake: I am prone to supporting the forward position and would be in support of getting an exemption on their open space requirement since it is helping an historical cause. I do feel it would have a lot of impact with that kind of height and would favor some treatment of the upper floor so that it doesn't read with such an impact. It might not necessarily take recessing the entire floor. I like the changing of levels and the up and down. I am not strong on lining everything up on a straight line. I support the idea of articulating the verticality that we see in the Brand Building, separation of vertical elements. I like the ' , indentation on the lower floor by they displays. Charles: If the second floor line stayed where it is on the street and it popped down a little bit from the Brand Building that would be an acceptable band. Possibly the upper floor reduced and set back so that it becomes a two story building. We would try and work to reduce the open space impacts. Georgeann: This building dominates the two buildings on the } sides because its mass is so great. I also think it is 6 .. 1 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 tremendously horizontal. I would like to see the third floor pushed back or possibly the two sides of the third floor pushed back and the central section held tall so we get more variety on that street. The floors need lowered down a little. Do three stories have to go 42 feet high? I am strongly in favor of having the building pushed 10 to 15 feet back because the further back it sets, it allows the other two buildings to come forward and be dominant. Glenn: What is important to me is preserving a "sense of street" and hopefully preserving a sense that people live on the street. When you push the third floor back you deny those people a chance to live on the street. Trying to make the building read a little more broken up vertically might make it more honest about its use. Georgeann: Every building doesn't have to be a monument and I feel this one is turning into that. Joe Wells: The ground floor will be a bank. Charles: Another issue is having building set back in this town 1 so that you can see the mountain from the other side of the 3 street. Georgeann: In a plaza area people will stop and sit when going up and down the street. Charles: If the building did two things: Two stories on the front edge of it, three stories on the back edge and was pulled back somewhat from the street it might create a park-like quality and would make the other two buildings predominant on the street. Harley Baldwin: Keeping the building along the street is historically compatible. Use and architecture get tumbled together although that is not in your purview. My concern is what's going on from the historic building "out", then I am with anything else, its creating a big wall of masonry when you are inside the historic building. When you are looking out the window of the Collins Block you are looking straight into a concrete wall. It is partially helped by shifting the entire building toward the street. At that point the views are at least marginal toward the mountain. Georgeann: Pushing it back might give more sunlight and space on the street but it also severely effects the people in the historic buildings which is something to consider. 7 .. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 Roxanne: We want to see the alley cleaned up and they are of a great concern to the HPC. Harley: The fenestration and materials are terrific and a great start and I look forward to working with them. Georgeann: The client needs direction and we are split as to whether the building should be back from the street or forward. We are split whether the third floor should be back from the second floor or not. There are no unfavorable comments about the articulation going in and out of the front within the building plane of the building. Steve Briggs, representative for Alpine Bank: A retail store on the first floor would not be possible as we need all that space. Roxanne: I am in favor of the building being moved forward somewhat but feel we are not ready to make a decision. Glenn: We need to recognize that people do want to be on the street and we need to acknowledge that. Kim Weil, architect: In height we did not use our limit and the two parapets are a code requirement. We would like to take the advantage of both views. Georgeann: In general the mass needs reduced somewhat. Possibly the end units need dropped down in order to lower the parapets. The rising up of the parapet looks false. Gideon Kaufman, attorney: We need direction as to whether the building needs moved forward or not before we deal with the third floor. MOVING OF THE BUILDING - STRAW POLL VOTE Jake: I would like to see the building pulled toward the property line but it could be several feet recessed. If that occurs then the third floor needs pushed back. Charles: They can have between zero setback and 5 or 10 feet in the front depending how the facade solution occurs. The top floor definitely needs setback. Also reduced from the sides so that the Collins Block has a view. Glenn: I want the building on the street and the third floor pulled forward to accommodate Harley's concerns. 8 e . Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of May 9, 1990 Joe: I would like to see the building set back from the lot line from zero to 5 feet. The third floor set back a substantial amount. Les: I could live with zero to five feet from the lot line. I would like to see five feet off the height of the building and the third floor pushed back as far as possible. The right side of the building dropped so that the Collins Block becomes more visible. Joe: Relieve on the right and left sides of the parapets. Georgeann: I would like to see the building ten feet back from the curb line. The third floor pushed back and the third floor sides diminished to soften the flow into the other two buildings. MOTION: Les made the motion to table 409 E. Hopkins until the May 23rd meeting to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal and revise the setback, massing, height, parapet, fenestration. Submit a completed application requesting demolition of the existing improvements on the parcel. No conceptual approval may be granted for the redevelopment of the parcel without the HPC's review and approval of a demolition or i~: relocation application. Charles second with all in favor. 610 N. THIRD STREET - PRE-APPLICATION Bill reseated. Roxanne: Welton Anderson, architect is proposing the addition of a garage and an angled tower element. Les: Most of the tower is not visible and doing the 4 5% angle makes it interesting. Georgeann: This building has had so many changes would it matter if one more thing happens to it. ' Roxanne: Is adding the tower making the building worse and should the tower be angled? Welton: The house faces Lake Avenue on one side and Third St. on the other. The house was brought over from Cooper Street in the late 60's. The queen ann roof was taken off and a mansard roof , was put on in 1968. In 1985 the master bath, bedroom etc. was added. To obtain the views etc. we propose to turn the car port into a garage and take a sleeping portion of the master bedroom and orient it such that the views are toward the mountain. There 9 Dil . ~ and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TEL (303) 925-4755 ~ May 14,1990 I Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitco Planning Office 130 S Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Alpine Bank 409 E Hopkins Dear Roxanne: Please except the revised HPC Submittal drawings (dated 05/14/90) for the above referenced project. This design is submitted which we feel incorporates the input received from the HPC Conceptual Review on May 9th. The following notes depict the changes incorporated into our revision decision. 1. Setback The building has been relocated and setback from the property line 8' as suggested by the HPC. We feel this 8' setback will give relief for the purpose of allowing the two landmark structures on the corner to stand out more prominently as outlined in the HPC Guidelines. 2. Alignment and Rhythm of Facade Details A. Storefront bulkhead panel height has been increased to be more compatible with the height of bulkheads around town. B. Main Floor flanking entrance doors have been redesigned to appear as a small storefront which is more indicative of street facades on the City's Historic Buildings. C. The height of second floor has been increased to align with the height of Brand Building and the Collins Block. This will also allowed us to increase the height of the second floor windows to be more historically compatible. .. ~ and associates D. Second floor windows in the stair corridor have been redesigned as a larger window assembly similar to the new door assembly below to create a vertical alignment seen through out Historic Buildings in Aspen. E. We have elected to retain the articulated parapet which we use to help define a rhythm compatible with Historic Storefronts widths around Aspen. 3. Massing The massing has been redesigned as requested bythe HPC. The first two floors have been moved forward with in 8' of the property line. The first two floors are also designed as a 29' mass which is within the average Historic Height of Buildings in the Commercial Core. This height also is more compatible with the heights of the two flanking Historic Structures. In addition the third floor mass has been relocated 20' back from the first two story mass (28' from the property line) to effectively identify a compatible Historic mass at the street and identify a contemporary third floor mass which is indicative of the contemporary buildings in the commercial core. We also feel this setback effectively reduces the height by allowing the first two story mass to screen its mass from a viewplane visible from across the street. 4. Storefronts We have designed the storefronts to be of compatible widths with storefronts in the core. The residential residences are also designed as storefronts to allow the building to appear as a series of storefronts indicative of buildings in the core. 5. Windows and Openings The windows have been redesigned and realigned to be more compatible to its neighbors. The windows have been enlarged in height and aligned over the storefronts to add to the vertical organization as seen on historic structures. The alley windows have been redesigned as requested in attempt to relate to the character of the street elevation. 6. Materials Predominately brick with sandstone accents and wood and glass windows and storefronts are proposed as originally submitted. We contend that the revised proposal is an improved design over the one previously submitted. bill. . ~ and associates We feel this is an important infill project and are appreciative of the HPC's input. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call. Finally, we will have a revised model for the HPC to review on May 23rd. If you would like to review the model to assist you in your review, please call our office. Sipcerely, Enclosure KSW:lah .. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development: 409 E. Hopkins, the Alpine Bank parcel, Public Hearing Date: ~ May 9, 1990 ~ LOCATION: 409 E. Hopkins, Lots D, E, and F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado APPLICANT: Alpine Bank, on behalf of Laura Donnelley, represented by Bill Poss and Associates APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Conceptual Development approval for the construction of a new three-story mixed-use infill structure between the National Register Brand Building and the National Register Collins Block/addition. The structure is proposed for single use commercial on the main floor, free market and deed restricted affordable housing on the second floor, and free market on the third. An auto lift is proposed off the alley, accessing below grade parking for the free market units and commercial space. Six affordable studio units are proposed for the second floor, incorporating the previously approved Lane Parcel units. A 15' setback is proposed, creating 15% open space (10% is proposed to be mitigated with cash-in-lieu). Plaza landscaping similar to the Pitkin Center is proposed for this space. The applicant is further requesting the demolition of all improvements currently on the parcel, however, an application for demolition has not been submitted to the Planning office. Conceptual Development approval is required prior to the submittal of a Growth Management Application to the Planning Office. ZONING: CC, "H" Historic Overlay District SITE, AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Due to GMQS competition forthcoming (application deadline is June 1) , the applicant has not supplied the Planning Office with FAR figures for HPC's review. Therefore, the HPC is basically asked to give conceptual development approval on the facade and alley elevation. Please refer to staff's recommendation for an additional review of the parcel as a whole following complete GMQS application submission in June. .. EXISTING CONDITIONS: A number of uses currently exist on this parcel, which are all slated for removal: One story Alpine Bank building (non-historic) Sculpture Garden (waterfall and Meadow in the Sky sculpture) Garden seating area for the Smuggler Land Office restaurant Note: Staff suggests that the applicant sponsor a code amendment changing Section 7-602 D. of the Land Use Regulations, adding paragraph #6 to include an "Exemption" clause for non-historic, non-significant structures within a historic district for demolition or relocation. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The applicable Guidelines are found in Section IV. Commercial Buildings - New Construction beginning on page 35. The Development review standards are found in Section 7-601 of the Land Use Code, and are reviewed below (staff's comments follow): 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an H, Historic Overlay district or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark... Response: The Guidelines state: "In all new commercial construction, compatibility to adjacent building types should be considered. Broad-scale characteristics such as the range of the building heights and their alignment at the sidewalk should be studied. At the same time, the designer should recognize fine-grained aspects such as facade composition and decoration." "The intent of the design guidelines for infill construction is to identify the elements most critical to the character of the historic commercial area and to insure that these elements are incorporated into new designs." Staff finds that these general characteristics have been considered by the applicant, however, the following issues must be considered when reviewing and analyzing the compatibility of this infill project: 1. Setback: The guidelines state "Plazas or courts that break the continuity of the facade alignment should be avoided. Maintain the general alignment of facades at the sidewalk edge. In some cases a courtyard may be considered if it has an active function or gives desired relief for the purpose of allowing a historic 2 .. . landmark to stand out more prominently." The HPC should consider this 15' setback carefully, utilizing the model to test whether a straight streetedge alignment or varying depths of setback are appropriate. It appears at this conceptual stage that some depth of setback is appropriate for the purpose of allowing the two corner landmarks to stand out. The 1904 Sanborn Insurance Map section attached indicates this parcel was never fully built out to street edge, therefore, historic precedence has not been set. 2. Alignment and Rhythm of Facade Details: We find the general patterns of the facades blend well, with the following exceptions: a) Storefront bulkhead panel appears too narrow. b) Main floor flanking entrance doors appear too "residential"; these need to relate better to the commercial character of the facade and district. c) Second floor too narrow/thin; appears out of balance with the two adjacent structures. The banding between the 2nd and 3rd floors appears too heavy and out of scale. d) Second floor windows servicing the stair tower on each end are extremely narrow and appear incompatible. e) The parapet is much too heavily articulated. The center ridge of the pediment measures 42', exceeding maximum allowable. The roof edge is not subordinate to flanking landmarks, and appears too high and overwhelming in relation to the historic landmarks on the block. f) The proposed building and awning materials appear compatible (red brick, sandstone, wood trim and windows, acrylic/canvas awning. 3. Massing: Infill construction within the district is critical to review in respect the characteristics of neighboring historic structures. Two National Register structures flank the subject parcel proposed. The proposal appears to meet the massing criteria guidelines, however, staff and members of the Planning 3 .. Office feel further study is warranted to consider stepping back the third floor mass from both the street edge and the one-story Collins Block infill. Staff has yet to see this approach successfully designed in the core, however, we feel that this must be innovatively considered and demonstrated to the HPC. It would appear that the relief a third floor step back could create would be a positive design solution to both the street and the adjacent structures. Staff feels strongly that the HPC should carefully consider this stepback approach before further review of the facade. Other public comments staff has received on the proposal has focused on the structure being "too big", "too high" and "too massive three stories high with no break or stepback". The steep canyon created between the west elevation of the proposed structure and the adjacent building (Collins infill) is extreme. As the Collins Block parcel is nearly maximized in FAR, it is highly unlikely that an additional story will be constructed onto the infill building. Therefore, staff recommends that a softening of this canyon effect be considered in a massing step back. 4. Storefronts: The proposal appears to meet the storefront guidelines, however, we are recommending further study and the submittal of more detailed storefront plans to determine exact proportions and detailing. 5. Windows and Openings: Wood windows are proposed, which meet the guidelines. The spacing pattern of the opening presents a very symmetrical facade, however, the relation of the proposed second and third floor openings to the Brand and Collins Block appear slightly incompatible, and should be studied carefully. The windows appear squat in relation to their historic neighbors. The facade's second and third floor may benefit from slightly taller windows. The south elevation (alley) windows bear no relation to the facade. The first and second floor windows appear deeply recessed, and the third floor is primarily transparent (for views of the mountain). Staff feels the alley elevation should attempt to relate somewhat to the character of the facade. This may be accomplished with a change in window style alone. 4 .. 6. Materials: Brick, sandstone and wood are proposed, which meet the guidelines. Staff is supportive of this combination on this block, however, we recommend that the use of sandstone be very subordinate and less ornate than the existing structures on that block, including the new Collins infill building. Canvas/acrylic awnings are proposed, which are characteristic in the district. 7. Signage: This has not been discussed, and should be clarified at Final. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The applicant states that the Hotel Jerome viewplane is unaffected in this proposal due to the steep angle of the corridor. Staff's comments under Standard #1 also deal with Neighborhood Standard #2. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structure located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: We find that there is argument as to the impact this size infill structure will have on the cultural value of the two adjacent National Register structures. In order to not detract from their value to the community, these must remain prominent and pure of integrity without an overshadowing building encroaching onto their visual and historic sense of place in the district. The development of a plaza/entry may add to the cultural value of the district. Landscaping and surface treatments should be carefully considered by both the applicant and the HPC. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: No designated structures exist on this parcel, therefore this standard does not apply. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the Conceptual Development as submitted 5 . 