Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Technical Review Committee 2025-10-30TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT Thursday, October 30, 2025 11:00 a.m. Town Hall Board Room Estes Park, CO 80517 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER. 1.Introductions of TRC members, staff AGENDA APPROVAL CONSENT AGENDA 1.Technical Review Committee Minutes dated July 7, 2022 2.Delegate future approval of Minutes to the Chair 3.Architectural Review Committee Minutes dated October 21, 2025 (acknowledgment only) ACTION ITEM: 1. Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Preliminary Package John Cullen, Jack Moussseau applicants Order of Procedure for Hearing: Staff presentation Applicant team presentation Public Comment Committee discussion; motion and second; vote ADJOURN The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services, programs, and activities and special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available. October 24, 2025 1 2 The Town of Estes Park is committed to providing equitable access to our services. Contact us if you need any assistance accessing material at 970-577-4777 or townclerk@estes.org. Memo To: Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee From: Steve Careccia, Director Department: Community Development Date: October 23, 2025 Subject: Delegate Future Approval of Minutes to the Chair of the Technical Review Committee Objective: Allow the Chair of the Technical Review Committee (TRC) to approve all future meeting minutes of the TRC. Present Situation: Pursuant to the Stanley Historic District Master Plan, a TRC shall be convened for the purpose of reviewing a specific project and rendering a decision on whether that project complies with the Master Plan. The TRC consists of five members – two public sector representatives, two private sector representatives appointed from a list approved by the property owner, and the Town Administrator, who also serves as Chair and appoints the other four members. Proposal: The Stanley Historic District Master Plan provides guidance for the convening of a TRC. However, the Master Plan does not provide clear guidance on the administration of the meeting (e.g., notice, minutes, etc.). As such, staff treat these meetings like other development review meetings, providing public notice and taking minutes, among other actions. But, with the TRC membership project specific and thus ever-changing, and with meetings occurring very infrequently, the process for approving meeting minutes could be better defined. Therefore, staff proposes the Chair, who is the only constant member of the TRC, be delegated the authority to approve all meeting minutes. 3 Action Recommended: Staff recommends that the TRC delegate to the Chair the authority to approve all future TRC meeting minutes. 4 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 7, 2022 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Technical Review Committee of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held Virtually in said Town of Estes Park on the 7th day of July, 2022. Committee: Town Administrator Travis Machalek (Chair), Public Works Director Greg Muhonen, Fairgrounds and Events Director Rob Hinkle, Member Mike Wisneski, Member John Gagnon Attending: Chair Machalek, Director Muhonen, Director Hinkle, Member Wisneski, Member Gagnon, Community Development Director Jessica Garner, Town Attorney Dan Kramer, Jack Mousseau, Architect, Stewart Olive, Attorney, Steve Rusch, Utility Coordinator, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund Absent: none Chair Machalek called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. AGENDA APPROVAL It was moved and seconded (Wisneski/Hinkle) to approve the agenda. The motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENT: none CONSENT AGENDA It was moved and seconded (Wiseneski/Gagnon) to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion passed 5-0. AGENDA ITEM: Stanley Film Center Plan Modification Senior Planner Woeber The applicant proposes to modify the existing, approved Cultural Arts, Conference Use, and Engineering and Support floor space of the Film Center and increase the square footage of the lower/basement level to accommodate Engineering and Support uses. The increase of additional area is 9,808 square feet, all of which would be added to the basement level and designated as Engineering and Support areas. The overall building area would increase from 79,892 square feet to 89,700 square feet. The applicant states visitor numbers would not increase with the additional square footage. Proposed increases would improve circulation within the facility and the museum and add additional area for storage and maintenance, which is very limited on the Stanley campus. Jack Mousseau, the architect for the project, gave a thorough presentation of the request. The main level square footage for engineering and support areas would move to the basement, allowing for more space for public use and maximizing the permitted area. A repositioned stairway was added for basement egress and will slightly shift the exterior doors. The footprint of the building will not increase. Steve Rusch, the town utilities coordinator, confirmed that the sub-terrain basement would not extend beyond the boundaries of the above-grade structure. PUBLIC COMMENT: none It was moved and seconded (Wisenski/Hinkle) to approve the plan modification for the increased and revised area within the Stanley Film Center, TRC Resolution 01- 22.The motion passed 5-0. AGENDA ITEM: Amended Plat, Stanley Lot 2 Senior Planner Woeber The applicant proposes amending the approved plat (Lot 2A) to convert the single- family lots to duplex lots. Lot 2B is not included in the amended plat. This amendment will provide six additional units to the Overlook Condominiums. 