3. Approve the Conceptual Development with conditions, to be met at Final Development review, such as 4. Table action to a date specific, to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal and revise the setback, massing, height, parapet and second floor fenestration. - 5. Deny Conceptual Development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC table conceptual development approval to a date certain, to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal and revise the setback, massing, height, parapet and second floor fenestration, and submit a completed application requesting demolition of the existing improvements on the parcel. No conceptual approval may be granted for the redevelopment of the parcel without the HPC's review and approval of a demolition or relocation application. Staff recommends that the applicant sponsor a code amendment changing Section 7-602 D. of the Land Use Regulations, adding paragraph #6 to include an "Exemption" clause for non-historic, non-significant structures within a historic district for demolition or relocation. The Planning Office further recommends that the HPC review the entire proposal once the GMQS application has been submitted in June. The proposal as submitted is vague regarding the Lane Parcel affordable dwelling units' incorporation into the Alpine Bank structure; the complete program/building must be reviewed by the HPC to determine complete compatibility within the district. memo.hpc.409eh.2 6 t Daily I.2ws Sign Suit Settled in Court 1 7 By EVE O'BRIEN $99.50. However, he wanted to deduct ' Aspen Daily News Staff Writer $24.50 from the payment because the one set of decals that was installed In his best King Solomon imitation, allegedly were put on crooked. ) Judge Tam Scott ruled for the plaintiffin THE JUDGE said the burden of . Small Claims Court Wednesday, but it proof was on Auten to show the Daily Jazzmin restaurant, Willuil 1.LwiLLY phoned the police and said Holding left was the defendant who walked away News agreed to buy all four decals, and p closed. In lawsuit 90$ 177 filed Tuesday, without paying for her two vodka marti- pleased. Auten didn't meet that burden. the bath company claims the money is nis (valued at $3.50 each). When Lapin Ahmen Auten, who owns a sign shop, "There were numerous conflicts in the owed for the balance on marble tops, contacted Holding, the 33-year-old sued the Aspen Daily News July 2 after testimony," Scott said, noting Auten Sounds Bad Aspen woman allegedly made the previ- Auten claimed the newspaper ordered didn't have evidence to prove his state- ous comments, and Lapin arrested her two sets of two decals for its delivery ments. Scott said it probably was just a Henry's Audio and Video filed on charges of defrauding an innkeeper. vehicles, then refused to pay for them case of a "human misunderstanding." lawsuit 90S 178 Tuesday against the Lapin also put a mental health hold on until they were installed. Auten had Scott also said he wasn't going to Paradise Club for $428.95. Henry's said Holding. installed one set (consisting of two deduct anything for the alleged crooked it loaned a Technics tape deck to the decals) and wanted the newspaper to pay installation job, and ordered Clifford to Paradise for a benefit Feb. 18, and it $150 for all four signs. pay Auten $99.50. A. .ill 1A 1,-pen the extrn _2~ Hopkins St Sculpture Garden May Br ,4 Goner I By EVE 0'BRIEN MOSTOFTHEHPCmembersliked Aspen Daily News StaM Writer the idea of having the building in the 400 ' block of East Hopkins "stepped back" A two-story commercial building is about two-times, possibly in two-foot proposed to replace the Alpine Bank increments. The stepping back would ~ Builing and the neighboring sculpture allow the Brand and Collins buildings, j garden instead of a three-story residen- which are on either corner of the block, ~ tial and commercial mix building that to stand out, Weil said, _ ... was proposed earlier. "As currently shown with a series of Architect Kim Weil's model, which small steps, it allows for the individuali- plan that will show more details of the way to get art "back on the street where he showed to the Historic Preservation ly of the store fronts," Weil said. building and its materials. people can react to it," according to a Committee Wednesday night, tenatively Mac Cunningham, who represents lot ALPINE BANK no longer is asso- May 1988 Aspen DaUy News anicle. featured a brick and sandstone structure, owner Laura Donnelly, agreed, adding: ciated with the project, HPC planner Along those lines, a earthen silo, a which could house five stores on the "We were trying to make a building that Roxanne Eflin said. Originally, they had waterfall fountain and benches were put. main floor and some other commercial completes the block but isn't obtrusive." planned to move their offices into the on the site. or office spaces on the second floor. The Most of the HPC members liked the new building. Â· Seating for the Smuggler Land Office second story also features a hidden conceptual design. It was approved, and The sculpture garden that currently bar and restaurant also will be removed courtyard. Weil will come back later with a final sits on the site was donated in 1988 as a when the site is built upon. -- ...A .. MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Roxanne Eflin From: - Kathy Strickland Postmark: Apr 27,92 , 4:38 PM Subject: Reply to: 409 E. Hopkins - HPC last action Reply text: From Kathy Strickland: extension of 10 mths granted aug. 28th, 1991 until JUne 1 1992/ Kathy Preceding message: From Roxanne Eflin: What date do you have for the last action taken by the HPC on this? They are asking for yet ANOTHER conceptual development extension, stating that their conceptual approval is UP on June 1. I somehow recall that we gave them one extension already. Thanks for letting me know. ,. .. m f '4 .. LAW OFFICES KRABACHER, HILL & EDWARDS APR 2 7 PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 201 NORTH MILL STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 B. JOSEPH KRABACHER TELEPHONE THOMAS C. HILL (303) 925-6300 JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, 111 (303) 925-7116 TELECOPIER OF COUNSEL (303) 925-1181 JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, JR. Â¥ April,23, 1992 j, Roxanne Eflin Historic Preservation Planner Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office 130 South Galena, Third Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 409 East Hopkins - Extension of Conceptual Development Approval Dear Roxanne: This letter is written to request an extension of the conceptual development approval for 409 East Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado. At the present time, the owner of the project has determined that it will not be proceeding with construction of the project during 1992. The reasons are as follows: First, the owner paid approximately $1.9 million for the property. As a part of the GMQS approval for the project, the owner was required to provide employee housing since the City Council was unwilling to accept a cash-in-lieu payment. The owner purchased the Smuggler Mountain Apartments and donated them to Pitkin County to satisfy the employee housing requirements. Although the cash-in-lieu payment was $772,800, the owner paid $925,000 to provide actual housing -- or $152,200 more than the cash-in-lieu payment. The owner wants to preserve the HPC conceptual approval previously received, but given the extraordinary amount paid for the property and the employee housing exactions, it is not economically viable to build the project in 1992. Second, the design approved by the Historic Preservation Committee ( "HPC") was extremely well received by the HPC and we believe that it is an excellent design solution. As you may .. Roxanne Eflin April 23, 1992 Page 2 recall, the prior owner proposed a three story building and the current owner has conceptual approval for a two story building. The two story building will be a benefit to the community since it is more in keeping with the historic character of the commercial core of Aspen and compliments the National Register Brand Building and Collins Block. To require the owner to reapply for HPC conceptual development approval could result in a less desirable design solution. Third, the economics of Aspen's real estate and rental market do not justify building the project in 1992. Accordingly, we are requesting an extension of the HPC conceptual development approval for a period of 12 months. The present conceptual development approval expires on June 1, 1992. Should you need any additional information or documentation to support this request, please let me know and I will provide it immediately. We would like to have this matter heard on the HPC's agenda for the May 13, 1992 meeting. Thank you for your attention to this matter. KRABACHER, HILL & EDWARDS, P.C. By: , BJK/ch B. JosÂ®h Krabacher CC: Kandycom, Inc. Richard S. Cohen, Esq. Bill Poss & Associates itakura\ltrs\eflin.1 ATTACHMENT 1 / ~ LAND USE APPE[CATION FOIN ~ I X 1) Project Nam ADANE *ANk 2) project Incation 401 â‚¬ . -HOfic [1427 1 l.001-4 P ,â‚¬5,f bLEDF- 6 8 (indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) 3) Present Zoning 66 4) Int Size ~9 00 5) Applicant's Nam, Address & Phone # Alf'INE 138+1K 404 â‚¬. -Hofic- 1 kie 470 -4600 al-14: Â£37[EVE- 1312- reÂ«b 6) Representative's Mann, Miress & Phone # -+61Ll- 9*26 Atlb -1Â»sc>c, 27005 5. MAN 125- 4795 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply): Conditional Use -_' __ Conceptual SPA ><f Conceptual Historic Dev. special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline Conceptual POD __1 Minor Historic Dev. .1 Stream Margin Final PUD Historic Demolition nxIntain view Plane . Subdivision IIistoric Designation Co~cniniumization - Text/Map Amer*hent QUS Allotment Iot Split/Int line ~ CMOS Enjition Adjustment 8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of ecisting structures; approocimate sq. ft.; nuaber of bedrocis; any previous approvals granted to the property). 1/5 Of fettgTH CORI:Al Alâ‚¬, 64(err: â‚¬f}RIc- REM#*) MS,- fe>Fep:r-'1 644741Kle> Â«11 Lm-cl*â‚¬ 62%4354 9) Description of Develerment Adplication A W\12[) c Â»ED 8, arr,rl <Bl Pe'. Â£30,M MER./ A-L I *C 6Â«Et - 3 *eÂ»"Dâ‚¬ m-IAL '2-*(SAN/p fift? 6646,-6 10) Have you attached the following? Response to Ati:EMinnent 2, Minimm Sulmission Contents Response to Attadment 3, Specific Submissian Contents Response to AlÂ»,-*mrot 4, Review Standards for Your Application ll-1-1 R : Li i.- 4- -_-PI~V '1*Fl IIi 'll '46' U 'J l' I '* 2 Z .re.71 -- AdE' .1 -:7 1 Z 1 AE' 0 - 0 H ~ ~ ~11 H I 11 - 7 /1 1 ---a I vp / 11-.m,~ 10*----- .' ---=1 7 C OOE 2 0 0'E - 1 3 00 E 400E _11*-9 0,M ~600E 41 ~ ./ . -. H H H- fCKE 18 -6- -I -. kRK ~ Â¢ - _ {41 jT H ) IH \ A x r irre 6--4 A i_J n E HOPKINS AVE. :i< ~ 4 -Can JIEN T 1 73) 0 /0 --- -F- - I i H f 1 - 1 8 V PO/3 1 4 H ----=--1 i 1 1 1 1-- 11 --1 Ny-FI . I . I 1 1 : i 5. It 4. 4 i HI@ w %9 . 11 4: 2 0 -7- D Z 1 1 111-P--- 1 plitki 0 01 WAGNER -- .a - E AVE. ----- F LiliFFY W 61.U~ r M W (D,T, H) 1 ~ 03 1 11-LA Â· C Z 1. PARK - 13 (B) '- Vi @Il - ~ 4 0 -\ C K N 11 RUM ' DURANTâ€¢- AVE. ~ I -, 1 CE 67 123 4 5678 9- Â© 8 9 10~11 13 1 Ight J ...14 :'.0 4 1.-----. 1~Iiâ€¢C-..-.1 6---2- -lili -1* "' 'r , r' * luy I It 1.1 1.1 lS- UNIbid 1 915 141. . I and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN,COLORAD081611 TEL. (303) 925-4755 * April 13, 1990 * Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Alpine Bank Dear Roxanne, Enclosed please find copies of the initial conceptual drawings for the above referenced project. We would like this project to be reviewed in a public hearing before the HPC on May 9, 1990. The Alpine Bank project would include both the Donnelly and the Lane parcels. The plaza level contains the bank and possibly one other retail commercial space. The second level contains both free market and affordable housing space. The third level contains free market residential space. With respect to the review standards for development in the Historic Overlay District, I would like to make the following comments. a. Compatibility with designated structures on adjacent parcels. Since this project is adjacent to the Brand Building and the Collins Block, we have tried to be very sensitive to the neighborhood. By providing a generally straight facade which is held back from the property line, we feel the project meets the intent of the HPC guidelines while being a secondary structure to the adjacent landmarks. In addition, by holding back the third floor from the front facade, the scale of the project is more in keeping with those landmarks. b. Compatibility with the neighborhood in general. The use of sandstone, brick and wood is appropriate in the neighborhood. Also, by using historically prevalent window and storefront patterns and proportions, the character dominated by the two landmarks remains consistent. 141â€¢ â€¢ ~ and associates c. Compatibility with the cultural value of the adjacent landmarks. Since both of the landmarks have exactly the same uses as the proposed Alpine Bank, retail below and residential above, the cultural aspects of the neighborhood should not be diminished. In fact, this infill project may act as a link between the two landmarks. Please review these drawings and feel free to comment or ask questions that you may have. We are going to continue to work on the project and it is our intention to have a model and possibly a rendering completed in time for you to review prior to your writing the memo for the May 9 meeting. Again, please call if you need further information. Sincerely, Aim weil N.B..6.4 4 - . ~ 00= 546 n. 47 .r HARRANTÂ¥ DEM) 29289u Kurt ar-nitz and Lott, Brainitz . I. . - -. - 64/18 DAÂ¥10 MTUN ONTÂ¥ RE""ER . hâ€¢,%c .0,1.Ire- ,â€¢ 1650 namstake Dr. A.-1, CO 81611 -9.- i. 15 2 4, PN '01 1.,1 th. , â€¢â€¢0â€¢i.kÂ·i..1,â€¢â€¢â€¢, Â·Â·1 and other valuable considerotton - 'rEN - .6â€¢1|.ill/ 1,1 hâ€¢'k' 14."â€¢1 /HÂ·nJA r/|1 -1 i -Â·;1 4 . 33 .nd iÂ·onie) 1. 1 14, Laura Domelley 4 ..:t .IM-Â· Icv.,1 addaÂ» i. 00801/11*Ilk*11~t*#(.6;tjaa( P.O. BOX )89 Ampen, CD ]81)et)Â¢)< 81612 the talliM In, real pn,pert> in :hr ( 1/,1,1, 1,1 Pitkin .rht %1.1..1 . Coliwiâ€¢,10. tâ€¢, â€¢ 11 Iots D, E and F, Block 88, City and luwnsite of AM-, Exoopting therefran the Southerly 20 feet of Lots D and E, Block 80, City and Townsite of Alven, County of Pitkin State of Cblorado _ STATE DOCUI~IARY ' 15!987 '; - )2 5*'CE,J_-1 ..No kn~n hi wreel .,nd nunilkÂ·1 .i~ 406 E. 14*lns Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 with .ill li~ 49,rkÂ·n.in.Â·M .ind */runli .4 114 1,11, If, It. . ilik q,h,Â·,t 1,1 general real estate taxes for 1987; and thoae remervations, exceptiolls, easenents and restrictions Bet forth in Dchlbit A attached hereto. .A 0'rn'Â·d th,I /6 '1.1, iiI 19 87 3 --\ Seilt,anber * lf**1 AQÂ·:3 ~ t..2 Kurt.Bre#nit*\ ~ 4< 1 ' 3)~tâ€¢Lit,&:. - Â»f- F ot te Bresnitz 0 1 Al 1 4 )1 4 t )1 1 )R \I N ) , i i Cm#, 4 Pitkin I lic t,Mer,inÂ¥ in,truinctit M.e ,Â·kn.m l,Â·d: e,1 4 1,4' flk+ IIi |lk ( ,Ill. .,1 Pitkin ,-. Aut.Â· â€ž1 (â€žtor..dti. thu. /, - '- d.e .,1 Septonber 1487 h, Kurt Brosnitz and f f f Lotte Bre.nitz. M> â€žMin,1..8* c.p,rr. U illk ", lin h.in.1 ..,d â€¢~IN..1 *1 tbfuR--- L Jul /... â€¢11 t. lk.,â€žÂ·, H,..11 1-04 -0 :It k.1-1 .. = 546,= 48 EXHIBIT A ,â€¢f> WARRANTY DEFD 1. Reservations and exceptions as contained in the Died from the City of Aspen providing as follow,; that no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to iny valid mining claim or posiession held under existing laws; and subject to 0, 1 all the conditiono, limitations and re,trictionâ€¢ contained in Section 2386 of the Revisid Statutes of the United Statil in Deed recorded in Book 79 at Page 32. 2. Terms, conditions and ag-ecmerts a. contained in instrument recorded in Book 239 at Page 436. 3. Easement over the Southerly 7.0 feet of the Easterly 10.0 feet of Lot F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, as met forth in Decree recorded June 20, 1979 in Book 371 at Page 85. j M . ~ and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN,COLORAD081611 TEL (303) 925-4755 tÂ¥- ECMNAIR- CRJ U Â· APR 17 '90 11:04 . . P.01 THEBRAND **** If p.. April 17,1990 Mr. Steve Briggs President, Alpine Bank of Aspen 409 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. Briggs. As the owner of record of the property referred to as the Lane Parcel (located within the south 20 feet of Lots D and E, Block 88, City and Townslte of Aspen), I hereby consent to your filing a proposal for conceptual developemnt plan review by the HPC which includes a new structure on the Lane Parcel. Sincerely, Hirley Baldwin HB/w s Enc. - - 0*Â«*Wh 2 . . 4,1% .....1. . i Y Recoided at 7.4 â€¢*k.lt-M 3/20/8-61 /*88 â„¢.- rio 'h.1:F /â€¢6- 1 : I .,1 <'.P . ':li- Â· t / heception No 3 49 r 2. S 1 1 .. SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY RECORDER EXHIBIT 3 WARRANTY DEED ..11 0 ac THIS DEED, made this /K' day of March, 1989, between Aspen 11 Hardware & Supply Company, Inc., a Colorado Corporation of the t- n: *. County of Pitkin and State of Colorado, Grantor, axid Harley 1 -- ti.1 -J 1, 1 L= tj Baldwin whose legal address is The Brand Building, 205 South Galena, Aspen, Colorado 81611 of the County of Pitkin and State W 32 of Colorado, Grantee: !=: o WITNESSETH, that the Grantor for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable considezation, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the Grantee, his heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Pitkin and State of Colorado described as follows: The real property described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as known by street and number as: 204 South Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado. TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the Grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for itself, its hei rs, and personal representatives, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, his heirs and assigns, thal- at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, it is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authot i ty to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions cf whatever kind or nature soever, except taxes due and payable for 1989 and subsequent years; any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for wdler or sewer service or for any other special taxing district for 1989 and subsequent years; reservations contained in Deed from the City of Aspen as follows: no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or tq-any valid ./ mining claim or possession held under existing laws,/3?RÂ·~Ap.G#or:th Irile- ...~ i r 4' i i MAR 201989 -# 1 97 A A,9 s i 41Â£. ri i Q. 1-UU o U iE; - ./i'/ ' i #balial*fik . + 1 -4,5 .////4..,1... .r . ,cÂ·De n BOOK -JOC) IFAGE'17IL # in instruments recorded in Book 79 at Page 32, in Book 59 at Page 307; any loss or'damages as a result of Ordinance No. 11 (Series of 1987) which repeals and reenacts Section 24-9 of the Municipal Code, titled, Historic Designation. The Grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantee, his heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof; provided, however, that the Receiver executing this Deed on behalf of Grantor shall have no personal liability for any claim by Grantee, his successors or assigns arising for any reason whatsoever under this Deed and Grantee, his successors and assigns shall have recourse only against Aspen Hardware and Supply Company, Inc. as Grantor hereunder. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above. ASPEN HARDWARE AND SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., a 9olgrado Corporation <204'f--21~-- By: Robert Camp, Receivd/r STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this (dj~' day of March, 1989, by Aspen Hardware and Supply Company, -Inc., a Colorado Corporation by Robert Camp, Receiver. Witness iny hand and official seal. My commission expires: 10/3/40 '35,020.:.'40 LeÂ»a,-14416 i :u / dixR Y '\ . ~t Notary Publyc .. i Â»Â«ED i p ph EUNKÂ¥ 1*66..1.. Â·.1 .:-:- Y.Ciri.ji.c . .lifillit:/S, I. .. I ' I ' ' ' ':. ... .....2 . I .... ..... I .. . \42 44:41*30>(Â·:Â· .. ,. EXHIBITÂ· "A"TO. WARRANTY DEED The North'80 feet of Lots A, B and C, Block 88, City and Townsite of aspen (excepting that portion of sald Lot C conveyed by Quit Claim Deed recorded in Book 287 at Page 425 of Pitkin County Records) And a Parcel described as: Beginning at Corner No. 1 which 19 the Southeast corner of Lot D in Block 88 of the City and Townsite of Aspen, and the Southwest Corner of Lot E in said Block thence running along the South Boundary of Lot D in a Westerly direction a distance of 24 feet to Corner No# 2, thence running in a Northerly direction parallel to the West Boundary of said Lot D a distance of 20 feet to Corner No. 3, thence running in an Easterly direction parallel to the South Boundary of said Lots D and E a distance of 41 feet to Corner No. 4, thence running in a Southerly direction parallel to the East boundary of -said Lot E a distance of 20 feet to Corner No. 5, thence running in a Westerly direction along the South Boundary of said Lot E a distance of 17 feet to Corner No. 1, the place of beginning; and Â·Â· . . r The South Twenty (20) feet of the East Thirteen (13) feet of Lot lettered "E" in Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen; and The South Twenty (20) feet of the Eas.t Twenty Five (25) feet of Lot lettered "D" in Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PlTKIN, STATE OF COLORADO I. 1 r . I .......1 1 , 0 in ... , .1 .. EXHIBIT 3 SCHEDULE A Date of Policy: March 20, 1989 at 4:51 P.M. GF No. 400368-0 Amount of Insurance $ 2,700,000.00 1. Name of Insured: HARLEY BALDW IN 2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is: (a fee, a leasehold, etc.) FEE 3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in: HARLEY BALDWIN 1. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION SET FORTH ON SHEET ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED HEREIN AND MADE A PART HEREOF. - ntie USA Insurance Co,Doralon,1301 Main St. Dallas. Teras 75202 Farrn l OOA Châ€¢n ?G/1/6 / - . . Â· rt: r :r,C nace _2 2 : 3Â·,-. '.-r :r Â· J :in:r.:tÂ·- :ru Ne .. SCHEDULE A - continued Policy No. 0157924 Order No. 400368-0 The land referred to in this policy is situated in the State of Colorado, County of Pitkin , and is described as follows: PARCEL A: The North 80.00 feet of Lots A, B and C, Black 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, EXCEPT that portion of said Lot C conveyed by Tinnie Mercantile Company, a New Mexico corporation, and High Country Lumber Co., a Colorado corporation, to Kurt Bresnitz and Lotte Bresnitz by the Quil- Claim Deed recorded May 22, 1974, in Book 287 at Page 425. .PARCEL B: Becinning at Corner No. 1 which is the Southeast corner of Lct D in Block 88 of the CITY AND TCWNSITE OF ASPEN, and the Southwest corner of Lot E in said Block 88; thence running along the South boundary of said Lot D in a Westerly direction a distance cf 24.00 feet to Corner No. 2; thence running in a Northerly direction parallel to the West boundary of said Lot D a distance of 20.00 feet to Corner No. 3; thence running in an Easterly direction parallel to the South boundary of said Lots D and E a distance of 41.00 feet to Corner 4Â· 1.... , thence running in a Southerly direction parallel to the East boundary of said Lot E a distance of 20.00 feet to Corner No. 5; thence runninc in a Westerly direction along the South boundary of said Lot E a distance of 17.00 feet to Corner No. 1, the place of beginning. PARCEL C: The South twenty (20.00) feet of the East thirteen (13.00) feet of Lct E, Block 88, CITY AND TCWNSiTE OF ASPEN. 3 29 05! n. The South twenty (20.00) feet of the East- twenty five (25. 00) feet of Lot D, Block 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. G 3200 (11/88) 0 - 91 1 : - #Vi.U-/UL-- POL!07 NO. 0 -... Order No. 400368-0 This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachmerIts, and any facts which a correct survey and inspec- tion of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessments, charge cr lien imposed for water cr sewer service, or for any other special taxing district. 6. Restrictions, as contained in the Deeds from M. G. Miller, as County and Probate Judge, to E. B. Collins recorded January 23, 1888, in Book 59 at Page 307, and , March 28, 1891, in Book 79 at Page 32, providing substantially as follows: tlThat no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine or gold, silver, cinnabar, or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws and subject to all the conditions, limitations and restrictions contained in Section 2386 of the Revised Statutes of the United States." 7. Encroachments by (a) the two-story brick building on Parcel A onto E. Hopkins Avenue, S. Mill Street and property immediately adjoining Parcel A on the South, and (b) the one-story "C.M.U." building on Parcels B, C and D onto the alley in Block 88 and property immediately adjoining Farcels 8, C_and D on the North end West, as evidenced by Survey No. 19022 of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. dated February 6, 1989. 8. Deed of Trust from Harley Baldwin to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County fer the use of Central Bank of Aspen, N.A., to secure 52,300,000.00, dated March 20, 1989, and recorded March 20, 1989, in Bcok 588 at Page 173. 9. Assignment of Rents recorded March 20, 1989, in Bock 588 at Page 188, given in connection with the above Deed of Trust. 10. Security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code affecting subject property, notice of which is given by Security Agreement and Financing Statement, frcm Harley Baldwin, debtor(s), to Central Bank of Aspen, N.A., secured party, recorded March 20, 1989, in Bock 588 at Page 192, and filed March 20, 1989 at Filing No. 12305. 8/7 ,;55:5259':,4-633 cE~ Norman E. Larkins Audionzed Countersignature Titi.LISA Insurance Corpora*n Endorsement Attached to and forming a part of Policy ~n 0157924 Order No. 400368 Issued by Title USA Insurance Corporation Exception No. 5 is hereby amended and modified in its entirety to read as follows: 5. Taxes and assessments for the year 1989 and subsequent years. Exceptions 1 through 4 are hereby deleted. In all other respects, said Policy remains the same. This endorsement is made a part of the policv or commitment and is subject :o all the terms and Drovisions thereof and of any prior endorsements thereto. Except to the extent expressly stated, it neither modifies any of the terms and provisions of the policy or commitment and prior endorsements, if any, nor does it extend the effective date of the policy or commitment and prior endorsements or increase the face amount thereof. Dated: Marrh 70. 1029 Title USA insurance Corporation Guatlht.= 1,0,8.3.Â¢17.Efa try. President & Chief Executive Officer i ig: SEAL:ti'~ ?e->,Â·p. 77-1.,#047 V...if..1.8...40,1 '>t Attest: Sectttary \swed at 5335~'~ /22, u LI ./ I '553*92zw--d? 632â‚¬i:43$03'74,0 Norman E. Larkins Authorized Countersignature CrAAA â‚¬ ln.lAM <AFTQ -1 .. Form 1756 Commitment Fic, Page COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent indorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obli gations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." .re.r- #i t,\UE INS# '44 First American Title Insurance Company ........ '4 1 I C, BY ~21, PRESIDENT 1-Â·9,) -ri t SEPTEMBER 24, 2 -9, 'Â· 1968 .. 4 .4/ ... 4 2 ATTEST 1(/11- c 3"7,Â£-1. SECRETARY ' CAL/f ORK#A/r *4'#MINY#*44* - ar?6- 8.ba,1_ COUNTERSIGNED 1-42242 ' Â©,ST A Af 4/4\ Form 1766-A Commitment, Schedule A Hol I and and Hart Â· 600 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: Tom Todd SCHEDULE A Customer Reference No. ALPINE BANK OF ASPEN 1. Effective Date: February 13, 1990 at 7:00 A.M. Commitment No:. 400712-C PL/pg 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount (a) El ALTA Owner's Policy $ 1,750,000.00 Proposed Insured: ALPINE BANK OF ASPEN, INC., a Colorado corporation (b) ~ ALTA Loan Policy $ Proposed Insured: (C) 0 $ 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: LAURA DONNELLEY 4. The land referred to in this commitment is LEGAL DESCRIPTION SET FORTH ON SHEET ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED HEREIN AND MADE A PART HEREOF. Owner's Premium: $ 2,041.25 CC's to: Lender's Premium: $ Holland and Hart Add'I Charges: $ Steve Connor Tax Certificate: $ 10.00 Steve Briggs ATC - Escrow Cynthia TOTAL CHARGES: $ 2,051.25 -Order No. 400712-C Plat I.D. # SCHEDULE A (continued) Covering the Land in the State of Colorado, County of Pitkin, Described as follows: Lots D, E and F, Block 88, C I TY AND TOWNSI TE OF ASPEN, EXCEPTING therefrom the Southerly 20.00 feet of Lots D and E, BLOCK 88, City and Townslte of Aspen. Form 1756 - 81 Commitment, Schedule B-1 SCHEDULE B - Section 1 No. 400712-C Requirements The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to-wit: 1. Termination Statement for Security Agreement and Financing Statement from Interior Designs of Aspen, Inc., debtor(s), to Laura Donnelley, secured party, recorded January 6, 1988, in Book 554 at Page 450, giving notice of a security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code. 2. Deed from Laura Donnelley to Alpine Bank of Aspen, Inc., a Colorado corporation. NOTE: Duly executed real property transfer declaration, executed by either the Grantor or Grantee, to accompany the Deed mentioned above, pursuant to Article 14 of House Bill No. 1288 - CRA 39-14-102. 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company or its duly authorized agent either (a) Â·that the "real estate transfer tax" imposed by Ordinance No. 20, (Series of 1979), and by Ordinance No. 14, (Series of 1989) of the City of Aspen, Colorado has been paid, and thai- the lien imposed by Paragraph 9 thereof has been fully satisfied, or (b) that a Certificate of Exemption has been Issued pursuant to Section 7 thereof. .. Form 1756 - 82 (Modified 1/84) Commitment, Schedule B-2 Order No. 400712-C Colorado SCHEDULE B - Section 2 303207-C Exceptions The policy or policies to be issued willcontain exceptions to the following unlessthe samearedisposedof to the satisfaction of the Company. Any loss or damage, including attorney fees, by reason of the matter'; shown below: 1. Any facts, rights, interests, orclaims whichare notshown bythe publicrecordsbut which couldascer- tained by an inspection of said land dr by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements or claims of easement which are not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies,conflictsinboundarylines,shortageinarea,encroachmentsandanyotherfactswhich a correct survey would disclose, and'which are not shown by public records. 4. Any water rights orclaims or title to water in, on or under the land. 5. Any lien, or right to alien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 6. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 7. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessments, charge or I len imposed for water or sewer service, or for any other special taxing district. 8. Reservations and exeptions as contained in the Deed from the City of Aspen providing as follows; that no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, clnnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws; and subject to all the conditions, limitations and restrictions contained In Section 2386 of the Revised Statutes of the United States in Deed recorded in Book 79 at Page 32. 9. Easement of the Southerly 7.0 feet of the easterly 10.0 feet of Lot F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, as set forth in Decree recorded June 20, 1979, in Book 371 at Page 85. 10. Agreement between Aspen Lumber and Supply Company, a Colorado corporation, and Alessandro Sabbatinl and Thelma Sabbatinl, recorded February 18, 1969, in Book 239 at Page 436. 11. Any and al I unredeemed tax sales. NOTE: Upon receipt of a Certificate of Taxes Due evidencing that there are no existing open tax sales, the above exception will not appear on the policies to be Issued hereunder. Exceptions number are hereby omitted. .. Form No. 1755 Commitment, Conditions and Stlpulations COMMITMENT Conditions and Stipulations 1. The term "mortgage," when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act e f reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. I f the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate of interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed I nsured which are hereby incorporated by re ference and are made a part o f this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and conditions and stipulations of this Commitment. *r .. STEPHEN R. CONNOR. P.C. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW SNOWMASS CENTER POST OFFICE BOX 6240 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO 81615-6240 TELEPHONE: (303)923-5361 TELECOPIER: (803) 923-6973 211 MIDLAND AVENUE STEPHEN R. CONNOR ..04_ April 16, 1990 jO POST OFFICE BOX H rb./. 2. BASALT, COLORADO 81621-0200 (303) 927-3171 Historical Preservation Commission Aspen City Hall 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Submission of Alpine Bank, Aspen Our File No. BAN-8-5 To Whom It May Concern: Alpine Bank, Aspen, has entered into a Contract for the purchase of Lots D, E and F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, from Laura Donnelly, dated February 19, 1990. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Contract, Alpine Bank, Aspen, is authorized to submit land use applications for approval of the redevelopment of the property to all review agencies, including the Historical Preservation Commission. By a copy of this letter, Alpine Bank, Aspen, is giving notice of the submission to Laura Donnelly, by providing a copy to her attorney, Arthur C. Daily. Very truly yours, STEPHEN R. CONNOR, P.C. By: 11. A. 8071 4,1 n., Stephen R. Connor SRC:slt CC: Arthur C. Daily, Esq. The printed porflons ofthis form npproved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission (CBS 2-5-89) THIS IS A LEGAL INSTRUMENT. IF NOT UNDERSTOOD, LEGAL, TAX OR OTHER couASEL SHOULD BE CONSULTED BEFORE SIGNING. COMMERCIAL " ! CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE Seller's remedy Liquidated Damages or Specific Performance (Section 16) February . 19 90 1. l'ARTIES ANI) 1'1101'ERTY. Alpine Bank of Aspen, Inc., or its assigns , purchascr(s) IPurchaserl,-tasjohm,crmirmlttmmrstri-camrtany agrees to litiy. 9,11(1 the imdersigned sellerfs) ISeller], agrees to sell, on the terms and conditions set forth in this contract. the following described real cslate in the County of Pitkin , Colorado, to wit: Lots D, E and F, Block 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, Excepting therefrom the Southerly 20 feet of Lots D and E, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, known :is No. 409 East Hopkins. Aspen. Colorado 81611 (Street Address. City. State. Zip) Ingether with all interest or Seller in vacated streets and alleys adjacent thereto, all casements and other appurtenances thereto, all improvements thereon ' and all attached fixtures thereon, except as herein excluded, and called the Property. 2. INCI,USIONS. The pt,rellasc price includes the following items (a) if attached to the Property on the date of this contract: lighting, heating, plumbing. ventilating, and air conditioning fixtures, smoke/fire/burglar alarms, security devices, inside telephone wiring and connecting blocks/jacks, plants, f loor coverings, intercom systems, built-in kitchen appliances, and sprinkler systems and controls; and (b) if on the Pmperty whether altached or not on the date or this contract: The above-described included items (Inclusions) arc to be conveyed to Purchaserby Seller by billofsale at thcclosing, free and clearofall taxes, liens and encumbrances, except as provided in section 10. The folk,wing attached Fixtures are excluded from this sale: 3. PURCHASE PRICE AND TERMS. The purchase price shall be $ 2 ___ _ , payable in U.S. dollars by Purchaser as follows (complete the tipplicable terms below): (alEarnest Money. not be /non refundable whigPeake&& toward $ -J . in the former a check Â· , as earnest money deposit enelÂ·penÂ·pe,men,4,f the purchase pricc, ri,yable toÂ·an,Lkâ€¢14 %56 Seller. ,.bs,>b#Jn.hocakar,kirud acâ€¢eeu.H>n helial k,f kM-|hSâ‚¬|40* 4,1*|-PurehAK# 8,elie,Â·in Â®11,er'zedÂ·tedeli,â€¢of,1,#ea,ne* meney<leponiHe *heelesing #gentri Kony; et-e,4,â‚¬FereÂ·ele,ing- (b) Cash n{ Closi,12. to be paid by Purchaser at closing in cash, electronic transfer funds, certified check, savings and loan teller's check, or cashier's check. Subject-to the-prw.4010#445â€¢etieÂ»4, W Wi.*Ki*ting-loaÂ»balanciatth. Umodologing-shaltÂ·be di#â€¢rentfrom-(holoa#holaaeâ‚¬40â‚¬00+ienÂ·3Â·r ' 1112 aftilt.Uncol slia U be-nuwl*-in AM+1+04Â· elesiÂ·ng erÂ·paid es-feliews?Â· ' I. 1 - h:-re)-Mew-tuarr. $1 hy Purchaser obtaining a new loan. This loan will be secured by a (Ist, 2nd, etc.) ,Â¢Otrust. The new 10 Purchascr shall bc amortized over a period or years at apprnximately $ I-'nionth including principal and litteresâ„¢qlto exceed % per annum, plus, if required by Purchaser's lender, a monthly depefifor Mz of the estimated annual real estate taxes, rik;peq~nsurance premium, and mortgage insurance premium. H the loan is an adjustable intercst rate or graduated payment loan, the nionthly payments and ilittÂ¥~ratc initially shan not exceed the rigures set forth above. Loan discount points, i (any, shall be>i~!tknder at closing and shall nol ,Â·Yr/prl % of the total loan amount. The first (1,2, clc. ) loan discount pâ‚¬Ms shall be paid by ,// , and lhc balance, it any, shall bc paid by \\\ ..- Purchaser shall timely pay a loan origination fce not to r.r~,L ~/flf~loan amount and Purchaser's loan costs. Cost of any appraisal for loan purposes to be obtained after this date shall be paid by ~ /' upon Imn application as required by lender. (d) Assuniption. i $ by Purcha~500Â«~suming and agreeing to pay :2kthiq~lon in this approximate amount, presently payable at $ per monts,DAIdding principal, interest presently al % perannum, and including escrow for the Aillowing as indicated: O real cs'Â£7~,~P<- C! property insurance premium, O mortgage insurance~hniqm.~1 . Purchaser agrees to pay a In;in trans fer fcc o cxcced $ . At thc,time of assumption, the new interest rate shall notneed % per annum and tl~petv monthly payment shall not exceed $ plus escrow, ir any. Seller ,FMhall O shall not be released from liability on said loan. 1 f applicable, compliance with the requirements for relcibfgm liability shall,kbidenced by delivery at closing of appropriate letter from lender. Cost payable for release of liability shall be paid by ilranÂ·amotmt,lottotxeced-$-----------------1- No. CBS 2-5-89. COMMERCIAI, CON'URACT TO RUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE ~ ~ Bradrord l'ubti,hing. 1743 Waice St., Denver, CO 80202 - (301 ) 292-2 300 - 6-89 -7 ii 24 0 0 Â»U 14 , Â· '03 fe//ar â€žr /'rpâ€¢,71, Third thrly Finnncing. $ - hy Purchaser executing a promissory note payahlr inÂ· , on the note form as Ind : (check one box) m Right-in f.,~;Zih'B.*Al!-83 0 No Right-to-Cure NTD 81-11-83 0 secured by a CIM, 2nd, etc.) - decd or trust encumbcring the Property, using the Forma ' !Eated: (check one box) O Strict Due-on-Sale ('ID 72-11.83) qditworthy (TD 73-11-83) O Assuinable--NoLgle!â‚¬S~ sale (TD 74-11-83) 1-1 Thc pri}missory note shall be amortized on the basis of -ars,eati per month including principal and ink res{ al Ilic rale of % per annum. Payments s~11â‚¬rliiRrtencE.- -. and shall be clue on the - day cA each succeâ€¢dingnmnth. I f not sooner paid, the balance of principal and accrued interest shall bc due and payable -DftÂ«.clming. Payments O shall O shall not be increased by Mu ofestimaled annual realt taxes, and O shall O shall not be increased by M, ores,fihnkÂ¢.annual property insurance premium. 'thc lii:An sh:ill :11<4 ci,I,~wing terms as indichted: Irany pnymentik not received within calâ‚¬Rrl-c.ditys after its due datc, a jate charge of 9klf-such nionthly payincnt shall be duc.Interest on lender disbursements under the cleed of trust shall be- % per annum. Deftiuit interest rate shall bc % perannum. Â· r,071:Â·rer mÂ·.T rr.r:,3, 'Â·'itli,-"1 01 r-'1')' ~V-~r' ------------------------------------:,V 1. 1'1,1.'.NCING CONDrrIONS AND OBLIC,trIONS. (A) L.....,tpplk.tk...(.0. 1 f ru, -1,u.,-, 6 tv p., all v, p., 1 VILI,L pu l .!IN.,u p, i.. a., J. . forth ihâ€¢,~tion j by obtaining a new Inan or iran existing loan it not to bc released al ck;sing, Purchaier, if rc'Quired by such lender, shall make wr' en opplieatio,Châ€¢ithin c,tlendar days from acceptance of this confract. Purchaser shall cooperate with Seller and lender to obtain loan proval, diligently and t~ursue s:ime in good faith, execute all documents and furnish all information and documents required by the lender d, subject to scctidn 3, 1 i mely pay [Theists 0[ obtai ning such loan or lender consent. (11) 1.oan Approval. 1 f Iflmscr is to pay al l or part of thc purch ase priceby obtaining a new loan as specified in section 3 scontract isconditional upon lender's approval of the ncOthip on or IwÂ·forp , 19 - . If not so apprnve said date, this contract shall terminate. Ifilic loan is so approved, ~hsuch proceeds arc not available to Purchaser as required in section 5 (G nds) at the timeof closing, closing shall bc exlended one time for ca~ar days (not to exceed (5) five). I f su fficient funds are not t available, this contract shall terminate. (c) Existing-Loan Review. 1 f an existing IGh*not to be released at closing, Seller shall provi copies of the loan documents (including note, deed o[ trust, modifications) to Purchaser within \ calendar days from acceptance o us contract. This contract is conditional upon Pur- chascr's review and approval of tlic provisions of such loan doCON~lts. Purchaserconsents t c provisions of such loan documents if no written objection is received by Seller or Listing Company from Purchaser within -a calcnd ays from Purchaser's receipt of such documents. I f the lender's approval o[ a trans fcrof the Property is required, this contract is condition rchascr's obtaining such approval without change in the terms of such loan, except as sct forth in section 3. If lender's approval is not obtained o re , 19 ,this contract shall bc terminated on such date. If Selleris tobe released f i liability und uch existing loan and Purchaserdoes not obtain such compliance as scaorth in section 3, Ihis contract maybe terminatcd at Sel soption. (d) Ass,implimt Bnlance. If Purchaser is to pay al part of the purchase price by assum, an existing loan andif the actual principal balance of the exisling loan at thc dot c of closing is less than t Amount in section 3 by more than g , then Purchaser may terminate this k ..e Â·.A contract effectivc upon reccipt by Scl!cr or U ng Company of Purchaser's written notice of termination.~ (e) Credit Informatic,n. If Purch ris to pay allorpart ortile purchase price by executing a promissory 2tmÂ® favor of Seller or ir an existing loan is not to bc released al closing, iIi' Â·ontract is conditional upon Seller's approval of Purchaser's financial ability ana'b,Â¢itworthiness, which approval shall bcat Seller's sole and a )tutediscretion. Insuchcase: (1) Purchaser shall supply to Seller on or before K , 19 , at Prir Â· .iscr's expense, information and documents concerning Purchaser's financial, employment and crediab,â‚¬ion; (2) Purchaser conscnts that SellÂ· 11:ty verify Purchaser's financialability andcreditworthiness; (3) any suchinformation and documents received by Sbtlershall be held by Seller in n fidcticc, and not released to others except to protect Se!!cr's interest in this transaction; (4) i f Seller does not provide w~atice of Seller' 1,approval In Purchaser on or before Â· , 19 , then Seller waives this condition. If SellENoes k mtitb:nmeticen{ db:,ppre<#)18-PorehaReren er,befern Mokkinle,41,49-Â©ent,824418*terminate--------------------- -- 1-Obâ€¢. 5. GOOD FUNDS. All payments required at closing shall be made in funds which comply with all applicable Colorado laws. 6. I~88536~SS!(;NA Ill,E. This contract shall 114*be assignable by Purchaser without Seller's prior written consent. Ei=optÂ·06 #0Â·reÂ¢*ictâ‚¬4,-thi#- cÂ£>1,1-met--61+0114{*{~â‚¬4041+04}enâ‚¬fikÂ»Rhnit k4141*liflt Â»peâ€¢liteÂ·heifh ref,enot-Fer,resen*0+ive*.-08Â»eeessersend-ansign,of-1Â·he-Fritk,: 7. EVIt)ENCE.<)17'11'1'LE. Seller shall furnish to Purchaser, at Seller's expense,eithera current commitment for TIferdi~~Alns Y~noc~pc:~2'1.lei ' s an aint,unt equal to tile purehase price or at Seller's choice, an abstract of title certified to a current date, on or hrforr ac entance,of thik Contri 19-------. If li t,114 h...uâ€žu,~-~ .uâ€žâ€žâ€ž,lâ€ž,Li,l h fuâ€ž,i.,1,LJ, Pu:.1.,i,k, â€žiu, ,Â£.lun. vr J.11-41â€žâ€¢tgopics or instrulnenls~orilbstracts of Instrulnents) listed in the schedule of exceptions (Exceptions) in the title insurance commitment also be furnished to Purchaser at Seller's expense. This requirement shall pertain only to instruments shown of record in the office of the clerk and recorder of the designated county or counties. The title insurance commitment, together with any copies or abstracts of instruments furnished pursuant to this section 7, constitute the title documents (Title Documents). 214,;haA*r-Â·mi#AxiwoGW;eNer te-fur 6917-Geries-er-abfRInets-efÂ·i...,1. u.-.[., Lt.J h. tr. #1.JJL Ur .- .â€ž(26,1., ..U lut. 111.11 .allt'Jdl J., j afic c.!lurdiascrk reÂ«40Â· p[-41,e-+ille-ingttraplee eammilment.-1119Â©Her-A/ni,he#-1,4*e-in,Mranee Â·een,mitment, Seller will have the title insurance policy delivered to Purchaser as soon as practicable after closing and pay the premium at closing. 8. TITLE. (a) Title Review. Purchaser shall have the right to inspect the Title Documents or abstratt. Written notice by Purchaser of unmerchantabilily or litle or of any other unsatisfactory title condition shown by the Title Documents or abstract shall be signed by or on behalf of Purchascr atid given to Seller orlibling-Compam,Lon or k,fore 10 calendar days after Purchaser's receipt of Title Documents or abstract, or within five (5) calendar days after receipt by Purchaser of any Title Document(s) or endorsement(s) adding new Exception(s) to the title commitment together with a copy firthc Title Document adding new Exception(s) to title . 1 f Sel ler nt Lisl inBCompany docs not receive Purchaser's notice by thedate(s) specified above. Purchascr shall be deemed to have accepted the condition of title as disclosed by the Title Documents as satisfactory. * (11) Matters Not Shm,Â·n hy the Public Records. Seller shall deliver to Purchaser, on or before the date set forth in section 7, true copies of all Icase(s) and survcy{s) in Seller's possession pertaining to tlic Property and shall disclose to Purchaser all cascments, liens orother title matters not shown by the public records of which Seller has actual knowledge. Purchaser shall have the right to inspect the Property to determine irany third parly(s) has any right in Ilic Property not shown by the public rccords (such as an unrecorded easement unrecorded lease,orÂ· boundary line discrepancy). Written notice of any ut\satisfactory ccinditicin(s) disclosed by Scilcrorrcvcaled bysitch inspeqtionshall be signed by or on behal f of Purchascrandgiven to ScllerorListing tion 8 Company on orbeft,re the date spt- forth in S~~- . 1 f Sel le rÂ·or bi, ( ing â‚¬mnim my docs n ot reccivc Purchaser's notice by said clatc, Purchiscrshall lic deemed to have accepted litic subject to such rights, if any, of third parties of which Purchaser has actual knowledge. (c) Righ{ to Cure. I f ScliccaLUsting.Cnolpanyroccivcs notice of unmerchantabilily of tillc orany otherunsalisfactory title condition(s) as provided in subscclion (7) or (11) above, Scllcrshall usc reasonable effort to correct said unsatis factory title condit ion (s) prior to the date or closi ng , 1 f Sel ler fails to correct said uns:glisfactory title condition(s) on or be fore the date of closing, this contract shall then terminate, subject to section 17: provided, however, Purchaser inay, by written notice received by Scllcr er-UtiÂ»g-CempR~Lon or before closing, waive objection to said unsatisfactorÂ¥ title condition(sl- * Purchaser hereby accepts the title exceptions described on Exhbit "A ' attached hereto and made a part hereof. .1 ?i one hundred and twenty days from the date of Seller's 9. DATE OFCLOSING. The date orclosing shall tw:/acceptance of thi'1# Contr SA~ mutual agreement at an earlier date. TItc hour and place of closing shall be as designated by mutual agreement of th4 parties 10. TRANSFER OFTITLE. Subject to tender or payment on closing as required herein and compliance by Purchaser with the other terms and prcivisions hercof, Seller shall execute and deliver a good Bnd â€ž,rfirripn, general warranty deed to Purchaser, on closing, conveying the Property free and clear of all taxes except the general taxes for the yearof closing, and ....pt the exceptions to the title described on Exhibit "A" ; free and clear orall liens for s pecial improvements installed as of the date of Purchaser's signature hercon, whether assessed or not; except distribution utility easements, including cable TV; except those matters reflected by the Title Documents accepted by Purchaser in accordance with subsection 8(a); except those rights, if any, of third parties in the Property not shown by the public records in accordance with subsection 8(b); and subject to building and zoning regulations. 