5 Technical Review Committee – JULY 7, 2022 – Page 2 2 The underlying zoning is A (Accommodations). The density standards from the Estes Park Development Code for Accommodations Zoning are not applicable but are specified in the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. There are “Maximum Allowable Development” standards for residential units and accommodations units on Lot 2, and special conditions regarding density also apply. The parcel size will not increase or change in any way; however, the Accommodation square footage will increase by 3% (1776 sf). Each proposed paired duplex will be 4,200 square feet in size (2,100 sf per unit). Owner-occupied units are considered residential and are not for short-term rentals. Individual owners are not allowed to rent out their units, per HOA rules. The units labeled as Accommodations are in the Stanley Hotel rental pool. Jack Mousseau, the architect for the Stanley Hotel, further explained the proposal. The only requested change is for a shift from single-family to duplex units. Utility easements will not encumber the project. Existing easements are shared between lot 2A and 2B. These will be recorded as plats, not site plans. Under the currently written definitions of the Historic Master Plan, there is no maximum for residential square footage per building. Attorney Kramer questioned if there was a previous approval of the single-family development by the TRC, and once there is a preliminary package in place, will that have to come before the TRC? Planner Woeber felt that the TRC should hear it. In theory, it could be done as a minor modification or a variance request when the TRC considers the preliminary package. Attorney Stuart Olive stated that he understood that staff could approve the minor modification. It was agreed that this would be something to be worked through at a future date if necessary. PUBLIC COMMENT: Gerald Mayo, 264 Lookout Street, condo owner and President of the Homeowners Association, stated that the HOA supports this proposal. It was moved and seconded (Wisenski/Gagnon) to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Board of Trustees for the Amended Plat of The Overlook Condominiums, changing six lots currently designated as single-family to duplexes. The motion passed 5-0. DISCUSSION: Director Garner stated that another TRC meeting would likely occur later this year regarding the Stanley Hotel Master Plan. There being no further business, Chair Machalek adjourned the meeting at 12:20 p.m. Travis Machalek, Chair Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary 6 7 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 21, 2025 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Architectural Review Committee of the Stanley Hotel Historic District, Larimer County, Colorado. The meeting was held virtually via Google Meet on October 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Committee: Architects Jack Cook, Barry Koury Also Attending: John Cullen, applicant, Jack Mousseau, applicant, Yates Osborn, Ross Eddy, Greg Rosener, Lubor Manolov, Scott Ranweiler, Cameron Aldridge, Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner; Steve Careccia, Community Development Director, Jennifer Waters, Plan Review Engineer, Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary. The meeting was called to order at 9:15 a.m. AGENDA APPROVAL It was moved to approve the agenda STAFF PRESENTATION Senior Planner Hornbeck reviewed the staff report for the expansion of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House. The 86,000 square foot expansion includes 65 new guest rooms, a main lobby for check-in, and support facilities. The proposal would extend both the hotel and manor house buildings to the north and connect them on the ground floor and basement levels. The Master Plan contains standards on site planning, building location, building design and landscaping. All applicable standards from the Master Plan were reviewed, followed by staff analysis. Staff finds that the proposal largely complies with applicable standards, with limited inconsistencies. Staff requested the ARC's expertise, particularly on building design standards, to ensure compliance. Staff recommended that the ARC forward to the TRC a recommendation to approve the Preliminary Package, including the following variances and conditions of approval: Variances to Allow: 1.White walls. 2.New parking lot in front of the front façade of the hotel complex. Conditions of Approval: 1.Details on materials used in and around drainage facilities shall be provided with the Final Package to demonstrate that river rock and cobbles are used rather than angular rip-rap or exposed concrete. 2.The Final Package shall quantify the proposed loss of significant trees and how that loss will be offset with new plantings. 3.The Final Package shall include additional information to ensure slopes greater than 3-to-1 are properly stabilized. 4.Sight distance shall be shown on the Final Package landscape plan to ensure compliance with Master Plan requirements. 5.Details on site furnishing and paving shall be provided with the Final Package application. 6.Limits of disturbance and tree protection standards shall be shown on construction plans. 7.Additional landscaping, to the maximum extent possible, shall be provided between parking lots B and C to soften views of the new additions. 8 Architectural Review Committee – OCTOBER 21, 2025 – Page 2 2 8.The Final Package shall address how the visual impact of retaining wall height in excess of 5 feet will be mitigated. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Owner John Cullen thanked the attendees and stated that this would probably be the next to last ARC/TRC meeting, hoping to move the decision-making back to the Town of Estes Park thus eliminating the Master Plan. Applicant Jack Mousseau focused on four points: 1.Coordination with Colorado Historic Foundation (CHF), evaluating conditions, compliance, and design. Myrick Howard, an architectural preservationist, was brought on board to help develop this design, ensuring it met CHF standards. 2.As the first of two major projects, the Film Center has completed the ARC and TRC processes, which established many precedents for today's proposal. 3.Relocation of the entrance point by way of removing the existing pool and the south overflow parking lot. Additional parking will be tiered and relocated to the east, creating open space in front of the hotel and restoring the site to its natural characteristics. 