11. PAYMENT OF ENCUMBRANCES. Any encumbrance required to be paid shall be paid at orbcfore the timeof settlement from the proceeds of this transaction or from any other scitirce. ~ 12. CLOSING COSTS, DOCUMENTS AND SERVICES. Purchaser and Seller shall pay their respective closing costs at closing, except as otherwise provided herein. Purchaser and Seller shall sign and complete all customary or required documents at or before closing. Fees for real estate closing and settlement services shall hot exceed $ _~-~-~ and shall be paid at closing k one -half by Seller and one-half by Purchaser 13. PRORATIONS. General taxcs for the year of closing, based on the most recent levy and the most recent assessment, rents, water and sewer charges, owner's association dues, and interest on continuing loan(s), ilÂ¢Â¥8*,04 fhall be prorated to date of closing. Purchaser Any sales, use and tÂ·rans fer tax that may accruc because of this transaction shall be paid by 14. POSSESSION. , Possessien of the Pror,crly shall be delivered to Purchaser as follows: . at closing i 1 subject to the following leascts) or knancy(s): (a) Lease dated June 17, 1988 entered into by and between Laura Donnelley'as i Landlord and Hopkins Street, Inc. as Tenant; (b) Lease Agreement dated October 28, 1988 entered into' by Laura Donnelley as Landlord and Alpine Banks of Colorado, Inc. as Tenant. tr Seller, artcr closing, fails hi deliver possession on tlic <late herein specified, Seller shall be subject lo eviction and shall be additionally liable to ~ Purch:,ser for paynictit cir $ ..~~ per day from the datc ofagreed possession until possession is delivered. 15. CONDITION OF AND DAMAGE TO PROPERTY. The Property and Inclusions shall be conveyed in their present condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted. In tlic event the Property shall be damaged by fire or other casualty prior to time of closing, in an amount of not more than ten percent or the total purchase price, Seller shall be obligaled to repair the same before the date or closing. In the event such damage is not repaired i within said time or if tlic damages exceed stich sum, this contract may be terminated at the option of Purchaser. Should Purchaser elect to carry out this contract despite such damage, Purchaser shall be entitled to credit ror all tile insurance proceeds resulting from such damage to the Property and ' inclusions, not exceeding, however, the total purchase price. Should any Inclusion(s) or service(s) fail or be damaged between the date of this coniract and the date of closing or Ilic date of possession, whichever shall be earlier, then Seller shall be liable for the repair or replacement or such Inclusion(s) or scrvice(s) with a tinit of similar size, age and quality, or an equivalent credit, less any insurance proceeds received by Purchaser covering such repair or replacement. 16. TIME OF ESSENCE/REMEDIES. Time is of the essence hereof. I f any note or check received as earnest money hereunder or any other payment due hereunder is not paid, honored or tendered when due, or if any other obligation hereunder is not performed or waived as herein provided, there shall be the following remedies: t (a) IFPURCHASER IS IN DEFAUIT: IF TIIE BOX IN SUBSECTION (1) IS CHECKED, SELLER'S REMEDIES SHALL BE AS SET FORTH IN SUBSECTION (1) [SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE]. IF SAID BOX IS NOT CHECKED, SELLER'S REMEDIES SHALL BE AS SET FORTH IN SUBSECTION (2) [LIQUIDATED DAMAGES]. 0 (1) Speciric Perrormance. Seller may elect to (rent this contract as cancelled, in which casc all payments and things or value received hereundershall be forfeited and retained on belialleif Seller, and Seller may recover such damages as may bc proper, or Seller may elect to treat this contract as being in full force and effect i and Seller shall have the right lo specific performance or damages, or both. (2) 1.Iquidated Damages. All payments :ind Illings (f Vallie received hereunder shall bc Airrcitcd by Purchascrand retained on behalf of Seller and both parties shall thereafter bc released front all obligations hereunder. It is agreed that such payinents and things of value are LIQUIDAT'ED DAMAGES and (except as provided in subsection (c)) arc SELLER'S SOLE AND ONLY REMEDY for Purchaser's failure to perform the obligations of this contract. Seller expressly waives Ilic remedics of specific performance and additional damages. (11) 1F SEL[.ER IS IN DEFAULT: Purchaser, as Purchaser's sole and exclusive remedy 441;,1,94,6, ma,Lâ‚¬Ier,(40-4 veal 41,;6 fentracta, eoneâ‚¬Hed;-h, â€ž 11.11 ....4,111 1,al,in.â€žl., .â€ž,J 11,I i '6Â·' uf valu. , ..w ..J lm, .unJ., alia l I 1Â£ i e Lut nc J diid -P-INAKe,Anay-rAG-* Awl.-*4wgw,geR.AG-Â·mÂ«,Â·he-pA,petrer-furrlm#tr 0ay elect to treat this contract as being in full force and effect and Purchaser sliall have tlic right to speci fic performance er+magesror botln (c) COSTS AND EXPENSES. Anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, in tlicevent orany litigationorarbitration arising out orthis contract,the court shall award to the prevailing party all reasonable costs and expense, including attorney fees. the earnest mongy is not refundable. 17. EARNEST MC)NEY DISPUTE. Notwithsl:Inding any termination or this contract, Purchascr and Seller agree that/in.the-event-ofÂ·*Ry et, nt rove rÂ·sr regln,ling-*110 eaf Fle,Â·t .:1,01,CÂ¥ 6,11,14,ing,-4,f Â¥011Â» holdÂ·19 1â€¢mleâ‚¬ Fiâ€¢ ele,sing agent-unleÂ¥, m t,( m* wri{~en inâ€¢11 ructionrn,c rectird t,yllicilo lder (,f-Ate-eftrne*mnt,erarle'.+111:'b.' "f i.duu, Inuk.un .6.we,gul~ :41],11| mil |;u :cqulicd w inke .1119 al.iluii liui indy awah .Iny Int,<metttlfgnirm-DiDICâ‚¬75-67 Cle,Ni n~M,ge,114,+PtiC>n Mwig**et#Nere IÂ«wl,Â·I,Hly 41,1Â©fpkNKI-,44â€ž.,1,L., uâ€žJ .L, M.,;t â€ž11, 11,vil~,J w 111;116Â·' vf ,.,Im mtâ€ž ., wiu, [ ur L u, i,14 km jui l,Jit. 1|01 i alld sh:LU.[ccus:cr-,Â·etrrtrr,manhrÂ·a,mlf,144-41UUC#1414 - - 18.Â· INSPECTION. Purchaser or any designee, shall have the right to have inspection(s) of the physical condition of the Property and Inclusions, at l'urchascr's expense, Ir written notice of any unsatisfactory condition, signed by Purchaser, is not received by Seller orÂ·Et,ting-(30â€žTrawy im {ir liefurc one hundred and ten (110) days * . 82 16***x*x, Ihe pllysical condition of tile Properly and Inclusions sit:Ill be cleci,ied tu lie s:iii st,iclory to 1'11[Â·clmser. 11' written notice (,1 :iny unsatisfactory condition, signed by Purchaser, is given 10 Sclicrod-istingl~ompan* as set forth above iii this section, and if Purchaser and Seller have not reached a written agreement in settlement thereof on or before one hundred and ten (119 1% days Mis contract shall then terminate, subject to section 17. Purchaser is responsible and shall pay for any dainage which occurs to the Properly and Inclusions as a result of such inspection. * from the date of Seller's acceptance of this Contract, ** from the date of Seller' s acceptance of this .Contract, i fl i. I Al' ' f< '--##*HANO,4*!lel,Oet<*.r-*Mâ€¢In,~||~T -----â€¢L------I---MI----01-mma!~~A--. Inll ill Aâ€¢1Â¢3 *Renl, (LIA,IM, Conipiny) reprown! Seller. The LIQI ]14 Company owel dullon or truil, 10,11(y ind WIndence to Sollor only Whlle thi 1.IMIng Comp.ny 11,9.11 duly It, INRI Purchu,or ht,Motlity, the Ll,tin, Company 11 Sollorb aucti ind 111 actln, on behilf of 5,Iler mad not Purchâ€¢â€¢Â· DY 310NINCI BELow, PURCHASER ACKNOWLEDOES PRIOI[ TIMELÂ¥ NOTICE BY 1.137'INC OR SELLING COMP*NY THAT Ual'ING COMIANY I,SELLER'3 m#NT. The 4111,11 broker,. andÂ·Ill nal.I, 8,(111. 15,111,I: Compiny) topf,Rint: [IP THE BOX IN SUBa:CrION (b) 15 CHECKSD, SELLINO COMPANY REPRESENTS PURCHASER ONLY, AS SET FORTH IN SUBSECTION (b), IF THC BOX IN gUBSECTION (b) 10 NOT CHECKED, SELLINO COMPANY RBPREJENTS SELLER ONLY, AS JET FORTH IN SUBBECTION [M),] 1.) 8.11.r. Tho 30111 4 Company owi; dullet of truit, loyally and confldence In Seller only, While ihe 5.Illn: Company hu i duly 40 tful . |'Urth,Mer htme"tly. Iho Sell In: Company I; Seller, agent ind 1, acling on behal F or Seller and mt Purchli,r, BY SIONINC] BELOW, PURCHASSR ACKNOWLEDGES PRIOR TIMELY NOTICE BY SELLINa COMPANY THAT SELLING COMPANY 13 88LLER'I AGENT, p (b) Purch.*.r. Ir thâ€¢ box 1, checked: Th. Sellin: Company oweR dulle, offruit, loy,Ity,nd confldence to Purch.i.r only. Whil. thi Solliy wompâ€¢ny hâ€¢* a duly lo trt# Seller hone,tly, the mellin: Compare, 1, actln, on behal fof Purchaior ind T' 011:ILSNLLER AND USTING COMP)AN -AGI*NO#04,GRPÂ»leRLFHAut#Â·NO;K;E.3Â¥4266{NegeMIMAW;WRWN 14A;RGMASOR'â€¢â€¢AO--------------7-------- 1 20. ADDITIONAL PROVIgIONg, I i- Ree Addâ€¢ndum attachid herito and madâ€¢ a part herâ€¢02 1 1 . 1 1 . .1 .l 11 thly will 11, RECOMMENDATION OF LEGAL COUNSEL, B RIgnin, thlidecumint, purchaur ind 5â€¢Ilâ€¢r uknowledle thâ€¢IWil:Bill'ImeUMP'Mf r -*W.149.GoÂ«>p.o, *M-Neâ€¢(1-0110*41.6.841â€¢011â€¢11â€¢-11&.~Uer obtaln the advice or their own ]411 Â¢oumel regard In: eximlâ€¢â€¢Ilon of litte and j ihi: Contrll:l. ---10:'fERMINNMON,--Â·hrlite,rer,â€¢411,0mr=fl,1-1,â€¢ed,â€¢111~FIN'fr'rdlhill,peffE,mt,ed 410,*un,1-1Â¢111)6,â€¢f,Im'***f : -Puuuâ€¢ball.homIJ=mlof.11.obapugn#haiumiaL.aulvgualzuou Ll. . , *urchaser ,3 eller I 13. NOTICE OF ACCEM'ANCE/COUNTERPARTS. If thli propoKd'I, weeptod b~#496<M wrill~; inq~foh- Fle,1- al|" of,uch : nÂ¢Â¢eptaace onorboforc .- F.kr]ARKy 26 -,19 90 ... ,thlt docur;62 81â€žfl bee,o,No.ontract b.twoon 3â€¢11â€¢râ€¢â€¢d Pâ€¢,fhim, A c(,py of thi, d,lculnellt Inny bl luculed by eoch party, 1,par,tely, and whine,ch p~FiÂ»â€¢14Â§041110 â€¢ coml|Â§*of, *uch onplal'likR,110,111Â¢1' Ilhall be '' deemed m be n rull und compl,te cont Mci b.tw.n Ihc pittles, ALIfINA MA*]d\OF IJp*N, INC. Al Colorado , J CO *or.10. j 1/1 k ka j. ~ffIJAAWL,rv avt\/ Jill V~AII [/m j I;;70~,vr 17110 Purch,Mork AddroNÂ» P.~..ARK-~ANL-Bnoied*,__ViJJt~~1~0101#01*. 81&~& U 2-23 -9'D ' ITO BE COMPLETED BY SELLER AND LISTING COMPANYI 24. ACCEMANCE/COMM]55!ON, 3,11Â®r nooepll Ihe #bow propoial thli . day of . .19 - 0 deletâ€¢â„¢INâ€¢!104â€¢Ih'61'11,râ‚¬!01,1.V â€¢10M1mll"'PI.'"I'Il"'#h'4'."prfi' 'IleÂ» m MY'Ul#Ovittle,1, #614Mm#WIR,â€¢,mpbreÂ·fdr'~0~401â€¢14*14Â·,N,"11â€¢leâ€¢Â»1414hiâ€¢â€¢Â»1*Mâ€¢,44,-4,0416*H'**hi'*4*10â€¢40â€¢Aâ€¢6 40â€¢41â€¢444 uwhâ€¢plly-1-44)11Â»08â€¢t.yalu...balkb..41Â¥Wld.b,wi#.U,UqMompaRIandÂ·$011*60;wahalLE|INW'&*LIâ€¢Ut4Â·Compâ€¢4~â€¢blâ€¢6-4â€¢ 4*fid#RM*#*NWAN 4,10Â«-40611â€¢. f~ haunk ~- f 00-11 - A' A :40 1 - 1 1 ~ e le' Laura-Donnelliy Dill '4841 thil ,' Seller'â€¢ AddroRb--,p. 0Â·~ Box 889, Aspen, Colorado 81612 The uinaril,nud Re'lll,4, awnpiny acknowld:o, recclpl t,r lho oortle,1 money dopullit :Ilerl fled In Rectk,rt 3 Itrld buth Râ€¢Illn, Compiny Ind LINIIng ct,;trimy ct,lir Irm the roft,vellve ziguncy dl,elt,Iture Not forth In 80Â¢111,11 19, 50"Ing Comply , - 1 . . - Wn,Imt. -- 0.11 4, Ad,IreÂ»M. . ... - . .. .In, i 4 A Â· LI:118$ COmpOrly * ~ ~ 1 ... .. Addi" rÂ· .*Â· ~ 1 011# , i A ADDENDUM Addendum to that certain Commercial Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate entered into effective as of February , 1990, by and between Laura Donnelley as Seller and Alpine Bank of Aspen, Inc. as Purchaser. 20(a) Access Information. Prior to closing, Purchaser and Purchaser's authorized representatives and agents shall have the right of reasonable access to the Property at any reasonable time for the purpose of making such inspections and examinations i as deemed appropriate by Purchaser. Purchaser shall indemnify, defend and hold Seller harmless from and against any and all losses, claims (including mechanics lien claims), damages or suits whether actual or threatened, arising from or associated with Purchaser's activities involving such inspections or examinations of the Property. 20(b) Land Use Approvals. Seller agrees to cooperate with Purchaser by executing any and all required applications associated with applying for and obtaining zoning and land use approvals and/or building permits reasonably necessary for Purchaser's plans to redevelop the Property; provided, however, that no rezoning or land use changes or related obligations or duties connected with such redevelopment plans (including, but not limited to, replats, lot splits, re-subdivisions, subdivision improvements agreements and the like) 5hall be binding upon Seller or serve to permanently encumber the Property until after Purchaser closes on the sale and purchase of the Property. 20(c) Property Conveyed "As Is ". It is understood and agreed that Seller is not making any warranties or representations of any kind or character, express, or implied, with respect to the Property, including, but not limited to, warranties or representations as to matters of title (other than Seller's warranty of title set forth in the warranty deed to be delivered at closing), zoning, tax consequences, physical boundaries, encroachments upon the land or upon adjoining property# closure of legal description, ingress or egress, operating history or projections, valuation, governmental approvals, governmental regulations or any other matter or thing relating to or affecting the Property. Purchaser has not relied upon and will not rely upon, either directly or indirectly, any representation or warranty of Seller. Purchaser represents that it is a knowledgeable Purchaser of real estate and that it is re].ying solely on its own expertise and that of Purchaser's consultants, and that Purchaser will conduct such inspections and investigations of the Property, including, but not limited to, the physical and environmental conditions thereof, and shall rely upon same, and, upon closing, shall assume the risk that adverse matters, including, but not limited to, adverse physical and environmental conditions, may not haveÂ·been revealed by Purchaser's inspections and investigations. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that upon closing, Seller shall sell and convey to Purchaser and Purchaser shall accept the Property "as is, where is," with all faults, and there are no oral agreements, warranties or representations, collateral to or affecting the property by Seller or any third party. The terms and conditions of this paragraph shall expressly survive the closing and not merge therein and shall be incorporated into the warranty deed. 20(d) No Brokers. Seller and Purchasers represent and warrant to each other that this Contract and the transactions contemplated herein were negotiated and will be consummated on a principal-to-principal basis without the services or use of real estate brokers or sales associates. Purchaser agrees to indemnify Seller from and against any and all real estate 14 t.*h 1 . 13 4, :Ib brokerage commissions, finders fees or related claims, suits or damages, whether actual or threatened. 20(e) Conflicts. In the event there is a conflict between the terms and provisions of this Addendum and the terms and conditions of the attached Contract, then the terms and provisions of this Addendum shall control. 2 .. Alpine Bank Â® Aspen, CO 81611 April 16, 199OJI Ms. Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Aspen CO 81611 Dear Ms. Eflin: This letter is to confirm that we presently have under contract for purchase the site of the Alpine Bank, (the north 80 feet of Lots D and E and all of Lot F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen). We have requested that the attached application for conceptual development plan review by the HPC be prepared on our behalf. Our purchase contract with the owner of the property includes the owner's consent to our application (see attached). We will be represented by Mr. Kim Weil of Bill Poss' office during the HPC's review of this submission. Sincertly, Steve 1 President- Alpine Bank of Aspen /b 409 East Hopkins Avenue â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 â€¢ (303) 920-4800 1 aj IAND USE APPLIaTION FORM . 1) Project Name 409 East Hopkins (Donnelly Property) 2) Proj ect location Block 88, North 80 Feet of Lots D and E and- Lot F, 409 East Hopkins Street, Aspen, Colorado (indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where- appropriate) 3) Present Zoning CC 4) Lot Size 7,823 5) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone # Laura Donnelly, c/o Cunningham Investment, Suite 201, 121 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-8803 6) Represerrtative' s Name, Address & Phone # Bill Poss & Associates 605 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-4755 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply): Cor*iitional Use ' Conceptual SPA X Cbnoeptual Historic Dev. Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline ' - Conceptual POD ' Minor Historic Dev. Stream Margin Final POD Historic Demolition Mountain View Plane . Subdivision IIistoric Designation Condminiumization Text/Map Amer*lment QUS Allotment Iot Split/Iot line (213S Banption Adjustment 8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures; approocimate sq. ft.; amber of bedrocms; any previous approvals granted to the property). One Structure, Masonry of 2,800 square feet 9) Description of Develoiment Application For conceptual Historic Approval of a two story brick and masonry structure encompassing retail storefronts on the first floor and second floor commercial space facades as shown in the plans. 10) Have you attached the following? Response to Attachment 2, Miniann Sulinission Contents Response to Attadmient 3, Specific Submission Oontents Response to Attathment 4, Review Standards for Your Application Form 1758 Commitment Ficâ€¢Pego COMMITMENT FOR TITLE tNSURANCE ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereo f. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and tlie amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent indorsement. ThisCommitment ispreliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obli- gations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "E ffective Date." 'Gtial--IJ:z;TFZ~'~ *44:19Â·47 :.UÂ»:t.:70,0/4,- 1:.c--Â·,IÂ·Â· Â·I . . 4Â»2Â·I4~9-*WAÂ«Â»122Â»Cah-26Â»6=-2/ 1*42/*Â·rk*yllfÂ«ftÂ·%29-22.{It~ 19&/6/%4*,&4344*MEARRGA: ~,Ati~4**iff'~4â‚¬49Â¢(Iftf'Â·:fO~>1 tÂ»?t Â· 44"Ne*244*â‚¬â‚¬124342 94.4 ,-r~x,10,704. / 1\111. E /*se 44 First American Title Insurance Company < % .-Â· '.03 % R 4 :-1.â‚¬*24 4. 1- 8%.4 .....) 0 BY ~~642-6.Â£.=C--Â·.,--m~, PRESIDENT â‚¬77:00 1 ,- '. SEPTE M B [ R 24 Â·* .t ~ 1 4 . ./ h, 1 0 2 1968 ~.' 4 / Â¥ ATTEST VULL- 6.394% SECRETARY ''4, 041;.r.ORN\11/fr j%-- 8. bLL COUNTERSI GN ED .. 4 Form 1756-A Commitment, Schedule A Holland and Hart 600 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: Tom Todd SCHEDULE A Customer Reference No. ALPINE BANK OF ASPEN 1. Effective Date: February 13, 1990 at 7:00 A.M. Commitment No: 400712-C PL/pg 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount Cal ~ ALTA Owner's Policy $ 1,750,000.00 Proposed Insured: ALP I NE BANK OF ASPEN, 1 NC., a Colorado corporation (b) ~ ALTA Loan Policy 1 $ Proposed Insured: (C) 0 $ 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: LAURA DONNELLEY 4. The land referred to in this commitment is LEGAL DESCRIPTION SET FORTH ON SHEET ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED HEREIN AND MADE A PART HEREOF. Owner's Premium: $ 2,041.25 CC's to: Lender's Premium: $ Holland and Hart Add'I Charges: $ Steve Connor - Tax Certificate: $ 10.00 Steve Briggs ATC - Escrow Cynthia TOTAL CHARGES: $ 2,051.25 Form 1756 - Bl Commitment, Schedule 8-1 SCHEDULE B - Section 1 No. 400712-C Requirements The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to-wit: 1. Termination Statement for Security Agreement and Financing Statement from Interior Designs of Aspen, Inc., debtor(s), to Laura Donnelley, secured party, recokded January 6, 1988, In Book 554 at Page 450, giving notice of a security Interest under the Uniform Commercial Code. 2. Deed from Laura Donnelley to Alpine Bank of Aspen, Inc., a Colorado corporation. NOTE: Â· Dul y executed real property transfer declaration, executed by either the Grantor or Grantee, to accompany the Deed mentioned above, pursuant to Article 14 of House Bill No. 1288 - CRA 39-14-102. 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company or Its duly authorized agent either (a) that the "real estate transfer tax" imposed by Ordinance No. 20, (Series of 1979), and by Ordinance No. 14, (Series of 1989) of the City of Aspen, Colorado has been paid, and that the I len imposed by Paragraph 9 thereof has been fully satisfied, or (b) that a Certificate of Exemption has been issued pursuant to Section 7 thereof. .. Order No. 400712-C Plat I.D. # SCHEDULE A (continued) Covering the Land In the State of Colorado, County of Pitkin, Described as follows: Lots D, E and F, Block 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, EXCEPTING therefrom the Southerly 20.00 feet of Lots D and E, BLOCK 88, City and Townsite of Aspen. .. Form 1756 - B2 (Modified 1/84) Commitment, Schedule 8-2 Order No. 400712-C Colorado SCHEDULE B - Section 2 303207-C Exceptions The policy or policies to beissuedwillcontain exceptionsto the following unlessthe same dredisposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. Any loss or damage, including attorney fees, by reason of the matters shown below: 1. Any facts, rights, interests, orclaims whicharenotshown bythe publicrecordsbut whichcouldascer- tained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements orclaims of easement which are not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies,conflictsinboundarylines,shortageinarea,encroachmentsandanyotherfactswhich ' a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records. 4. Any water rights orclaims or title to water in, on or under the land. 5. Any lien, or right to alien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 6. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public recordsorattachingsubsequent tothe effective date hereof but prior to thedate the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 7. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessments, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service, or for any other special taxing district. 8. Reservations and exeptions as contained In the Deed from the City of Aspen providing as follows; Â·thatÂ·no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, clnnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under.existing laws; and subject to all the conditions, limitations and restrlctions contained in Section 2386 of the Revised Statutes of the United States In Deed recorded In Book 79 at Page 32. 9. Easement of the Southerly 7.0 feet of the easterly 10.0 feet of Lot F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, as set forth in Decree recorded June 20, 1979, in Book 371 at Page 85. 10. Agreement between Aspen Lumber and Supply Company, a Colorado corporation, and Alessandro Sabbatinl and Thelma Sabbatinl, recorded February 18, 1969, in Bock 239 at Page 436. 11. Any and al I unredeemed tax sales. NOTE: Upon receipt of a Certificate of Taxes Due evidencing that there are no existing open tax sales, the above exception will not appear on the policies to be Issued hereunder. Exceptions number are hereby omitted. .. Form No. 1755 Commitment, Conditions and Stipulations COMMITMENT Conditions and Stipulations 1. The term "mortgage," when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. I f the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate of interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and conditions and stipulations of this Commitment. t't , â‚¬4.1 - N - t.0 41 - 0 21 4 , It - 44 - F,- 46 48- r.2.....11:mpl .= 4, 66 71**14 2A jitg?t-- ,~4-' 22 Â· Ai ilifry?':e r 0. r *kp,tit,#*1~/I..... ..4 -Â·-1 --- ... . 1 ...2 ELL- Â·,:, . f 11.# . 41:4 ':NK ' , 4;t *f~ 54 2,'.0 1~1:.,1 1.-1,1. #*: *01 01 41-Â· .9.1 1 f.,I~ f p ?141 '' ti 1, ~,d . . *": 6 4 .,rl" 1.Id:,gr# - 92-qq < 1 1;~ i#*IlÂ·. *.IÂ·:.Â·hâ€¢Â·IM# :tÂ·:JL~ - ; â€¢: 1, 11 '1'04144; D S "1 -11'.dr tf.~.1 ~ 1 -L 841.f f .-T-'--r ' I Â·S.4. 1. 4.-1Â»"W~ ' I k 'Itilt,avi'll= tTe:imillill/*Mon:j///1/111-- -- 0 2#*i......W&..W...1...'L-- 11- - , 4 Fl ' I Ill 1 4. 1.rb,1 .."....,1,1 te -/ 4 *= A i 1 -. 4.94 ... 1Â·rl,>,plaâ€¢-- 1,4 4 1 i#' :4*#4"/Rimili 11 1 1 14 . 11 2 1 ..4 k 1 1 -4 * C , . HI "mill. S . ' ~i - fÂ·_llif-12 2 Q SS-iÂ» . H i .1 . 1 1 +JR e. Hol~Alt:19 Â·M"71 2Â«~. *.2 4 -. 4 60'/41,46 5,264 8.Â·' 7... ....11, *-,1-I - I i-. - I -- -.*11 .. ...11 .1- ... Â· ~ftÂ·#'Â·~?4:k 1 ~ ' | ' ./ tt ..' 1/ 1 t., . ' ,/ ~ ..flk,274 1:4'. '. ' 3,4 ..VE#] Â¢ ittl.32.4 - 31 -b : i /4 ' i fi ~; ' .%, r , .1 41 m 1 1.4 Â· 4''iii ..4 1 I 1 't. 4 f'Pofb..Â·ED L,,x#E t=, - I --,1 . 1 N R-=56*0.-]ND -lf=7 -t==11 INtl 1 11 1 :LA= IL-4~ -1~ 1 1. -~4'1 Ly-LAr .,34,;.eur,:cs#%.A.4 ' ALLEY ELEVATION 4 ..0,9 4:.. 1 1 1 4 t 1 l 1 1 WEST :ELEEVA:T~,..,, .t '..f;,1-2/ ': :414:i.n i! 21 Â·k: 1-31.,-Â·i,~~1101"1:"b - ' i< ~ ~~..:~~~}t~ ~?~~~t:? ~4.' " I '., ..:''I'.' ~ :, il,4 ':1: , 1 1 -p JUUÂ¥ 99 9-93Â®02 1 A .-'IO 4 ~fÂ·?Rf*j-Â·El~-4,9,1Â¢*:!Â·'~,:t f #! 1,4 >3<~; {i::,i:+Â·:..".#k',,.4;-ti}:04%9Â¢i.e , 1. F'~~ : Â·Â·. flt. '4 . l!*hj*/y.vÂ·,0.~Th Â·:M~~.4~~~i Â·' â€¢*L:.Frif. 1 1 : 4 ! 1? : 691 h! : 9.i tt ji, i Â·# : .Â·..... Â·\ df ! . i:42 fig"' M ~, - . Â· 04-' i imÂ·~.4 Elituti,ji.Â·41.-0.; t.: 4' $~:..42}>,1#iÂ§.ifi~:~~.1,if:--i P."tâ‚¬56' ''' i - .Â·iukeite,*,i,t.: 6, 1 "CIA;47%Â·1Â· .~;'-1* ;9 *~T#7tlt~iÂ¢?~.Â·~Â· ~ 1.'.M~.F,Â» 0 . Â· ,#.2.;t',44.4,0 FIE Â·~1 i :79/554:. 2, . :iii i.' Â· i 1, .pqi--Ii-- 1.5 11#, lilli . . / I . . , *N ,:,SreÂ·Â·~tÂ·.~~~.~~.., , ....4 4,1.-,LA,1,0,1 1 -,Â·Â·Â· i. f j< I Â·,fr k; Â¥111 Wf tÂ·~1:i#.F iL 44}ill & 4 ' k u .:.â€ž, i .'.: ,. 4: : 4 4444 % 86 .4, 41'., .. 41.1~11?ffii jlb. r,i':111'..~ .. . I 11. " . , . . /.Â·iâ€¢6~3' .. P. "614.19,1 . =1 1 1. - 1 j. .,-184#,4 24,1 1 1.11 1. 1. ta;All . 4. T - 4 :. t.. ; 1 ~ 9 ~( ~ ~- -d I h 1 1 1 j; 7,Â»A Â· ff k . L 494*11:094% . ~ 94 -1.1Â»k:.9 27 32--4.1 q 1 , EAST ELEVATION % 4 -------> ty gark I,Ci'99 61Â«92 lr=v/iii 4-----l r F 1 --=-11=t I I 1 1- ---- ----- -I-- ----111 E--4Ed 'i 6----- . 4 ' 3 1 Â·--- ~iB 1 1 1 111 1 1 11 IN H 1 11 --1 ' -TF#, 1, 1 1 2 11 7-2- f=:4 1, A 1 _, k Upuj 51,1 -- - . - 1 T -- - ; hi ]-La .--u,===6, i ! 41 i IC k 4 ,) 1' 11 2 -4; - --4 -UL__._IL, 1 4 1 4 ~ k*â€¢-â€ž6.----b =.*f |' ~ Ar/mel ~ 1 1 1 1. 15 i -7 r---r-- Â·- , ----i- . Â· iÂ©=2 UU *=21 -12=a 473.-J tfzR 1 .tr --: lit 1 hZ=~2--4- 4 3 L i h ' I_{ ~ 41 LU iLl ' 1 -_1 i b 1 : 0 !1 i ' it Â«=Â·1 1 ?m 1 1 11 1 / 1 1 :1. :l 1 1 i '11 1 1 1. , 1 110 .! 1 h' 111Â·*#IfililjHWA!21.PHml'kill fb- FOÂ·441"3-F -7- flÂ·-3-rk r-,4*r-tUnW-r-il-r.% ..*u'.9Â£ 1 U-=. 1 1 4 1 4- 1 , . 1 1 i li 'l - ~% i-=iHHHE}JEE}i}-130-{11}1[ 11-1131:.lrJâ‚¬-11 DIFE--0 1-1- n itrt-fi-flfuhl-[1 il-i 1111 r rIEWÂ·Â·qi-l j guew j f 4-,up~., 3 ~ : I '4*BEWBM'#84 ' I 2,4Ps.,/. , i ,: . Â·, f.Â·o:?...,4Â·;44-L:f i:arj-il~! 1. j : i Â· t *Â·lt'~.fi:-:.~s...~44,*Wrv, 0 ...1 - r~-- tte.*t~ Et~*.Fri:!,:!141(...:1.4Â£.t i - r.. & 2%2Â·fli:.114:1.1#.Al)#04; ' I - .48$9.9,8-~*84:13(3 irtilft 42Â·~ ~.LO:.~,1.4. - r .i e ' :-A- 64,Â«Nftt~-' 1%-3.*7*,ill-Â·Ti ; 1 '1 -Â·,1' 1 # . - '. : ' i ..1 I I = 16 - exa.3 4 k.-A"t:41?%4,1 1 :4.:. r.+ 6 1, ,... 1 -r. a :* 1 .1 -. 4 1 -4. 9<.171...,51.2:1.9fe-~1..;1.8.. .~.,1, 11.f ... IN*; t.. + :=U-32' 2 ''Jb:.f .ij .Â£1 2?N -1*'SK.f 4% f-{-)'$44.f-;-4: t: 1.1 1 Â·,Â·:9Â·Â· 'I,Â·Â·6314#.,34*#; LA&01Â·lf.t 4 . Â·Â·Â·: .ityllÂ·pff*I . - :~'~t':3.t;&-F'~.-~%~44' 4 , : eks/t W<* 14.fri't#~~~:.' 0. ; 1.1 r , 41:Â·P.f li't.;itj~.; p 1 1 .t,AN.;.~Â·Â·: ~~~ ~ F.' A.I' ...AV ...../ ... .,4:!.4.4 - , r#;At**kÂ·ai. 1. 1. - '. 7~EQÂ¥ftÂ·~!1~K,~fli~i:i:*1~Ff~3~ 'Â·-- ..9.04~i, +T P .'I.â€¢Â«f, Â·P IL.~'~Â·'1''i Â· 4% 8 4#*Â·91?4ji' '~~'~ ~ ~'r - i...#4'j?JAN#* N 'Â·1 ,{Â·2'/4.~AN" ; 1/43 2*"Nu ~~ / /2 .447 C *39*34 4-7'~ : ';~4 ' ,; 6 k...).... 4 k.41*00.1 -.Lilift,/dib/* " " 1 11 . - MeTÂ»v 1 .. ruu ...2 - -- .. .... - - - (C.Â»:1>5ECÂ» 1 U ..1 1 L li 1* 11 1.I L, 12 1. 1-*71 H,1~ !61'KI,1.[ - 12=UKi:W#14-1- 0- _. _ 4- ---- ... - ...... 1 0 0 Illi-[ 11 - . ,---4 0 . 1 li-$7 1 di KI 11-3 L-i L-j r 52/44*02Â»6 ' t]Â»4 1 ' CAN,1 44â‚¬2 - 7 ~ 11 1 Â¥14. ---Â·--- -Â·-r-1 ~ il. =12.-4.1 1 ' . 1 1 1/1. =41 If:=41 1 1 1, .,1 1-11 4 Â· b V 1 7~ M i l l 2 1 1 1 /1 I'l 9 1 0 1.1 4 1 1 1 ; 41 01 i ' 1/ I. 1 -:Â· - Â· i It 11 41 11 .. M Fr __-21 ilk ~Â«148 4 ZÂ»142 LE-2'4 1 8,1:4 ...C. -4.._iâ€ž_, , 1, 11-2â€ž1139221 -1 - 9-1-2.%= g.4.1-4 -F~ F il t 7,5/. Â·27Jfâ‚¬F!=2~ :Tj'6'SY'.; plch.. AE 5. r lE 3-' + d.6 60#- 1 45 25. -- > HOPKINS ELEVATION j. .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF 409 E. HOPKINS AVE. - ALPINE BANK PARCEL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, May 9, 1990, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee in the Second Floor Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application by Alpine Bank on behalf of Laura Donnelley, represented by Bill Poss and Associates, for the conceptual development of the parcel described as Lots D, E, and F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The proposal requests conceptual development approval from the HPC for the construction of a new mixed used three-story building. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office at 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. (303) 920-5090. s/William J. Poss Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Published in the Aspen Times on April 19, 1990 City of Aspen account pub.notice.Alpine .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF 409 E. HOPKINS AVE. - ALPINE BANK PARCEL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, August 8, 1990, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee in the Second Floor Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application by Alpine Bank on behalf of Laura Donnelley, represented by Bill Poss and Associates, for the conceptual development of the parcel described as Lots D, E, and F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The proposal requests conceptual development approval from the HPC for the construction of a new commercial two story building. This application presents a revision from the previous three-story mixed-use building proposal. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office at 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. (303) 920-5090. s/William J. Poss Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Published in the Aspen Times on July 12, 1990 City of Aspen account pub.notice.409eh.2 409 EAST HOPKINS APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL GMQS ALLOCATION September 15, 1990 Submitted to: City of Aspen Planning office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: 303-920-5090 Applicant: Laura Donnelley , Box 589 Aspen, Colorado 81612 605 East Main Street Architect: Bill Poss and Associates Aspen, Colorado 31611 Phone: 303-925-4755 FAX: 303-920-2950 Planner: Joseph Wells, AICP 602 Midland Park Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 FAX: 303-925-8275 Phone: 303-925-8030 Attorney: Arthur C. Daily Holland & Hart 600 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: 303-925-3476 FAX: 303-925-9367 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM APPLICATION (Article 3) 4 Description of Proposal 4 A. B. Commercial GMQS Evaluation Criteria 8 1. Quality of Design (a) Architectural Design (b) Site Design (C) Energy Conservation (d) Amenities (e) Visual Impact (f) Trash and Utility Access Areas and Services 2. Availability of Public Facilities (a) Water Supply/Fire Protection (b) Sanitary Sewer (C) Public Transportation (d) Storm Drainage Ce) Parking 3. Provision of Affordable Housing 4. Bonus Points II. SPECIAL REVIEW PROCEDURES (Article 7, Division 4) 20 A. Payment-in-lieu of Open Space 20 Reduction in Required Off-Street Parking 21 B. C. Reduction in Required Trash and Utility Access 22 III. REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM GMQS PROCEDURES FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING BUILDING [Â§8-104(a)(1)(A)] 25 IV. REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, THE LAND USE REGULATIONS (ARTICLE 7, DIVISION 11) 26 EXHIBITS 1. Application Form 2. Consent of Applicant 3. Disclosure of Ownership 4. Vicinity Map 5. Map of Transit Routes 6. Technical Memorandum Regarding Traffic Generation for Commercial Uses TDA, Inc. 7. Improvement Survey 8. Property Owners Within 300 feet of the Property I. COMMERCIAL GMOS APPLICATION A. Description of Proposal. This Application requests a Commercial GMQS Allocation sufficient to complete a new commercial building at 409 East Hopkins Avenue under the provisions of Â§8-106(F), Special Review of open space, parking and trash/utility service area under Article 7, Division 4, and Amendments to the Text of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen under Article 7, Division 11. The property is located between the Brand Building and the Collins Block; both structures are historic landmarks which are on the National Register. The site is presently occupied by a l two story split-level structure of 2,795 sq. ft.; this building includes 2,375 sq. ft. of net leasable and 1774 sq. ft. of FAR. The site also includes an outdoor dining area and bar for the Smuggler Land Office Restaurant and a sculpture garden. The site includes the north 80 feet of Lots D and E and all of Lot F, Block 88, a total of 7823 sq. ft. of lot area. An existing transformer easement of 70 sq. ft. reduces the lot area available for calculation of allowable floor area to 7753 sq. ft. The existing commercial building on the site, which was built approximately 20 years ago, is not viewed as being very compatible with present historic guidelines. The use of jumbo or modular brick is now highly discouraged and the split-level design is out of character with all but the most prominent historic structures generally located on the corner lots. The new building which has been designed for the site is intended to complement the adjacent historic structures. In an effort to work within the HPC guidelines, careful attention has been given to avoiding the imitation or compromising of the established character of the building's landmark neighbors. In particular, the building's setbacks relate to both adjacent buildings, the massing has been varied, and the rhythm of the fenestration of the proposed building is tied to adjacent structures. The new building is a clean and quiet structure which will be viewed as a complement to the adjacent structures. In order to assure that the project is in scale with the National Register structures in the block, the applicant has -- footage, as permitted up to 2.0:1. The FAR square footage of the chosen not to seek special review approval for bonus square project is 11,629 sq.ft., an FAR of 1.5:1. Total area is as follows: 4 l Net Leasable Total Comml. & Accessory FAR Sq.Ft. Office Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft Basement level 7,624 7,624 Ground level 6,974 5,392 1,582 6,974 Second level 4,655 3,806 849 4,655 19,253 9,198 10,055 11,629 One issue which needs to be addressed is the presence of the existing open space features on the property which were installed by the applicant several years ago. These include "Meadow in the Sky" which is an organic sculpture constructed of a cylindrical wire cage filled with boulders and covered on top by grasses and wildflowers. "Rearing Hole" is a fountain which is a boulder-lined depression in the ground in a square shape into which plumes of water are pumped. Finally, the open space is enclosed along the sidewalk by a low concrete wall and steel frame which forms a waterfall of small jets of water falling into a rectangular pool below. These features have been appreciated by both pedestrians passing by the site as well as the patrons of the Smuggler Land Office Restaurant's outdoor patio, which is located along the eastern side of the property. Because of these considerations, it is not feasible to preserve the open space features on-site. In order to comply with the Historic Guidelines and respect the comments of the members of HPC, the building proposed for the property maintains the storefront edge at the sidewalk as established by the two landmark structures at each end of the block. The building has also been limited to two stories, responding to HPC's criticism of three story solutions proposed previously for the property. Because of these considerations, it is not feasible to preserve the open space features on-site. The applicant proposes to donate the three existing open space elements to the City for reinstallation on another site in the area. It may be appropriate to select a site such as the open space adjacent to City Hall which is effectively a part of the commercial core but where maintaining the cont-inuity of the commercial uses in the core is not at issue. Alternatively it might be appropriate to relocate the elements to a more remote site, such as the Art Museum or Art Park site. The owner also confirms her willingness to negotiate with the City or other interested parties to sell the undeveloped property at market value so that it can be preserved as open space. Such negotiations would obviously need to occur in the 5 very near future and would require the City's approval of a subdivision or subdivision exemption. A second issue is the viability of commercial proposals in the CC zone district. Since the adoption several years ago of a series of code amendments by the City which dramatically increase the cost of competing for a commercial allocation, only one been filed in the CC zone. Projects which involve expansions of application requesting an allocation of around 3,000 sq. ft. has historic landmarks and are therefore exempt from GMQS have been . from utilizing a significant portion of their permitted buildout pursued, but other property owners have effectively been excluded until such time as commercial rents escalate even more dramatically than they have in recent years. Included in this submission are two proposed code amendments which address issues which specifically affect the viability of this proposal and not necessarily others in the CC zone. The code amendments are therefore intended to prompt a discuss-ion about whether the present rules need to be revised to be more equitable. Commercial GMQS Procedures request written information covering twelve areas of concerns, as follows: 1. Water System. Water will continue to be supplied by the existing 6" City water main in Hopkins which is maintained at a pressure of approximately 100 P.S.I. Because the project is limited to commercial uses only increased demand is estimated to be less than 5,000 GPD. Adequate capacity is presently available to service this project. 2. Sewage System. The project is served by the existing 8" Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District line in the alley to the south of the site. Impact on the system resulting from the project is expected to equal water useage, or less than 5,000 GPD. Adequate capacity is presently available to service this project. 3. Drainage System. On-site storm drainage for the proposal will comply with current City standards; the project will be designed in a manner to assure no negative impact on historic drainagae patterns. Presently, water from the site flows to the curb and gutter system in Hopkins Street and then to the northwest. 4. Fire Protection System. The building is across the street from the Aspen Fire Station, with a response time of less than five (5) minutes. Fire hydrants are located at the northwest corner of both Hopkins Street intersections to the east and west of the building. 6 5. Development Summary. The proposed project includes 9,198 net leasable sq.ft. of commercial space. Commercial uses are permitted by right in the CC zone. Minimum lot size is 3,000 sq. ft. The height of the building is well below the height limitation of 40 feet in the zone district and the proposed FAR of 1.5:1 does not require special review. Special Review of open space off-street parking and utility/trash service area is requested as permitted in the CC zone. 6. Estimated Traffic Count Increases. In order to estimate increased daily traffic on adjacent streets resulting from the proposal, a memo prepared by TDA, Inc. dated July 20, 1984 (Exhibit 6) regarding traffic and parking impacts associated with non-accessory commercial space within the Aspen Mountain PUD has been reviewed. TDA estimated that, based on the travel characteristics unique to the Aspen area, commercial space in the commercial core can be expected to generate 10 daily one-way trips per 1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable. During the peak hour, approximately 6 percent of daily trips would be generated. The increased number of trips from the project has therefore been estimated as 92 daily one-way trips, and approximately 6 peak- hour trips. l The principal hours of operation of the project is ant ic ipated to be 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Because of the limited alley frontage of the project, no off-street parking spaces can be provided. The off-street parking requirement will be met by a payment-in-lieu of $210,000. All RFTA bus routes and the Rubey Park Transit Center are within three blocks of the proposal (see Exhibit 5). No bike paths are provided through the Commercial Core. The location of the project is the greatest disincentive to auto use. The site is within comfortable walking distance of the majority of accommodations in the City's lodge district. 7. Affordable Housing. The affordable housing required for the project is proposed to be provided through a payment-in-lieu equivalent to 60% of the employee generation of the project. 8. Stoves and Fireplaces. The development will not include any woodburning devices. 9. Location Relative to Public Facilities. Given the downtown location, the building will be within close proximity to all public facilities. Because the project is a commercial project, it is not anticipated that there will be any increased usage of public facilities. 7 1 10. Location Relative to Retail and Service Outlets. This criterion does not apply to commercial/office applications. 11. Effects of the Proposed Development. The proposed building has been limited to two stories in order to complement adjacent historic structures and has been located on the site as preferred by the HPC. 12. Construction Schedule. It is presently anticipated that upon approval of all required review procedures and receipt of an adequate allocat-ion, construction of the project would proceed within 6 months. The project would then be completed in one phase, with completion within 9 months of start of construction. B. Commercial GMP Evaluation Criteria. 1. Quality of Design (maximum 18 points). (a) Architectural Design (maximum 3 points). Considering the compatibility of the proposed development (in terms of scale, siting, massing, height, and building materials) with existing neighboring developments. The proposed building is a two story brick structure with sandstone details and painted wood windows. At HPC's request, the sandstone has been simplified to avoid competing with the bolder sandstone detailing of the Collins Block and Brand Building. The rhythm of the detailing is very much in harmony with the two landmark buildings, however. Because the Lane Parcel building, which is part of the Collins Block ownership, partially blocks the alley exposure of the proposal, the second level commercial space of the project has been designed in two wings with an open central plaza separating the two. This plaza cannot be seen from the public areas below but it does benefit both of the historic structures on either site by providing a second level open space which extends completely across the site of the proposal in an east-west direction. In addition to accommodating the required functions of the building, the intention behind the design of the project is to relate to the existing historic buildings, as well as to the general environment of the adjacent commercial district in scale, massing, proportion and materials. These goals have been accomplished, in part, by providing a projecting bay of storefront windows at the first level at each end of the building to match the plane of the facades on either side. Emphasis has been placed upon creating a vocabulary of forms and materials that will fit in comfortably with surrounding structures, and which are in keeping with HPC guidelines and committee member comments. A somewhat horizontal character has been given to the building in order to balance its low profile, 8 1.08â€¢02 --7 STORAGE STORAGE cL 1 cL CORRIDOM 14 1 1 STORAGE ,1 STORAGE - _licl. Â· - 9 (-4 1 ltd I ME#HANICAL Â· r BASEMENT PLAN ~ 409 EAST HOPKINS SEPTEMBER 15, 1990 ~-fo~,241--~ r 1J L=32_12..._- .9.0 -2_f L_LI 0 0 9) 0 1 1 rl -r- UP - ..% I . . 1 - COWMEACIAL IPACE .. -L. â€¢ JIARI - I, 43/t- =i, n i < i Â»= 1 ON Urn [1 itt-' CORRIDOR -4 11 1, SERVICE YARD TRANSFORâ€¢EA MAIN LEVEL PLAN ~ 409 EAST HOPKINS SEPTEMBER 15, ..--47 --4 1. 1,1,Â®1 6..ERCIAL SPACE - CN '.L /> ......1 - i , 1~14 3-9I . i ' PL*ZA ~ -7 COMIERCIAL SPACE IMI UPPER LEVEL PLAN 409 EAST HOPKINS SEPTEMBER 15, 1990 ~~ I. - 4111'11 1 1 I kt f 1 \ 1.1 .'\ 1 h i ,7==3 , // 1.â€žr J HH}**U***U-U-Ii m.Â· ' *****IHI-- wikÂ·I} t}***}+0* -â€¢ r.:L=- ' At .,I ---- 8 - El _El_ _11 --- -- - C==3 Â£*Willi I I lillbillili"lidtilitti)/Il'LA.lilillil I I fl\Il/Elili/Eaf 3%26$ M I I ' ~ A 3--H E-=d LBI i 1-* 11111. lili rm wi n I E ~ f 2--4 ~ c~ _~i==+FI - [m 11 =1 dil i -=. â‚¬=111.Emt!*=lulesttr=â€¢Ik=LLIC=111 1,e91-11 - _~ f Em4153 ~~~~ ~ Fri HOPKINS ELEVATION 11/ 't!. I A 40 _ 24-----8- a tiftigilj B NE titi 5[_ dmiÂ¥Â·*22â€¢. fi#*Al't' V ALLEY ELEVATION 409 EAST HOPKINS SEPTEMBER 16, 1990 1, 1. r AÂ«f lllllll[lll, U====Cl- 9.\ n Ot?/4 2~ , 0 4 2--9 1- 1#4Â¥* F--09 -3-1 .J- -_~~ . ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ /44,54 k 4, TY 1/ ' - --ot=-= r---9---* gri 11 Â· 121 -- - 3'gÂ¥4 -i - EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION .V 4'. I. Â·42 .dI ':* Â· 4 44 2 - Â«TA 0 5,-1391 i r \% /:3 1 1 1 9. . , --4 1 2 3 ,2, i ,-4 y'~1-1-/.3 7. *#All//1//PI'l"$ *4Â¥1 -TUU"Fllipp.Tilf.li'll/% SOUTH PLAZA ELEVATION NORTH PLAZA ELEVATION IMI 409 EAST HOPKINS SEPTEMBER 15, 1990 ~---~ .. 1'. r r ? L__1 and to further enhance a compatible visual expression when seen in context with its immediate neighbors. Careful attention has been given to avoiding the imitation or compromising of the established character of the building's important neighbors. In particular, the setbacks relate to both adjacent buildings, the massing of the building has been broken through the use of the extended first level storefronts at each end of the building and a slightly recessed entryway at the center of the building, and the rhythm of the fenestration of the building is tied to adjacent structures. The new building will be seen as a clean and quiet structure which will be viewed as a complement to the adjacent historic structures. The south side of the building which fronts the alley has been treated simply but the second floor facade on the ally will be finished with the same brick material as the front. (b) Site Design. (maximum 3 points) Considering the quality and character of the proposed landscaping and open space areas, the amount of site coverage by buildings, the extent of underground utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of circulation, including access for service, increased safety and privacy, and provision of snow storage areas. Given the HPC's stated preference to have the new building aligned with the front of existing buildings to maintain the historic storefront style, site design options were limited. Because of the building's location within the commercial core, the major orientation and identity for the project will be the pedestrian traffic of shoppers along the storefronts. By holding and defining the street edge in plan and elevation, the proposed building will strengthen the street's linear character, and provide a perception of continuity along the sidewalk. Access to the second floor commercial space is provided from the sidewalk by a stair at the east end of the building and a corridor leading to the elevator at the west side of the building. Service and delivery access will be through the alley at the rear, where a generous service area more than twice the size of the required area has been provided. Four existing Norway maples and a cottonwood are i_n place to soften the streetscape, and to continue the existing rhythm and alignment of trees already established along the sidewalk. While the open space is limited, it is useable and partially sheltered from the elements by the existing trees. All proposed utilities will be undergrounded to lessen the visual impact. A snowmelt sidewalk is provided to limit the need for snow storage areas. In Section I(B)(2)(c), the applicant has committed to pave the entire width of the alley adjacent to Lot F provided that the score awarded in that category is in excess of 1 point. 9 (c) Energy Conservation. (maximum 3 points.) Considering the use of passive and/or active energy conservation techniques in the construction of the proposed development, orientation, efficient heating and cooling systems and solar including but not limited to insulation, glazing, passive solar energy devices; the extent to which the proposed development avoids wasting energy by excluding excessive lighting and inefficient woodburning devices; and the proposed development's location, relative to whether solar gain can be expected to reasonably result in energy conservation. The new building will be designed to maximize benefits in energy conservation and operating costs while minimizing system complexity. Energy conservation efforts will be directed toward selection and design of systems which have proven performance over extended periods of time. All energy conserv-ing devices will be simple to understand, operate, adjust and maintain so the efficiencies achieved can be reasonably maintained over the effective life of the building systems. The following specific conservation features will be incorporated in the detailed design of the project. (1) Insulation. The greatest opportunity for energy conservation occurs in the types of materials specified in the construction of the building envelope. An infiltration barrier wrap such as "Tyvek" will be installed around the entire building exterior which will significantly reduce infiltration. All penetrations of the wrap will be carefully caulked and sealed to further enhance the effectiveness of the barrier. Windows and doors with state-of-the-art closures and gasketing methods will be specified throughout, and bat and rigid insulation specifications will exceed minimum standards. Insulation values for the project's walls and roof will be R-28 and R-38 or better, respectively. In addition to the exterior barrier wrap and internal bat/rigid insulation, an interior vapor barrier will be provided. This vinyl vapor barrier will not only further decrease infiltration, but will tend to hold interior humidity levels at least 10% to 15% higher than exterior levels, resulting in a greater degree of occupant comfort at lower room temperatures. All penetrations of the vinyl vapor barrier such as at wall switches and outlets will be sealed. With the indi-vidual unit' s envelopes sealed and insulated, an air-to-air heat exchanger will be used to control the indoor environment while signifi-cantly reducing energy losses. (2) Mechanical Systems. Comfort heating will be provided utilizing high efficiency mechanical systems. Consideration will be given to integrated systems which provide optimum efficiency in the projection of both comfort level heating and domestic water heating. The use of individual 10 temperature controls for major occupancy areas will assure that building energy inputs can be matched to the occupants' daily use patterns. Although initial installation cost for high efficiency systems may be slightly higher than conventional systems, the long range effectiveness and efficiency in operation will be the governing selection criteria. Primary heating systems will also be selected and designed to incrementally match the seasonal and daily demands of the commercial spaces. (3) Plumbing. All plumbing fixtures and fittings will be of a low flow, low water consumption type. Faucet aerators and shower heads will be selected which provide the maximum apparent flow at relatively low actual flows. All plumbing will be fully insulated to prevent excessive water usage at the point of use while waiting for adequate temperatures to be achieved. Domestic water heater design will incorporate the latest technology, and may be integrated with heat recovery from the heating system. Should the final selection be a stand-alone water heater, it will incorporate all of the current pilot, flue and flame efficiency designs, as well as high efficiency storage tank insulation. (4) Glazing. All of the glazing in this project will be selected with the highest "R" value practical. Glazing located within six feet of the floor will be low "E" type to enhance the warmth radiating between occupant and glazing. The use of low "E" glass will permit a significant improvement in the occupant's sense of comfort because of its effectiveness in re-radiating interior warmth. In selecting interior finishes and colors, particularly in those rooms with south-facing glazing, the advantages of radiant absorption and mass heating will be considered. While the specific design intent is not to create a perfect passive environment, the design team will utilize proven techniques in enhancing the natural solar heating capacities within the finished interiors. (d) Amenities. (maximum 3 points.) Considering the provision of usable open space, pedestrian and bicycle ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters, and other common areas for users of the proposed development. As discussed i-n Section II, the design for the project responds to the HPC's desire to have the proposed building align with the storefronts of National Register buildings on either side, as suggested in the adopted Historic Guidelines. Because of this, none of the open space provided on-site complies with the current open space definition which requires a minimum depth of 10 feet. Any open space requirement would therefore have to be met through an open space payment-in-lieu. Under current requirements, the payment has been estimated to be $387,600; if required, the appraised value 11 of the land would be established upon receipt of an allocation. The applicant is requesting a code amendment to permit waiver of a payment-in-lieu fee when HPC favors locating the building in required open space; this is discussed in Section IV of this submission. Because the two landmark structures at each end of the block are built out to the sidewalk, there is little opportunity for amenities on either of these sites. The existing open space on the site of this proposal functions more as a space to be viewed by passersby from the outside, rather than as an area to enter and relax in, except of course, for the restaurant patrons. The proposal will respond to the needs of pedestrians and bikers in this block with the inclusion of two benches and a bike rack to be installed between the street trees. Alternatively, if the City has identified an alternate location for such improvements, the applicant will agree to install the equipment elsewhere. The site is not located directly on a bus route so no bus shelter is proposed. Pedestrian access in and around the project will be enhanced through the installation of a snowmelt system in the walkways on the north side of the project. Bicyclists are required to use the streets through the commercial core, as no bike trails are anticipated in this area under the present master plan. Ce) Visual Impact. (maximum 3 points.) Consider-ing the scale and location of the buildings in the proposed development to prevent infringement on designated scenic viewplanes. The height of the building, which ranges between 28 feet and 31 feet has been established to relate to both the recent addition to the Collins Block as well as to important architectural elements of the neighboring National Register buildings, and also to minimize the visual impact of the project. The overall height has been limited to generally align with the lower roof on the Brand Building; the height is approximately four feet below the parapet on the Collins Block. It is important to emphasize that the height of the building is well below the 40 foot height limit in the CC zone district. In addition, the Hotel Jerome Viewplane is higher than the zoning height limit when it crosses over the site at least 45 feet above the groundplane. This is the only viewplane which extends over the project site. The location of the building on the site has been established through several discussions of the project with the HPC which favored locating the building so that the first floor storefronts at each end of the building align with the adjacent 12 storefronts. In considering their decision, HPC took into account the relevant language of the adopted Historic District Guidelines. The project is consistent with established community goals relative to visual compatibility, as evidenced by the height limit established for the area, the Historic District Development Guidelines and HPC' s review and participation in the siting of the building. (f) Trash and utility access areas. (maximum 3 points.) Considering the extent to which required trash and utility access areas are screened from public view; are sized to meet the needs of the proposed development and to provide for public utility placement; can be easily accessed; allow trash bins to be moved by service personnel, and provide enclosed trash bins, trash compaction or other unique measures. We have included a request for Special Review of the trash/utility service area for the project in Section II(C). While the overall service area is more than twice that required, the alley frontage is three feet less than the Code requires (20 linear feet compacted to 23 feet required) because of an existing City transformer pad adjacent to the alley. Technically, the transformer pad should be considered an acceptable use of the service area, however. The proposed service area for this project can nonetheless accommodate five dumpsters stacked so that they can be rolled directly into the alley. This compares quite favorably with the trash facilities provided with other projects in the Commercial Core. In addition to being oversized, the proposed utility/trash service area is well organized, protected by a roof overhang and slightly elevated to minimize ice buildup. A gate will be provided as a visual screen of the trash area. 2. Availability of Public Facilities and Services (maximum 10 points). (a) Water Supply/Fire Protection. (maximum 2 points.) Considering the ability of the water supply system to serve the proposed development and the appli-cant' s commitment to install any water system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development. Fire protection facilities and services shall also be reviewed, considering the ability of the appropriate fire protection district to provide services according to established response times without the necessity of upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of available water pressure and capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment of the 13 applicant to provide any fire protection facilities which may be necessary to serve the proposed development. The Aspen Water Department has confirmed that adequate capacity exists to provide for the needs of the project without system extensions or upgrading. Water service will be provided through the existing 6" City water main in Hopkins. Estimated increased demand will be less than 5,000 GPD, as the proposed addition is limited to commercial uses. The Applicant commits to the payment of fees associated with the fixtures added as a result of the project. Fire protection service to the project can be provided without the necessity of upgrading fire protection facilities. The Fire Department is across Hopkins Street from the pro ject, and response time is estimated to be less than five minutes. Existing fire hydrants at the northwest corner of Hopkins and Galena and at the northwest corner of Hopkins and Mill provide adequate coverage for fire protection without further upgrading of fire protection facilities. Water pressure and capacity is adequate for fire protection flow. In discussing water service in the area of the project with the City Water Department, it is clear that water service is more than adequate in the area of the site. Therefore, we have discussed the possibility of participating in the cost of adding a main extension to serve a new hydrant at the corner of Main and Hunter Street. This is a location that has been identified by the Water Department as an area with inadequate hydrant coverage as well as a location for a needed main interconnect between the Hopkins Avenue and Main Street water lines. The applicant is prepared to commit $5,000 toward the installation of the main extension and hydrant. Since the location is not immediately adjacent to the project, however, this commitment is conditioned on an award by the Planning and zoning Commission in excess of 1 point, since it is clear that the project merits a score of one point without this additional improvement. The main extension and hydrant will not only increase fire protection in the area, but will also serve as a first step toward the interconnect desired by the Water Department. (b) Sanitary Sewer. (maximum 2 points. ) Considering the ability of the sanitary sewer system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any sanitary system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has confirmed that the capacity of the existing sewage collection 14 system is adequate to accommodate the project. Sewer service will continue to be provided through the existing 8" District line in the alley to the south of the site. This line flows to the west and connects to a 8" main in First Street which continues to the north toward the treatment plant. The Sanitation District has confirmed that some mi-nor point repairs need to be made in the alley in order to improve sewer service in the area. The applicant proposes to contribute $3,000 toward these repairs, to offset District expenses for these improvements, provided that the applicant is awarded an average score in this category in excess of 1 point. This commitment is in addition to the Applicant's commitment to the payment of any fees associated with increased sewer service to the project. 1 (C) Public Transportation/Roads. (maximum 2 points.) Considering the ability of the proposed development to be serviced by existing public transit routes. The review shall also consider the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed development without substantially altering existing traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or maintenance problems, overloading the existing street system or causing a need to extend the existing road network and consider-ing the applicant' s commitment to install the necessary road system improvements to service the increased usage attributable to the proposed development. The project is within three blocks of all RFTA bus routes, and the Rubey Park Transit Center. The site is also little more than one block from Aspen's pedestrian mall. The primary hours of operation for the commercial uses in the building will be approximately 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Because of the project's close proximity to the majority of accommodations and all bus routes, the daily auto trips generated by the new project is expected to be well within the capacity of existing streets in the area. Access for service vehicles will be from the alley between Mill and Galena Streets. Traffic generation of the project has been estimated based on a 1984 memo prepared by TDA, Inc. (see Exhibit 6). Using the parameters of that memo the project is expected to generate 92 daily one-way trips (46 round-trips) and 6 peak-hour one way trips (3 round-trips). In order to improve the road system -in the area, the applicant commits to repave the full width of the alley along the rear property line adjacent to Lot F, provided that the applicant is awarded an average score in this category in excess of 1 point. 15 (d) Storm Drainage. (maximum 2 points.) Considering the degree to which the applicant proposes to maintain historic drainage patterns on the development site. If the development requires use of the City's drainage system,, the review shall consider the commitment by the applicant to install the necessary drainage control facilities and to maintain the system over the long-term. Site topography presently directs surface drainage into Monarch Street where it is collected in the existing curb and gutter system and directed to the northwest of the site. The drainage concept for the project is to meet the requirements of the City of Aspen regulations as described in Section 7-1004C(4)(f). This will be accomplished by providing short- term on-site detention to maintain the historic rate of runoff for the 100-year storm from the undeveloped site. Prior to seeking a building permit for the project, the applicant will submit a drainage plan prepared by a qualified engineer to assure that the historical rate of runoff will be maintained. It is presently anticipated that surface drainage will be directed and collected through surface grading. Area drains will be located in exterior areas with hard surfaces and collected run-off will be routed via underground piping to drywell structures designed to discharge water at the rate of the 100-year storm from the undeveloped site. For off-site runoff 1 entering the site, measures will be taken to maintain historic drainage patterns and flows. The City's storm drainage system in the immediate vicinity of the project is adequate; there are, however, problems with the City's system to the west of the site, in the vicinity of 7th and Smuggler. There is not an adequate collection system in the area and water in the form of sheetflow presently runs across the streets and onto the adjoining private properties. In order to improve public facilities in the area, the applicant therefore proposes to commit $5,000 toward storm drainage improvements, provided that the applicant is awarded an average score in this category in excess of 1 point. (e) Parking. (maximum 2 points. ) Considering the provisions of parking spaces to meet the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed development as required by Art. 5, Div. 2, and considering the design of the parking spaces with respect to their visual impact, amount of paved surface, and convenience and safety. The proposed commercial project is withill comfortable walking distance (1,500 feet) of the majority of accommodations in the L/TR zone district. In addition, as stated previously, the project is within three blocks of all RFTA bus routes. 16 Because of increasing congestion in the commercial core as a whole, a growing number of Aspen's tourists arrive and depart the commercial core by taxi. The off-street parking requirement for commercial uses in the CC zone district is two spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable, which may be provided via a payment-in-lieu pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. In Section IV, the applicant is requesting an amendment to the text of the land-use regulations to eliminate the mitigation provision for existing space proposed to be demolished and rebuilt. When existing commercial space is to be retained, there is no parking requirement for that increment [Â§5-301(c)]. Because of the limited alley frontage and conflicts between service vehicles and parking in the alley, no off-street parking is possible. The applicant proposes to satisfy the off-street parking required for the project through a payment-in-lieu. If the code amendment is approved, the requirement is 14 spaces, requiring a payment of $210,000.00: 9,198-2,375=6,823 sq. ft. x 2/1000=13.6 (14) spaces 14 spaces x $15,000/space = $210,0000 In addition, in order to improve the availability of public parking in the area, the applicant proposes to make a payment of an additional $15,000.00 for one parking space beyond the requirement for the project, provided that the applicant is awarded an average score in this category in excess of 1 point. 