4.The original vision of the hotel was to have a four-sided building with interior courtyards for both the hotel and the Manor House. This project brings that to fruition. Barry Koury, the architect, stated that the plan meets the intent of the District Plan and concurred with the recommended variances. He inquired about the design intent of the transformer yard on the northwest side of the hotel, noting a discrepancy between a rendering and other plans. Jack Mousseau clarified that a retaining wall shown in an earlier design model was no longer needed after a final survey, and that existing transformers would remain untouched, with new landscaping provided at a safe distance. Koury also asked about the CHF requests for final details, and Mousseau confirmed that CHF has collaborated with them on these three points. Jack Cook, architect, approved of Planner Hornbeck's comprehensive report, agreeing that the character of the addition and maintaining the standards have been upheld. The eight conditions of approval were reviewed by Jack Mousseau, who confirmed that all have been, or will be, adhered to. He reiterated that they have no concerns or issues with these conditions and will work to provide the necessary information PUBLIC COMMENT: none It was moved and seconded (K oury/Cook) to forward to the TRC a recommendation of approval, finding the application complies with the Master Plan, subject to the variances and conditions of approval as outlined by staff. The motion passed unanimously. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 a.m. Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary 9 10 The Town of Estes Park is committed to providing equitable access to our services. Contact us if you need any assistance accessing material at 970-577-4777 or townclerk@estes.org. Memo To: Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee (TRC) Through: Steve Careccia, Community Development Director From: Paul Hornbeck, Senior Planner Department: Community Development Date: October 30, 2025 Subject: Review of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Preliminary Package Application Objective: The Technical Review Committee (TRC) will review a proposed expansion to the Stanley Hotel and Manor House for compliance with the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines. Present Situation: The Stanley Historic District is primarily governed by the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines (Master Plan), which is accessible at this link. Additionally, portions of the Municipal Code and Development Code apply, as well development agreements for each parcel within the District. According to the Master Plan, all new development shall first be reviewed as a Preliminary Package by the TRC and the Architectural Review Committee (ARC), followed by review of a Final Package by the TRC. Part III of the Master Plan includes general design guidelines applicable to the entire district and specific development standards and special considerations for each individual parcel. The Master Plan states: The specific guidelines and standards which are incorporated into Part III of this document shall be used in the review process to direct the character of design for all development within the Stanley Historic District. Proposal: 11 The applicant, Mr. John Cullen of the Stanley Partnership for Art Culture and Education, LLC. (SPACE), represented by Mr. Jack Mousseau of MOA Architecture has submitted a Preliminary Package application for the expansion of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House. The 86,000 square foot expansion includes 65 new guest rooms, a main lobby for check-in, and support facilities. The proposal would extend both the hotel and manor house buildings to the north as well as link the two buildings together on the ground floor and basement levels. The Master Plan contains standards on site planning, building location, building design and landscaping. Listed below are all applicable standards from the Master Plan, followed by staff analysis. Staff finds that the proposal largely complies with applicable standards, with limited inconstancies. Areas staff finds inconsistent with the Maste Plan include the location of a new parking lot beyond the hotel’s front façade and the use of white walls. These items can be approved by variances granted by the TRC. General Design Guidelines A. Site Planning 1. Buildings shall be sited in a manner that preserves existing land forms. Natural land forms are important in creating the appeal and the special character of the Stanley Historic District. The objective is to fit buildings to their sites in a way that leaves natural massing and features of the landscape intact. The most visually dominant and distinctive natural characteristics of the parcels should be left in their natural condition. Scale buildings so that they do not dominate the site. Staff Comment: The proposed building additions will have minimal impact on existing landforms, as the majority of construction will occur in previously disturbed areas (parking lots, manmade landscaping, etc.) The proposed realigned entrance road and new parking lot will have some impact on the existing land forms southeast of the Hotel Complex. The most visually dominant and distinctive natural characteristics of the parcel appear to be the area directly south of the hotel, which will be less impacted. 2. New construction should be compatible with existing adjacent residential buildings and uses. 12 When planning new construction, analyze the setting for the new building. Look at the siting and mass of other buildings in the residential neighborhood. Notice the setbacks, heights, parking arrangements and building shapes. Observe the building forms and materials of surrounding buildings. Be aware of the elements that are repeated nearby, such as certain roof pitches, window shapes and porch and entrance orientations. New construction should blend with the residential neighborhood without copying other buildings. Staff Comment: Adjacent residential buildings, known as the Overlook Condominiums, are located within the Stanely Historic District to the north of the proposed additions. The proposed additions will be compatible with the existing Hotel Complex. 3. Grading. Overlot grading for the sole purpose of creating flat building pads is prohibited within the Stanley Historic District. Foundations that step up or down with the natural slope of the site can greatly reduce site disturbances. Extensive grading to create large flat lawn areas is prohibited unless appropriate to grades at building site. Staff Comment: Overlot grading to create flat building pads is not proposed. Grading is proposed to create a flat lawn area in front of the Stanley Hotel (south of the old swimming pool) that would be roughly 150 feet by 180 feet in dimension. Fill would raise this area approximately two feet on the north and eight feet on the south. This would have the effect of increasing the grades of the site just north of Steamer Parkway from around 7% to approximately 20%. The Master Plan requires protection of certain views of the Hotel and values the overall prominence of the hotel from many locations in the valley. The proposed grading would likely have little to no impact on those views. The grading would change, but not obstruct, the view from Steamer Parkway. Application materials indicate demolition of the pool and tennis court and regrading those areas will return the grade to a more natural state and the resulting “great lawn” would be similar to F.O. Stanely’s original vision. 4. Drainage. 13 Culverts and flow dissipaters are to be constructed in a manner that reflects the natural character of streams in the Rocky Mountain region. River rock and cobbles are required. Use of angular rip-rap and exposed concrete is prohibited. Minor drainageways that are created to collect and convey storm water shall be constructed of materials and revegetated so as to appear natural. Staff Comment: Details on materials used in drainageways does not appear to be provided in the Preliminary Package. But, pursuant to a staff recommended condition of approval, this is a detail that will be included with the Final Package for staff and TRC review to ensure compliance with the guideline. 5. Buildings shall be sited in a manner that preserves significant vegetation. New construction and landscaping shall respect and be compatible with natural vegetative patterns. Consult the Landscape Section for additional discussion. Staff Comment: The Development Code defines significant trees as deciduous trees four-inch diameter at breast height or larger and as conifers eight-inch at breast height or larger. Numerous significant trees will be removed due to the building additions, modified parking lot to the north, and new parking lot. New landscaping is proposed; however, pursuant to a staff recommended condition of approval, the Final Package will quantify the proposed loss of significant trees and how that loss will be offset with new plantings. 6. Buildings should be sited in a manner that preserves significant views. The primary concerns relate to maintaining views to the site. Projects should be designed so they complement rather than dominate the natural landscape. Views should also be considered in the preparation of a landscape plan, particularly where plant material will be considerably larger at maturity. Staff Comment: The most significant views of the Hotel Complex are from the south, which will be maintained. 7. Site design should not change natural drainage patterns. Site grading should be sensitive to existing land forms and topography in the area so that the natural setting may be preserved to the greatest extent possible. Every effort 14 shall be to minimize the limits of construction on the site and all stock piling of materials and equipment storage shall occur within those limits. Abrupt grade changes on property lines are not permitted. Grade changes within tree driplines should be avoided. When modifications are necessary, surface drainage systems such as swales and detention basins are preferable to underground systems. Drainage designs should avoid the concentration of runoff and acceleration of the rate of runoff. Site design should be executed in a way which will avoid drainage impacts such as erosion and road damage both on-site as well as downstream. Slopes steeper than 3-to-1 shall be stabilized using natural materials and revegetated. Cuts and fills should have good surface drainage and must be revegetated and terraced or controlled by retaining walls to protect against erosion and sedimentation. Silt fencing shall be established in a continuous barrier on all downslope boundaries of the development site prior to earthmoving activity. Additional silt barriers and silt settlement areas shall be established along drainage courses as necessary to prevent erosion and the flow of transported sediments beyond site construction areas. These erosion/ siltation control facilities shall be maintained throughout construction activity until disturbed areas are successfully revegetated. Staff Comment: To facilitate drainage, minimize erosion, and comply with Town street standards, staff requests concrete curb and gutter be constructed to match adjacent construction along the north frontage of Lot 1. Additionally, slopes steeper than 3-to-1 are proposed on the site with new cut and fill. Staff requests both items be addressed with the Final Package. 8. Clustering of buildings and parking is encouraged Efficiencies in design result from building clustering when it applies to appropriate building types and land uses. Service needs can be combined in a central location. Access roads and utility services to scattered areas within a site can be reduced and disruption of the natural land forms and vegetation can be minimized through clustering. Building clustering may result in a visually more cohesive design solution. Clustering may also provide more usable open space. Staff Comment: Buildings and parking lots will be clustered. 15 B. Building Placement 1. Buildings should respect existing landforms. Buildings should be located so that earthwork can be minimized. Emphasis should be placed on building locations that fit existing contours rather than those that require a building solution that would dominate the site. Staff Comment: New buildings will require considerable excavation for construction; however, after construction this excavation will result in buildings with a reduced mass that do not dominate the site. 2. The alignment of roads and driveways should follow the contours of the site. By meandering roads to follow land forms, it is possible to minimize cuts and fills, preserve natural drainage patterns, and produce roads that are easily negotiated. Efforts should be made to construct roads parallel to contours. When roadways or drives must be located on cross slopes, they are preferred to be cut into the slope rather than placed in a location creating a fill condition. Staff Comment: The new access road necessitates a grade change of approximately 25 feet from Steamer Parkway to where it ties in with the exiting parking lot. There will be considerable cut to achieve this grade change, although fill appears limited. The road does meander to follow the land form as much as possible and disturbed areas will be revegetated. 