3. Provision of Affordable Housing (maximum 15 points). Each Development Application shall be assigned po-ints for the provision of housing which complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City, and with the provisions of Sec. 8-109. The applicant commits to provide a payment-in-lieu under low-income (Category 1) standards in effect at the time a building permit is issued equivalent to 60% of the employees generated by the project. In Section IV of this submission, the applicant is requesting approval of an amendment to the text of the land use regulations to eliminate mitigation requirements for reconstructed commercial square footage. Proposing to satisfy the project's affordable housing requirement with a payment-in-lieu is necessary because prior discussions with HPC indicated that the committee was reluctant to approve a three story solution for the site. If the code amendment is approved, employee generation for the project is 27.29 employees based on the proposed program of 9,198 sq.ft. of net leasable retail and office space, less 17 footage of 6,823 sq.ft.), and using an employee generation factor of 4.0/1,000 sq.ft. of net leasable. The applicant's required payment-in-lieu would therefore be $573,000, calculated as follows: 27.29 employees x 60% x $35,000 = $573,000 An employee generati.on factor of 4.0 employees per 1,000 sq.ft. of net leasable commercial space has been used because the Planning Office used this factor recently to determine the employee generation for a restaurant in the commercial core. Since restaurant facilities have traditionally been considered the highest employee generator among all uses listed in the housing guidelines, using the same factor for the proposed project is conservative. Approval of the method by which the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing shall be at the option of the Aspen City Council, upon the recommendation of the Commission. In evaluating the applicant's proposal, the advice of the City's housing designee shall be sought in considering the following factors: 1. Whether the City has an adopted plan to develop affordable housing with monies received from payment of affordable housing dedication fees. 2. Whether the City has an adopted plan identifying the applicant's site as being appropriate for affordable housing. 3. Whether the applicant's site is well suited for the development of affordable housing, taking into account the availability of services, proximity to employment opportunities and whether the site -is affected by environmental constraints to development or historic preservation concerns. 4. Whether the method proposed will result in employee housing being produced prior to or at the time the impacts of the development will be experienced by the community. 5. Whether the development itself requires the provision of affordable housing on-site to meet its service needs. 18 If the Council shall not approve the method by which the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing , the applicant shall be provided with direction as to which other method or methods would be preferable. 4. Bonus Points. (maximum four points.) Bonus points may be assigned when it is determined that a proposed development has not only met the substantive standards of Secs. 8-106(F)(1) through (3), but has also exceeded the provisions of these sections and achieved an outstanding overall design meriting recognition. 19 II. SPECIAL REVIEW PROCEDURES No development subject to Special Review shall be permitted unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the request, as discussed below. A. Special Review of Payment-in-lieu for Open Space. The open space requirement in the CC zone is 25% of the lot area, or 1,938 sq.ft. Approximately 132 sq.ft. of open area is provided along the sidewalk, however, along the sidewalk, this area does not meet the definition of open space because it is not 10 feet in depth. The P&Z may approve a reduction in open space by Special Review; under current regulations a payment-in-li-eu for that portion of the open space not provi.ded must be paid, based on the appraised value of the unimproved land. In Section IV of this application, the applicant is requesting an amendment to this provision of the code to allow a waiver of this payment when the HPC determines that provision of all or a portion of the open space is inappropriate on the site. If the proposed open space code amendment is not approved, it is estimated that the payment-in-lieu of open space (based on an estimated value of $200 per square foot for the unimproved land, and using a total of 1938 square feet of required open space to be developed) would be $387,600: 1938 sq. ft. x $200.00 = $387,600.00 For reduction of required open space in the CC zone, the applicant must demonstrate compliance with the following standard: 1. Provision of less than the Required Open Space On-Site is more Consistent with the Character of Surrounding Land Uses than would be the Provision of Open Space According to the Standard: Response: Both of the landmark structures on the block are built out to the property line, in the traditional manner of the late 1800's. While a limited amount of open area was approved recently for the small addition to the Collins Block, this area nonetheless does not comply with the current open space definition and has been approved as a variance. 20 In its conceptual approval of this proposal, HPC requested that the proposed building be moved forward on the site so that the architectural elements at either end of the building are located at the property line, in the same plane as the two historic structures. The applicant has complied with this request. This is consistent with the general guideline of Â§7-404(A)(3) which states that "it may be inappropriate to have open space on the site when other buildings along the street front are built to the property line. 1, B. Special Review of Reduction in Required Off-Street Parking. In the CC zone, the parking requirement is 2 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. of net leasable for commercial expansion. A payment-in-lieu for on-site parking of $15,000.00 per space may be approved by Special Review by the P&Z under Â§7-404(B). Because of the limited amount of alley frontage, and the need to maintain an adequate trash/utility service area, it is not possible to provide on-site parking for this project. The payment-in-lieu of parking is $210,000 calculated as follows: Net leasable expansion: 9,198 (proposed) - 2,375 (existing) = 6,823 sq. ft. Off-street parking required for commercial space: 2 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. x 6,823 sq.ft. = 14 spaces required Parking payment-in-lieu required: $15,000/space x 14 spaces = $210,000 In determining whether to accept the payment, the Commission shall take into consideration the following factors: 1. The Practical Ability of the Applicant to Place Parking On-Site; Response: The project's alley frontage is limited to only 30 feet, of which 10 feet is subject to a City easement. In order to provide required trash storage, it is therefore not practical to provide off-street parking for the project. 21 2. Whether the Parking Needs of the Development have been Adequately Met On-site; Response: As discussed below, while no on-site parking is provided, adequate off-street parking is readily available within close proximity of the site. 3. Whether the City has Plans for a Parking Facility which would better meet the needs of the Development and the Community than would Location of the Parking On-site; Response: The project site is located only two blocks from the recently completed parking structure. That facility is presently underutilized; rather than encourage additional traffic to circulate to off-street parking in the commercial core it seems preferable now that an alternative exists, to encourage long-term parking at the City facility. The applicant's payment in-lieu would also help defray the cost of the facility, which exceeded cost estimates. C. Special Review of Reduction in Trash and Utility Access Requirements. In the CC zone district, a minimum area of 20 linear feet along the alley with a minimum vertical clearance and depth of 10 feet is required for a utility/trash service area for a project of up to 6,000 sq.ft. of net leasable floor area under the provisions of Â§5-210(D). For each 1200 sq. ft. of additional net leasable, the length must be increased by 1 foot. With 9,198 sq. ft. of net leasable, the required service area for this project is therefore an area 23 feet in length and 10 feet in depth, or 230 sq. ft. of area. The utility/trash service area proposed is 30 linear feet with a depth of 20 feet or an area of 600 sq. ft.; however, the existing City transformer easement reduces the alley frontage to 20 feet, three feet less than required. The Applicant is requesting special review approval by the P&Z of the proposed utility/trash service area. The review criteria to be considered by P&Z in its consideration of the appropriateness of a reduction in trash and utility access requirements (See Â§7-404C) are as follows: 22 1. Adequacy of the Proposed Utility Trash/Service Area: Response: The proposed service area for this project is two times as large as that required for the project in terms of its square footage. 2. The Adequacy of Access. Response: The alley behind this project has historically been one of the most disorganized of all the alleys in the Commercial , Core, due to the absence of off-alley trash storage. However, with the construction of the large service area proposed for this project as well as that for the Lane Parcel immediately adjacent to the site, access in the alley should be improved upon significantly. 3. Measures to Facilitate Trash Removal. Response: The proposed trash storage area is well organized, protected from the elements by a roof overhang, and will be slightly elevated to minimize ice buildup. At least five 6'8" x 3'6" trash containers can be provided directly off of the alley outside of the easement area; this is more than enough containers to adequately serve the needs of the project. 4. Provisions for Trash Compaction. Response: In the past, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission has investigated trash compactor systems for the Commercial Core area. Such a system will only be feasible if all the building owners in each block are prepared or required to participate in the cost of such a system. The owner does not presently anticipate a need for an individual trash compactor system, given the size of the service area provided for the project. 23 5. Adequacy of Area for Utilities. Response: A portion of the service area will be set aside for transformers and other utility equipment for the building. These facilities will be more than adequate to serve the needs of the building. 6. Assurance That the Access Area Will Be Constructed. Response: The service area as proposed is an integral part of the Applicant's GMQS Submission. It will not be possible to obtain a building permit for the building unless the service area is included on the construction documents as approved. 1 24 III. REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM GMQS PROCEDURES FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING BUILDING [Â§8-104(A)(1)(a)] Under the provisions of Â§8-104(A), the Planning Director shall exempt from GMQS procedures the reconstruction of an existing commercial building. Under current provisions, mitigation for affordable housing and parking is required in order to replace existing commercial square footage proposed to be demolished. In Section IV of this submission, the applicant is requesting a code amendment to delete the mitigation requirement. 1 1 25 IV. REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE LAND-USE REGULATIONS. (ARTICLE 7, DIVISION 11) The applicant is requesting approval of three proposed code changes. The first has to do with a technical oversight which is already under consideration by the HPC. Under the current language of Â§7-602, no structure (whether it is on the historic inventory or not) which is within an historic district can be demolished unless the HPC makes a series of findings. One of the required findings is that the structure must not be structurally sound. This and other required findings effectively block the demolition of any structure which is in an historic district regardless of its historic significance. The proposed amendment language included here is only one method of correcting the oversight. HPC is presently considering other alternatives to resolve the problem. The other two proposed code amendments are intended to deal with provisions of the code which affect the viability of commercial projects. The City adopted a series of code amendments several years ago which dramatically increased the cost of exactions for commercial projects competing for a GMQS allocation in the CC zone, including an increase in the housing requirement from 35% to 60% of employee generation, an off-street parking requirement and payment-in-lieu provision, significant restrictions on what may be counted in open space, together with an open space payment-in-lieu provision, and elimination of the credit for existing commercial space when demolition is proposed. Since these provisions were adopted, only one application requesting a conunercial allocation of approximately 3,000 sq. ft. in the CC/Cl category has been submitted. In the meantime, the City has held meetings to discuss the dramatic escalation in rents for retail and office space in the downtown area and its consequent effect on the loss of locally-oriented retail and office business. The Planning Office expects to continue these discussions in the future but as yet has not made any concrete recommendations. The first of the two substantive code amendments establishes a waiver of the open space payment-in-lieu fee when HPC requires that a new building be located within the required open space in order to comply with the adopted historic guidelines. The second substantive code amendment eliminates the mitigation requirements for commercial space when demolition and reconstruction is proposed. 26 A. General Application Requirements (Â§6-202): (1) Application Form is attached as Exhibit 1. (2) Applicant's Letter of Consent is attached as Exhibit 2. (3) The street address of the parcel is 409 East Hopkins Avenue. The legal description of the site is the north 80 feet of Lots D &E and all of Lot F, Block 88, Townsite of Aspen. (4) Disclosure of ownership is attached as Exhibit 3. (5) The Vicinity Map, included as Exhibit 4, locates the subject parcel. 1 (6) Public notice for an amendment to the text of the Land-Use Code [Â§6-205(E)(4)(d)], requires only publication in the newspaper by the Planning Office. Under the provisions of Â§7-1103, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Land-Use Code may be submitted at any time during the year. (7) Compliance with Substantive Review Standards: In reviewing an amendment to the text of the Land-Use Code, the Commission and City Council shall consider the following review standards of Â§7-1102: 1. "Whether the proposed amendments are in conflict with any applicable provisions of the Land Use Code." 2. "Whether the proposed amendments are consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan." 3. "Whether the proposed amendments are compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. 4. "The effect of the proposed amendments on traffic generation and road safety." 5. "Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. " 27 6. "Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment." 7. "Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. " 8. "Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendments." 1 9. "Whether the proposed amendments would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter." B. Precise Wording of the Proposed Amendments to the Text of Chapter 24: 1. Amendment regarding demolition of non-historic structures in an Historic District. In order to correct the provision which prohibits the demolition of any structurally sound structure regardless of historic significance, the following text changes are proposed: Amend Â§7-602(A). Demolition, Partial Demolition or Relocation, by deleting the phrase "or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay District" from each of the first three paragraphs of the Section. The first three paragraphs would then read as follows: Sec. 7-602. Demolition, Partial Demolition and Relocation. A. General. No demolition of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, established pursuant to Sec. 7-709, shall be permitted unless the demolition is approved by the HPC because it meets the standards of Sec. 7-602(B). No partial demolition and removal of a portion of any Historic Landmark shall be permitted unless approved by the HPC as necessary for the renovation of the structure, and because it meets the standards of Sec. 7-602(C), or unless the partial demolition and removal is exempt because it creates no change to the exterior of the structure and has no impact on the character of the structure. No relocation of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, established pursuant to Section 7-709 shall be permitted unless 28 the relocation is approved by the HPC because it meets the standards of Section 7-602(D)(1) through (4). When deemed appropriate due to the significance of the project, the HPC may require a Performance Guarantee in a form acceptable to the City Attorney as assurance that the demolition, partial demolition, or relocation will be completed as represented. 2. Amendment of Â§7-404 (A) ( 3) to allow waiver of open 1 space payment-in-lieu fees upon approval by HPC. Under current Special Review requirements, the waiver of payment-in-lieu fees for open space is only permitted in the CC zone when the HPC approves the relocation of an Historic Landmark into required open space. The adopted Historic District Development Guidelines, however, strongly encourage new proposals to maintain the storefront edge at the sidewalk at the expense of open space area. For instance, for renovation and restoration projects , the following language is included in the Guidelines: A. Streetscape: "It is important to maintain the elements of the streetscape which make the commercial core a pedestrian environment... (including)... access to the display windows at the sidewalk edge." B. Setback: "Buildings in the commercial core form an edge along the back of the sidewalk. This is one of the most important characteristics of the commercial core. Maintain the existing edge created by the building facades at the sidewalk. The building facade is the most effective way of maintaining the edge . . ." l C. Massing: "The vertical plane of the building facade at the street edge should be maintained . . . For new construction, equally strong encouragement to build at the sidewalk edge is incorporated into the guidelines: "New structures do not need to damage the historic integrity if they are designed to respect the relationships among the buildings that have already been established. Broad-scale characteristics such as 29 the alignment (of buildings) at the sidewalk should be studied." A. Setback: "Plazas or courts that break the continuity of the facade alignment should be avoided . . . Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk edge. Most building were built right up to the sidewalk. This alignment defines the public space and the building edge. This basic alignment of buildings at the sidewalk should be maintained." By adopting these Guidelines, the City has endorsed a concept of maintaining the pedestrian experience at the sidewalk in the commercial core. The open space requirement in the CC zone has been retained, however. Consequently, applicants who comply with the guidelines in order to obtain HPC approval are presently required to make a payment-in-lieu equal to the provided. This further threatens the viability of all new unimproved value of the land when less than 25% open space is commercial projects in the CC zone. 1 One way this conflict between the adopted HPC guidelines and zoning regulations can be remedied is to amend a portion of the language of Â§7-404(A)(3). The relevant paragraph presently reads: "When the HPC approves the on-site relocation of an Historic Landmark into required open space, such that the amount of open space on- site is reduced below that required by this Code, the requirements of this section shall be waived." Proposed language: "When, in order to assure compatibility with the Historic District and Historic Landmark Development Guidelines, the HPC approves the on-site relocation of an Historic Landmark or the sitinq of a proposed structure within required open space, such that the amount of open space on-site is reduced below that required by this Code, the requirements of this section shall be waived. 3. Amendment of Â§8-104(A)(1)(a)(1) to eliminate mitigation requirements for replacement of demolished commercial or office floor area. Under present 30 regulations, the Planning Director is required to grant an exemption from GMQS procedures for the reconstruction of an existing commercial building which does not expand commercial floor area. In order to obtain such approval, however, the applicant is required to provide affordable housing and parking for the reconstructed floor area as if it were newly constructed space. At the time of adoption, the intent behind the regulation appeared to be two-fold - to first discourage the demolition of smaller historic structures remaining in the commercial zone districts and secondly to avoid awarding full credit for outdated, inefficient or otherwise substandard structures which could not be expected to generate an equivalent number of employees and parking demand as a replacement structure. With regard to the first concern, continued strengthening of regulations regarding demolition of historic structures has provided increased protection for historic structures of significance to the point that they would no longer be jeopardized if this provision were deleted. With regard to the second concern, a situation such as the applicant's, where the existing structure is sound and fully viable as a commercial structure, was not given sufficient consideration at the time of adoption. While the existing structure is at odds with current HPC guidelines (the use of modular or jumbo brick is clearly discouraged and the split level concept is also inconsistent with virtually all historic structures in the District) it is nonetheless fully occupied and employee generation and parking , demand is as great as the replacement square footage will be. It is inconsistent to require an applicant who is replacing equivalent commercial space to pay these exactions when an applicant seeking an allocation to expand an existing structure is not required to pay exactions for the space to be retained. While the goals behind the regulations may very well have merit, nonetheless in practice the regulation discourages creative solutions in some cases. The applicant requests that the language be deleted until a more equitable regulation can be resolved. 