3. Site design should consider solar access. Building placement and planting materials should accommodate passive solar designs. Maintaining solar access to adjoining building sites, roadways, and parking shall be considered during the review process. Staff Comment: Solar impacts appear limited, with the exception of sidewalks and parking areas directly north of the building additions. As a primary entrance for hotel guests, it is assumed snow and ice impacts from limited winter sun will be mitigated by the hotel operations. 4. Site design must consider the placement and screening of service areas and auxiliary 16 structures. Utility meters and service functions should not be visible on the primary facades of buildings or in front yard areas. Minimize the visual impact of trash storage and pickup areas. Screen trash and service areas with landscaping, berming or fencing. Consider snow accumulation in planning access to trash receptacles and service areas. Auxiliary structures should be architecturally compatible with the rest of the site development. Staff Comment: No new service areas are proposed. 5. Site design around intersections must provide a clear view of intersecting streets. In order to allow drivers a safe visibility at intersections, no obstruction in excess of two feet high may be placed within a triangular area formed by the streets at property line and a line connecting them at points 25' from the intersection of the street lines. Trees pruned high enough to permit driver visibility may be permitted. Staff Comment: This requirement appears to be met; however, through a recommended condition of approval, staff requests the applicant demonstrate conformance by showing sight distance on the landscape plan provided with the Final Package. 6. Site design should facilitate pedestrian circulation. Care should be taken to provide pedestrian circulation that is separate from and does not conflict with vehicular circulation. A master pedestrian circulation plan for each parcel shall be developed by the developer at the time of initial development review process. Staff Comment: New sidewalks will enhance access to and through the site. Sidewalks are planned along Steamer Parkway along with three new connections from Steamer Parkway to the site. Staff requests that the sidewalk at the northeast corner of the new entrance continue south to Steamer Parkway, including a curb ramp. Further, staff requests the existing concrete trail on the south side of Steamer Parkway, adjacent to Lot 4, approximately, be extended west approximately 175 feet to close the gap in the pedestrian network. These two modifications shall be addressed with the Final Package and will facilitate future connections to the Wonderview Avenue trail extension south of Steamer Parkway, which the Town plans to complete in the future. 17 7. Building Setbacks. The Technical Review Committee may adjust interior line setbacks based upon innovative site design, site planning, and access. Each parcel has perimeter setbacks which shall be maintained. Staff Comment: Minimum setback requirements are met with this proposal. C. Building Design 1. New buildings designed to imitate historic styles of the Stanley Hotel will not be approved. The Town considers that the integrity of the Stanley Hotel historic structures will be compromised by the introduction of new buildings that appear to be older than they really are and, therefore, will not approve historic imitations. The following architectural styles and motifs are prohibited in Stanley Historic District Ordinance: • A-frame structures, • Geodesic dome structures, • Mediterranean motifs, • Tudor or mock tudor, • Swiss chalets, • Highly ornate Victorian, • Rustic frontier, • Colonial, and • Other historical or period design motifs that have a strong connection or • association with other regions or which have no historical connection with Estes • Park. Staff Comment: The Colorado Historic Foundation review found the proposed architectural design “compatible with the historic, applying the same forms, materials, and color palette in a manner that subtly distinguishes it from the historic buildings.” They also state “To depart from the Stanley Historic District theme would create visual dissonance and make the addition stand out oddly within the historic district.” 2. Building designs should attempt to minimize the apparent scale of buildings. 18 Buildings can be made to seem larger or smaller depending on the proportional relationship of the building elements that comprise the building front. Doors, windows, roof shapes, siding, lighting and signs should all be considered carefully in order to create an appropriate scale of development. Staff Comment: The apparent scale of the buildings is minimized by building into the hillside, building placement at the rear of the existing buildings, and use of design elements that are consistent with the historic structure. 3. Rooflines of buildings should be designed to be compatible with surrounding building forms. Clashes in styles and materials should be avoided. The objective in determining roof shape is to establish a visual order to building clusters. The following roof forms are prohibited in Stanley Historic District: • Mansard or fake mansard, • Gambrel, • Curvilinear, • Domed, • Geodesic domes, • Conical, and • A-frames. Staff Comment: Rooflines are compatible with the historic structures, while being offset to help delineate old and new. 4. Roof surfacing materials should be selected to help new buildings blend with their surroundings. The use of similar building materials throughout areas that are seen together provides a very strong link that unifies the varying architectural features of the buildings. Preferred materials are cedar shingles, resawn shakes (to give a less rustic appearance than heavy shakes), standing seam metal roofs in colors that approximate the color of weathered cedar shingles and composition shingles. The following roofing materials are prohibited: 19 • Untreated aluminum or metal, • Reflective materials, • Brightly colored roofing materials such as bright red, blue, yellow, or similar colors that are highly visible, • Red tile roofs, (tile roofs may be allowed in shades of grays and browns that approximate the color of weathered cedar shingles), • Roof color should approximate the color of weathered shingles; however, colors which blend with the background natural materials, such as forest green, are acceptable. Staff Comment: The new shingle roofs are red in color to match the existing roofs. Staff does not find the proposed roof color to be a bright red, and therefore it is appropriate. Red roof colors are also supported by the Master Plan’s direction to blend roof materials with their surroundings. 6. Allowable Building Height. Care must be exercised in siting structures and orienting roofs so that allowable height of 30 feet as regulated by the Stanley Historic District Ordinance is not exceeded. "Building height" is defined by ordinance as the vertical distance from the average of the finished ground level at the center of all walls of a building to the highest point of the roof surface, exclusive of chimneys, ventilators, pipes and similar apparatus. Staff Comment: The building design complies with the maximum building height of 30 feet. Per the Master Plan, the methodology for measuring the maximum height is to measure from a base plane determined by averaging the ground elevation at the midpoint of all new walls. From that point, the maximum height is measured to mean height level between the lowest point of the topmost top plate and highest roof ridge, in accordance with the Development Code rules of measurement. The cupola is exempt from the height standard due to its function as a ventilator, per the Master Plan. 7. Facade lengths must be varied. The objective of this requirement is to ensure that buildings do not become overpowering. A change in the planes of walls, changing the direction or providing some variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. Structures must exhibit a prominent shift in the facade of the structure so that no building façade appears 20 unbroken. Each shift shall be in the form of either a change in building façade alignment or a change in roofline height, or a combined change in facade and roofline. Staff Comment: A variety of methods are used to ensure the building additions are not overpowering. The locations where the new additions meet the historic buildings feature offsets in the facades that help delineate new and old as well as break up the building façade length. There are breaks in the roof line from old to new and the additions feature dormers, bump outs, and porticos. 8. Building should be constructed of natural wall materials. The use of natural materials such as redwood and cedar, and accent stone is encouraged. Wall materials should convey a sense of human scale and warmth. Stones should be laid in a manner that conveys the appearance of a structural element rather than as a veneer facing another material. They should not convey an overly urban or industrial character. The following wall materials are prohibited: • Thick shake shingles, • Ceramic tile, • Slump block, • Weeping mortar, • Plastic or vinyl siding, • Used brick, • Synthetic stone products, • Precast stone or concrete imbedded with stone fragments, • Lava rock, • Clinkers, • Asphalt siding, • Exposed concrete block (architectural or split-face block may be acceptable), • Plywood siding, and • Aluminum siding. Staff Comment: The buildings will use natural materials, including cedar siding and stone wainscot to match the existing buildings. 9. Exterior wall colors should harmonize with the site and surrounding buildings. On exterior walls the predominant tone should tend toward warm earthy hues, whether in the natural patina or weathered color of the wall surface itself or the color of the paint, 21 stain or other coating. White walls are not permitted. Accent colors on the wall surfaces can enliven buildings; however, their location should be confined to entries and gathering points which do not disrupt the overall harmony of the area. Body trim and accent colors as per Historic Code. In most cases, only one or two accent colors should be used in addition to the base color. Doors may be painted a bright accent color or they may be left natural wood finish. Harshly contrasting color combinations should be avoided. Brilliant, luminescent, or day-glow colors will not be approved. The colors found in the landscape around Estes Park, the dark green of forests, the gray-brown of mountains, and the tan of grasses all relate well to wood and stone masonry. Colors indigenous or associated with other parts of the country should be avoided, such as colonial and tropical paint schemes. Staff Comment: White walls are proposed, in conflict with the above requirements. However, using a color palette consistent with the historic structure makes for a more compatible design and other techniques outlined herein are used to differentiate the old and new construction. Additionally, the white walls are consistent with recent TRC approved white walls to be used at the film center. Staff recommends the TRC approve a variance to allow white walls as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan. 11. Exterior lighting systems should be chosen with care so that glare is not created and light is not cast on neighboring properties. The objective is to provide subdued night lighting illuminating only what needs to be lit to promote safe and pleasant use. Lighting with a number of low intensity sources close to the area requiring illumination will in nearly all cases be more effective than lighting with a remote single source. Generally, exterior lighting should direct light downward and the light sources should not be visible from neighboring property. Staff Comment: Parking lots and walkways are proposed to be lit by 42-inch-tall bollards that use full cut off fixtures. This is consistent with minimizing glare and using diffuse light sources that will not cast light on neighboring properties. A mixture of wall mounted fixtures and recessed fixtures are proposed around building entrances. Application 22 materials indicate these will be dark sky compliant, which will be confirmed with review of the Final Package and building permit documents. D. Landscaping 1. Landscape plan. Off-site views of building masses shall be substantially softened with plantings of large coniferous trees