31 Current language of Â§8-104(A)(1)(a)(1), with language requested to be deleted shown as struck: "1. General. Development which the Planning Director shall exempt shall be as follows: reconstruction of existing building: a. Remodelinq, restoration, or (1) The remodeling, restoration or reconstruction of an existing commercial lodge or multi-family building which does not expand commercial or office floor area or create additional dwelling, hotel or lodge units or involve a change of use. No bandit unit shall be remodeled, restored or reconstructed unless it has first been legalized pursuant to Sec. 5-510. To obtain approval to reconstruct demolished commercial or office floor area, the applicant shall demonstrate that affordable housing and parking io provided for the reconstructed floor area as if it wcrc newly constructed opacc. 1 32 l EXHIBIT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1) Project Name 409 East Hopkins Commercial Proiect 2) Project Location North 80 feet of Lots D and E and all of Lot F, Block 88, Aspen Townsite 3) Present Zoning CC 4) Lot Size 7823 sq. ft 5) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone # Laura Dorinelley, Box 589, Aspen, Colorado 81612 6) Representative's Name, Address & Phone # Joe Wells, 602 Midland Park Place, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-8080 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply): - Conditional Use - Conceptual SPA - Conceptual Historic Dev. X Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. - 8040 Greenline - Conceptual PUD - Minor Historic Dev. Stream Margin Final PUD Historic Demolition Mountain View - Subdivision - Historic Designation Plane - Condominiumiza- _1_ Text/Map -1_ GMQS Allotment tion Amendment - Lot Split/Lot GMQS Exemption Adjustment - 8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures; approximate sq. ft.; number of bedrooms; any previous approvals granted to the property). Two story split-level commercial building of 2,375 sq. ft. of net leasable, outdoor dining for restaurant on adiacent property and open Space. 9) Description of Development Application Reqeust for commercial GMOS allotment, special review and related code amendments for a two story commercial structure of 9,198 sq. ft. of net leasable space plus a full basement. 10) Have you attached the following: _1_ Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents X Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents X Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application EXHIBIT 2 September 15, 1990 Ms. Amy Margerum Planning Director City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Ms. Margerum: My letter is to confirm that I am the record owner of the north 80 feet of Lots D and E and all of Lot F, Block 88, Aspen Townsite; I have requested that the enclosed application for a commercial GMQS allocation, special review and amendments to the text of the Aspen land use regulations be filed by Joseph Wells. Sincerely, Amle-/9- ~-6/0 A-1 A/Jâ‚¬ ON L /9 L Laura --nnelley- (4676) 1 EXHIBIT 3 DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 1 l 35 146761 1 71* L Oinmoakveallfl ~LM Land Title Insurance Compaiiy COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A ~ 1. Effective date: 07/19/90 @ 8:00 A.M. Case No. PCT-4853 C2 2. Policy or policies to be issued: (a)ALTA Owner's Policy-Form B-1970 Amount $ (Rev. 10-17-70 & 10-17-84) or 10/21/87 Premium s PROPOSED INSURED: CUNNINGHAM INVESTMENT CO., INC., A COLORADO CORPORATION (b)ALTA Loan Policy, Amount $ l (REV. 10-21-87) Premium S PROPOSED INSURED: 1 (c)Alta Loan Construction Policy, 1975 Amount S (Rev. 10-17-84) Premium $ PROPOSED INSURED: Tax Cert. S 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interesu in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested ~ in: LAURA DONNELLEY ~ 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOTS D. E AND F, BLOCK 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, EXCEPTING . THEREFROM THE SOUTHERLY 20 FEET OF LOTS D AND E. BLOCK 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Countersigned at: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS - This Commitment is invalid ASPEN, CO. 81611 unless the Insuring 303-925-1766 Provisions and Schedules Fax 303-925-6527 A and B are attached. Authorized officer or agent i 13 Lommonwealtn ~LEI Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE 8-SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ~ ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be ~ insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: 1. Deed from : Laura Donnelley to : Cunningham Investment Co., Inc., a Colorado Corporation ~ 2. Certificate of Incorporation or Certificate of Good Standing issued by the Secretary of State of Colorado for Cunningham Investment Company, Inc., a Colorado Corporation. 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Real Estate Transfer 1 Tax as established by Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990) has been paid or exempted. ~ 4. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Declaration of Sale, Notice to County Assessor, as required by H.B. 1288, Notice to County Assessor, has been complied with and that no fees or penalties exist or are currently due. ~ 5. Certificate of Nonforeign Status of Individual Transferor signed by Laura Donnelley. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 1 PG.1 ~ the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-4853 A and B are attached. ~ commollweallil Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE 8 SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material . heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Reservations and exceptions as contained in the Deed from the City of Aspen providing as follows: that no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws; and subject to all the conditions, limitations and restrictions contained in Section 2386 of the Revised Statues of the United States, in Deed recorded in Book 79 at Page 32. 8. Terms, conditions and agreements as dontained in instrument recorded in Book 239 at Page 436. 9. Easement over the Southerly 7.0 feet of the Easterly 10.0 feet of Lot F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, as set forth in Decree recorded June 20, 1979 in Book 371 at Page 85. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 1 PG.1 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-4853 A and B are attached. 1,0 I~~ Commonwealtn / 6.2 Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE B-SECTION 2 CONTINUED Exceptions numbered NONE are hereby omitted. ' ~ The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any, shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents 1 or in Acts authorizing issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. l 1 NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners' closing under 1 circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage" . ~ This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-4853 A and B are attached. ~ LU11111/UtiN CL11611 Land Title Insurance Company ENDORSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR OWNER'S POLICY The following Endorsements will be issued in connection with the Owner's Policy to be issued hereunder. NONE REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 1.2,3 & 4 WILL BE DELETED FROM THE OWNER'S POLICY UPON COMPLETION OF ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS NOTE: A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and materialmens liens executed by the persons indicated must be furnished to the Company, together with any additional premium required by the filed rates of the Company. Upon receipt of these items, pre-printed item number 4 will be deleted, or modified from the owners/mortgage policy when issued, at the descretion of Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company. NOTE: Current survey, certified by a Registered Colorado Land Surveyor must be delivered to and approved by the Company for deletion of Printed Exception No. 3. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule A-Section 1 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-4853 A and 8 are attached. ne Commitment For Title Insurance Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, herein called the company, for a valuable con- sideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and ~ to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance o f such policy or policies o f title insurance and all liability and obligations ~ hereunder shall cease and terminate 120 days after the e ffective date hereo f or when the policy or policies committed for shall be issued, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Company has caused its Corporate Name and Seal to be hereunto affixed; this instrument, including Commitment, Conditions and Stipulations attached, to become valid when countersigned by an Authorized Officer or Agent of the Company. COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ililll~ Attest: President 8% LÂ«t ~ 900 *i~ Conditions and Stipulations 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, Lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise 1 acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the de finition o f Insured in the form o f policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions, the Conditions and Stipulations, and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of poucy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. American Land Title Association Commitment 1966 Cover Page Form 1004-8 EXHIBIT 4 VICINITY MAP l 36 It - 0 HALLAM RIO GRANDE PARKING ROARING ~~'42'kx FORK RIVER ~ BLEEKER i. 1 1- -------- -----II--+ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MAIN I 1 1--- 11 1 1 li~ -i I I i V 4 1 it 11 1 LGRATAT--1 0 ~ Cl 0 1--7 i 1 11. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HYMAN | ------ | I r--- - -- 1 11 1 ' i ets 1 .=1 1 1 1 1 1 RMF ' 1' li=-5 1 1 ' L2 ' 1-Â·2-h-* 1.,2.ri--2 1 COOPER -4=L. 1,53/9-=7 -------r------ 1 ZI 1 1 199 rl tw Vi- J NCI I 1 lr' 4 El a K- I N; RUBEY 4 li 0 1 1. eli .1 10 DURANT I T J - I l VICINITY MAP AT NO ICALI MONARC EXHIBIT 5 MAP OF TRANSIT ROUTES 1 37 14676) ....................0 4/.V.~ iwl?FT#716*Ar;fiefi~$41. AS PEN .,l ,~ASPEN MOUNTAIN . ,-,As# b.:\\ ..'lilliwillillillaillillillifilibl:liti ....44 10 Alhc,01 3/ .'44. i T )-- .2..1 Vil . :lk #1.l .. . 1 k ........ - f J '~ *~ASPEN 9.41 4 :>41.~ 3 Mo,intain --16#LA r.tr- 1 W 'IA[)'W' "|'"~~~~ 7 HIGHLANDS *IleÂ¥ 8 ~ tril. D-- . Ind'pendenc' P...% ' .... -I. \\ .......1 Â£-1 1 J[-lE-_3 -1 Â«11312 â‚¬iI--3 E-11--1] a * G- 2 VALLEY M Â£AWL-44612406'7 A""M""lillillnlmill,Ul,N 1 li i 103 i â€¢ 1â€¢â€¢Aâ€¢â€¢Xâ€¢â€¢Mâ€¢' .--1 #99/ PUU,4 O 00 ' 41-79< 1 1 1-, .... -i L 31 . CJFH/ki 99!J'10 11'VWJ"'9' , < 1/ '--r#~ i~ Â·...4,4 1 1\ . : / . Ul ......... .* I[Lk/Â·-~.Â»tÂ·-Â·~ - 31Ii] Ell . J [-1 -1 [J / i SMLK.C.L.LA MOUNTAIN Â»\ .1 1 lid ]El El[~ j.(3 ~~ --31 & I ./' 1...*'/ Â·*21 Ahâ€¢usic FESTIVAL ' ~ StÂ¢JEAKING ~% iÂ· .~~ ) Rr'SIC T.NT . f Vt,-1 \ ASPEN INSTITUTE SNOWBUNNY ~ MTN. VALLEY----- Figure 1. Transit Routes SILVERKING .............. HIGHLANDS 00000000, SNOWBUNNY MUSIC FESTIVAL --- COUNTY ROUTES I1111111111 SKIERS SHUTTLE .... Source: Aspen/Pltkin Coun~y_Transit Development Program -FIQ,41 - EXHIBIT 6 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM REGARDING TRAFFIC GENERATION FOR COMMERCIAL USES TDA, INC. 38 Â£46761 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Joe Wells Date: July 20, 1984 Doremus and Company 29.0 Job: #1299 KS 49 From: Chris Deffebach, Bill EagerV nactmemo.cjd Subject: Non-Accessory Commercial Space Description The purpose of this memo is to describe the transportation elements in Aspen code Section 24-11.5 that are affected by the proposed 4,500 sq. ft. of non-accessory commercial space in the Aspen Lodge development. First, let me explain the basis of our estimates before proceeding into the specific questions raised in the code. Transportation and parking impacts associated with the residential and commercial development for the proposed Aspen Lod~e have been described in detail in previous technical memorandums. Included in these documents was the parking and transportation impacts associated with accessory commercial space. It has been previously assumed that accessory retail space would be oriented entirely to Lodge residents or those within walking distance and would not generate additional vehicular traffic. With 4,500 sq. ft. of non- accessory retail uses, there would be some additional traffic, though the amount would be quite small compared to total Lodge volumes. Specifically, we estimate that the commercial space would generate 40 person trip ends per 1,000 sq. ft. and 10 auto driver trip ends per 1,000 sq. ft. This results in 180 daily person trip ends and 45 auto trip ends. During the peak hour, approximately 6 percent, or 3 vehicles trips would be generated by the non-accessory commercial space. The number of additional trips generated is small because: 1. Aspen is an unusual situation, 2. most of the shoppers attracted to the commercial space would be pedestrians in downtown Aspen, and 3. some would drive to downtown, but would have multiple destinations. 1 TDA, Aspen Lodge, Top of Mill, 700 S. Galena and Summit Place Transportation Study, November 18, 1984 and TDA, Aspen Lodge, Top of Mill, 700 Galena and Summit Place Parking Study, March 30, 1984. (This latter report revised the parking figures.) I TDA . INC. 57 The following discussion addresses the transportation elements in Aspen Lodge 24-11.5 as they relate to the 4,500 sq. ft. non-accessory commercial spaces. Section 24-11.5 (1)(ee) o Estimated traffic count increases on adjacent streets resulting from the proposed development. The 4,500 sq. ft. of non-accessory commercial space would generate approximately 3 vehicle trips per peak hour.This represents 2 percent of the net Lodge project peak hour traffic. o Hours of principal daily usage. The retail space would be open between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. o On and off-street parking to be supplied. The non-accessory commercial space will not alter the number of on and off-street parking spaces supplied by the Aspen Lodge and Condominium development. o Location of alternate transit means. - Location of bus routes: The transfer station for all city and county buses is located at Rubey Park, which is directly across the street from the proposed commercial space. The city transit system includes nine routes that provide service throughout the city as well as to Mountain Valley, the Highlands and Snowmass. The county also operates service to Snowmass, as well as two routes going down valley to El Jebel and Glenwood Springs. The close proximity of these transit routes to.the. proposed project would minimize the need for retail patrons who are not Lodge guests to use their car. 1 58 - Location of bicycle and pedestrian routes. Pedestrian and bicycle access to the proposed commercial site will be promoted with the construction of bicycle and pedestrian improvements proposed by the Aspen Lodge develop- ment. These improvements include: . a pedestrian/bike path along the perimeter of the site that will connect with the Ute-Benedict bike path, . contribution toward sidewalk construction and reconstruction along streets in the Lodge Improvement District, . new crosswalk paying at the intersections of Durant and Mill Streets and Durant and Galena Streets, . enriched paying and benches along Mill Street, benches in scattered nooks along the bike path on Lodge property. These improvements will increase the accessibility for pedestrians and bicycles to the commercial space. o Auto disincentives. Since 80 percent of the person-trips generated by the retail space are assumed to be made by Lodge guests or by walking, the most important auto disincentives would be oriented toward employees. The Aspen Lodge will sponsor housing for all Lodge employees, including those employed in the non-accessory commercial space. To discourage the use of autos by employees, the Lodge will: - locate all Lodge sponsored employee housing within walking distance of the Lodge or on a transit route, - purchase transit passes for any employee that needs one to commute to work, - Provide an Aspen Lodge shuttle for seasonal employees residing down valley. 59 Section 24-11.5 (2)(cc) o Motor vehicle circulation, parking, bus stops and improvements for privacy. Landscaping for the commercial space will be completed as part of the landscape plan for Aspen Lodge. This plan provides privacy for motor vehicle circulation, parking, bus and transit stops on- site as shown on the site plan. Section 24-11.5 (2)(dd) o Public transportation and road capacity. The proposed commercial development will have little impact on the public transportation system because most person-trips (80%) will be made by Lodge guests and residents. The few auto trips generated by the commercial space during the peak hour could also be expected to have minimum impact on the road capacity. This impact is even smaller when the high probability that these trips are multi-destinational is considered. To determine the impact of projected generated pedestrian volumes on the streets serving the Lodge, net Lodge pedestrian volumes were added to background pedestrian volumes. The Lodge is expected to generate an additional 3 pedestrians per minute at the most frequented intersection (crossing ~urant at Mill street) during the peak hour (winter, 4-5:00 p.m.). The pedestrian volumes were combines with vehicular volumes to assess potential circulation problems. The intersection, with projected pedestrian and vehicular volumes, was found to represent average conditions in the central areas of most towns and appears to present minor potential for vehicular/pedestrian conflicts. Although the commercial space will generate only a fraction of the total Lodge pedestrian trips, capacity on the adjacent streets appears adequate to accommodate the total projected pedestrian and vehicular volumes. 2 TDA, Technical Memo to John Doremus, July 2, 1984 60 Section 24-11.5 (2)(ee) No parking is required for commercial space in the CL zone according to Section 24-4.5. 61 EXHIBIT 7 IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 39 446764 111 1 1 j E. HOPKINS AVE. (1500 ) .... I-. ./ -URS < 21--0-75 El 11 Â°TAEET LIG-T -- ~---------r LEGEND AND NOTES cc-,c â€¢VAL.. I -- DETAIL I .CA DETA, ~_ 4 WALL T,4,5 .rAVE. CON,- 1 C..2 ki -_ 0/ AL /1// '4.9// N. A- 1 7C. 6-1 C -Z . CMâ€¢21 62 D 90 11 AUGUST .i ....1 , VIA25 LeEI> i./ TIE IF*EPA....... I. OF / ENCROAmMEN-1 0 Â·1- 0 It' 1 WATER VALVE P I - 5Â¥XIII .--J . 6 .1-0 U I FENCEE 2 ./.LiTI F~LE I mllili Â£49 . ..7 ZS/4-7 aDMM,-TMENT FOR irril INSuAhÂ£-E Coe,E kio COMMONWEALY. k AND 'll LE INSURANCLE COMA~NI PC--7 4eS' CL DATED 07~ 19/910 WAS OICD AN T Mt ' PREPANKAnc=,4 OF 7)416 SolvE./ ..1.-_r- ~ --- -- E- ------ -----~ i . ~ASPe. OF .EA.ikIG:25 Â·JE CORN~. eLOCC Kee OISK 1/,/9 AND W C r, 7/E. NE CORNER MU,&1.0 1 4[ OF 8,6.- 6, P. IN . I.EE_-T . 4.-00 43'Â· W 144 7 D Vt I .AE. lee E IF ~ 4 F 3 C .....AP' 3 C ./.JURE J CERTIFICATION ('N -1'S- C.'ll"W GO i.') C -m-L i um, 0. f: UnAR,=482=5 i V ---1 955 00 -t=' '2-43- =-Llu. 1-Movt... 0,5 i. 8Â£0~ /10- n e~ 4 --0,,Â· UN Ul,.â€ž .~.Ulâ€¢IEN~CM. -, DUCul~NTS 01 0~4~01Â«~ NOT ~~Uto IO 1,â‚¬ 5.., 10...1 _I.-4 i.*.11- Ill 25947 W ...~~In> ro . AL]:I. DON. ELLE. %0/ 1300â€¢~ 3, PAL>E Â£ C.LÂ»ali,UG~-IAM ]NVESTMENT co , i,Gc ALLEY BLOCK 88 P=NED , 04"<IJ#'EAL T '1 1 AND TITLE INSURANCE_ ce,i-rÂ¥ I 40 Id ) 0 1.1 Z. 1 VI C IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 01= '1- uZ>r-% . E AND F /4 0,2 )i ee r A..-|* TWE 200-i,CAL' U> CLET D AN'. E .11-I AND .CÂ»4'NS ITC. O. ff .0*Â»,JJ eUIL.,r.,e ENCIOAC.... AS.... pir.'. Und.9-Tr , GOLDA ACDCJ EMAIE-Â£> .le, O,/ * 90 . 1. PREP..10 I. OETAI LA OCTAIL . 2,0 b Gâ€¢.ENA St NT/ ./ S Aspen Survey Engineef i, In, 1.111( & 4 LN,/i, L ir,M'ri,k.i'. Â£â€žAl .0,1 9,5 3.1. .liM -M' I.GN Â·W~, Ofâ€¢. 1 IN râ€ž 1 I .-V, A~IEM . .'.1.1 g. 1,f'~CL' - - DEFECT â€ž4 *.* 4.--Â§ M# ./ ... I .......(.Il -- /.*. Â£,Ar. JOB NO. I-71:55 1 EXHIBIT 8 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROPERTY (4676) 4 0 Can Am Aspen Developments Duane Robert and Margaret Whitfield Johnson 135 E. Cooper Ave. 1116 E. annabar Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 Phoenk Arizona 85020 Mill Street Plaza Associates The Bank of Aspen Suite 301A 119 S Mill St 205 S. Mil Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 Wheeler Square Associates, Inc. Gordon L Whitmer and Howard Ross c/o The Donald Fleisher Company 314 E Hyman Ave. 710 E Durant Ave Aspen, CO 81611 2nd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Camilla Sparlin William L Comcowich c/o Lillian Uvely Trustee of Robert Barnard Trust Box 2213 420 W Main St Aspen, CO 81612 Aspen, CO 81611 1 Chitwood Plaza Company Jesse J and Esther M Maddalone c/o David J Myler Central Bank Grand Junction 106 S Mill St Suite 202 2265 Tanglewood Rd. Grand Junction, CO 81503 Aspen, CO 81611 MaW Associates 205 S Mil St Marjorie P Jenkinson 403 W Hallam St Suite 301A Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 Ryanco Pannership Ud Harley Baldwin Suite 106 The Brand Buiding 201 N Mill St 205 S Galena St Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 Wendelin Associates Footloose Moccasin 9 Old Cross River Rd 210 S Mill St Snowmass Center #201 Katonah, NY 10536 Aspen, CO 81611 Mountain Enterprise Margaret M Dole 4001 Classen Blvd Box 8455 Oklahoma City, OK 73118 Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Art Investment, Ud. T. Michael Kantzer Number 8 6501 Vista Del Mar Playa Del Ray, CA 90293 1450 Sierra Vista Dr. Aspen, CO 81611 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 David and Kathleen Denson Hilis 01 Snowmass, Inc 170 East Gore Creek 170 E Gore Creek Val, CO 81657 Val, CO 81657 R. Braden and J McCormick Walter F Hampel Jr. Box 2874 Box 1034 Aspen, CO 81612 Aspen, CO 81612 Duvike Inc. Loma Alta Corporation Box 2238 6210 N Central Expressway Aspen, CO 81612 Dallas, TX 75206 S.A Levant America Loma Alta Corporation c/o Colonial Navigation Co., Inc Box 8105 #2240 Dallas, TX 75205 17 Battery Place New York, NY 10004 1 Ransom B. Woods, Jr. and Justine F. Woods Fritz and Erika Under Box 12288 3404 207th Ave. S.E. Aspen, CO 81612 Issquah, WA 98027 B and K Associates Amelia L Kopp and Robert L Zupancls 308 S Mil Box 100 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81612 Birkwood Associates Angeline M and Roy Griffith Box 3421 530 Walnut Aspen, CO 81612 Aspen, CO 81611 Us G Sorenson Bruce E. Carlson Box 9381 Box 3587 Aspen, CO 81612 Aspen, CO 81612 James E Cox and Anthony E Cos W. G. Bullock c/o Aerscape Umited Grant Bullock Trust 314 S Mill St Box 609 Aspen, CO 81611 Glerrwood Springs, CO 81601 Maurice Berriro BPO Elks Lodge No 224 Aspen Elks Lodge - No 224 Suite 912 Suite 21 3475 Mountain Stgreet 210 S Galena St Montreal, Quebec Canada H3G2A4 Aspen, CO 81611 1 SJA Assocmes, Ud Pitkin Center, Lid. Suite 207 Boo(4948 520 E Durant Ave Aspen, Co 81612 Aspen, CO 81611 Arcades Associates, Ud. Jerome H Michael Mason & Morse c/o Airscape Umited 514 E Hyman Ave 314 S Mill St Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 Laura Donnelly Sabbatini Sport Inc. P.O. Box 589 208 S. Mill St. Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 1 Theodore Koutsoubos Christine DiBartolo 419 E. Hyman Ave. 104 Magnolia Lane Aspen, CX) 81611 Covington, LA 70433 1 1 Bruce Konheim Glenroy Partners C/O Charles Israel P 0. Box 3677 Aspen, CO 81612