carefully located to create a natural appearance which blends with existing vegetative patterns. The landscape plan should reflect the landscape character of an area. On those sites where the existing vegetation is considered a significant attribute of the site, the siting and design of buildings shall retain the existing significant vegetation wherever possible. The landscaping should reflect the native vegetation patterns and plant materials. Outward orienting portions of the landscape shall be planted with the same species of plants which are found on the adjacent undisturbed areas. New plantings should blend in with the existing landscape so that several years hence all traces of the site disturbance will have disappeared. Proper landscaping transition to adjacent properties and natural areas should be provided without strong demarcation. All disturbed areas must be revegetated. Landscaped areas should be planned as an integral part of the project and not simply located in left-over space on the site. Landscaping should complement the architecture of adjacent buildings and not hide it. Staff Comment: The most significant off-site view of the hotel complex is from the south. Most new construction will have limited visibility due to its placement to the north of existing buildings. The one exception is the connector between the buildings. Significant landscaping is proposed to soften this view. One area staff requests additional landscaping, to the maximum extent possible, to soften offsite views is to the north, between parking lots B and C, as identified in the parking plan. Offsite views of the new parking areas to the south will be softened with new plantings. The landscape plan reflects the landscape character of the area and utilizes largely native plant materials. 2. The design of fences and walls should harmonize with the site and the buildings. 23 Walls and fencing can only be used to provide privacy or service area screening. Screening should not dominate the buildings or the landscape. Planting may be integrated with screening schemes in order to soften the visual impact. The tops of screens should generally be maintained horizontal. If the ground slopes, the screen should be stepped. Fencing may be allowed around private areas provided it is attached to the building, does not adversely impact elk or deer migration patterns, and does not adversely impact common open areas. Fencing materials should be compatible with the materials and color of the surrounding or the prevailing building materials and color in adjacent developments. Unacceptable fencing materials include chainlink, plywood, chain and bollard, and slump block. Staff Comment: No fencing is proposed. 3. Retaining walls should be compatible in form. scale, and materials with the architectural details and materials of nearby buildings. Retaining walls may not be faced with any material disallowed for buildings. Rock facing on walls should be applied in a manner that makes the rock appear as a structural element rather than a veneer. Specially formed architectural block or stone are encouraged wall materials. Retaining walls over 24 inches high may require railings or planting buffers for safety. Low retaining walls may be used for seating if capped with a surface of at least 12 to 16 inches wide. Retaining walls must be designed to minimize their impact on the site. Retaining walls over 5' tall are discouraged. In situations where a series of walls occur, landscape material shall be planted within benched terraces to soften the appearance of the walls. Architectural block or stone construction material is encouraged. Exposed poured-in-place concrete retaining walls are not acceptable. Staff Comment: One retaining wall is proposed north of the Hotel Complex, between parking lots B and C. The bottom four feet will be exposed concrete. Above that will be stacked sandstone veneer to match sandstone elsewhere on the site. Wall height varies between 3 to 14 feet. Staff recommends a condition of approval that the Final Package address how the visual impact of retaining wall height in excess of 5 feet will be mitigated. 4. Site furnishings and paving materials should be selected to complement the 24 architectural style of the building and the paving and site furnishings of surrounding properties. Staff Comment: Details on site furnishing and paving will be provided with the Final Package application. 5. Consider site conditions, drought tolerance, and hardiness when selecting plant species. Soil conditions, exposure, wind, temperatures, and other factors vary. These factors should be considered in the choice of plant materials. Soils tests to determine soil amendment mixes shall be required. Plant species selected should be compatible with the activity of the particular area. Drought tolerant plant species shall be used wherever possible to reduce water demand. Only plant materials acclimated to the Historic District environment shall be used. Select plant material to be tolerant of browsing by elk and deer. Staff Comment: Trees species proposed are generally native, or recommended non- native trees adapted to the local climate. 6. Native vegetation shall be encouraged. The use of blue grass turf is not allowed except in Parcel 1 and 4 (retail use). Staff Comment: Trees species proposed are generally native, or recommended non- native trees adapted to the local climate. 7. Significant existing vegetation is an attribute to any site and the vegetation should be protected and retained. Areas that are not disturbed do not have to be revegetated and projects which retain existing vegetation are much more desirable to prospective buyers. In addition, the more areas left undisturbed as a result of construction, the less erosion problems will be produced from the site. Site disturbance shall be minimized in the layout, grading, and drainage design of all development sites, drives, and parking areas. This goal of minimizing site disturbance has been established in order to minimize the impacts of erosion, siltation, and removal 25 of existing vegetation. The removal of significant, mature trees should be avoided. In the event of removal of existing mature trees, a tree replacement plan shall be submitted to the technical review committee. To achieve these goals, site disturbance limits shall be established based on approval site grading plans and fenced, prior to any earthmoving or site preparation activity. Site preparation activity will require fencing constructed of 2" x 4" lumber with horizontal rails set at a maximum 30" height above grade. This fencing is required to accommodate elk and deer, minimizing disturbance to the seasonal passage of wildlife through the site. Builders and developers should avoid the following hazardous situations, all of which can kill trees: • Placing backfill into protected areas or on top of roots of trees to be saved. • Felling trees into protected areas. • Driving construction equipment into or through protected areas. • Bumping into trees with construction equipment and/ or driving over the top of • their roots. • Stacking or storing supplies in protected areas. • Changing site grades which cause drainage to flow into, or to collect in, • protected areas. • Trenching underground utilities through root zones. Staff Comment: The scope of this project necessitates significant site disturbance; however, it does appear minimized to the greatest extent possible. The removal of significant, mature trees will occur. Staff requests the Final Package quantify the proposed loss of significant trees and how that loss will be offset with new plantings. Staff also requests final construction plans include limits of disturbance and tree protection plans. 8. All trees to be removed shall be removed in a manner that will not damage the remaining trees. 26 Any trees that are to remain that are damaged during the clearing operation must be repaired in an approved manner or by a tree expert as soon as final clearing has been completed. After construction is completed, temporary barriers, surplus materials, and all trash, debris and rubbish shall be removed from the site. All backfill shall be clear of building material, stone, and rubbish. Retained existing trees (more mature trees, especially) will undergo "post operative shock" caused by the construction activity. All possible safeguards should be taken to minimize these effects and to provide optimum growth conditions. Foliage feeding and liquid fertilizer root feeding may be appropriate. Branch and foliage thinning may be desirable also. Staff Comment: Construction plans will need to include plans for tree protection. 9. There shall be construction limits set for every project. Any vegetation which is removed without specific approval beyond those established limits of disturbance must be replaced with large specimen plant materials of similar species. Staff Comment: Construction plans will need to include limits of disturbance. 10. Generally the seasons for planting in Estes Park are from April to September. Staff Comment: The applicant’s contractors should understand appropriate planting times. Should any plants not survive, they will need to be replanted. 11. Landscape Maintenance Requirements. All planting areas except native seeded areas shall be irrigated until landscape material is established. Staff Comment: Irrigation is proposed. Parcel 1 Development Standards Maximum Allowable Development: 75,000 s.f. Stanley Hotel expansion, 14,000 s.f. Manor House expansion 27 Staff Comment: Gross square footage proposed is 85,980 square feet, less than the allowable 89,000 square feet. Maximum Building Floorplate: Stanley Hotel Expansion: 33,000 s.f. Manor House Expansion: 7,200 sf. Staff Comment: The proposed floorplates comply. The proposed floorplate of the hotel is approximately 16,000 square feet (21,000 square feet if counting the connecting building). The proposed floor plate of the Manor House is approximately 7,100 square feet. Maximum Building Height: 30 ft. Staff Comment: The building design complies with the maximum building height of 30 feet, as previously outlined. Off-street Parking: Hotel: One and one quarter (1.25) spaces per room. Staff Comment: The addition of 65 guest rooms will require an additional 81 parking stalls. A total of 81 new stalls are proposed. Minimum Setback From Property Lines Buildings: Minimum setback from perimeter: 25' Minimum building separation: 10' Minimum setback from private drives right-of-way: 10’ Parking/Drives: 10' setback from all property lines Staff Comment: All setback requirements are met. Parcel 1 Development Standards – Special Conditions 1. Historic facade easements as described in the Historic District Ordinance shall not be encroached upon as prescribed in the Ordinance. 28 Staff Comment: Three conservation easements were granted to the Colorado Historical Foundation in the 1980s that control the character of construction, alteration and remodeling of the Stanley Hotel Complex and eight acres of adjoining land designated for scenic and conservation easements. The Colorado Historical Foundation has reviewed the proposal and confirmed it is in conformance with the requirements of those easements. 2. Expansion of the existing historic Stanley Hotel shall be located generally to the west and north of the existing hotel structure. The expansion shall not interfere with or diminish historic views established in the Historic District Ordinance. The expansion shall not exceed a maximum floor plate of 33,000 s.f. and shall generally be located within a designated building envelope extending 275 ft. to the west of the existing hotel structure, setback to the north from the southwest comer, and extending northward approximately parallel with the east wing of the existing hotel structure. Expansion will be subordinate to hotel building. All development will be coordinated with the Colorado Historical Foundation and Colorado Historical Society. Staff Comment: The proposed expansion is to the north of the existing hotel structure and complies with other locational requirements. The location of the expansion north of the historic structures will not interfere with or diminish historic views established in the Historic District Ordinance (from Highway 36 between Highways 7 and 34 and from the Visitors Center). The proposed floorplate of the hotel is approximately 16,000 square feet (21,000 square feet if counting the connecting building), less than the allowed maximum. As discussed above, the Colorado Historical Foundation has reviewed the proposal with no adverse findings. A referral of the proposal was sent to the Colorado Historical Society (History Colorado). As of this writing, no response has been received, although any comments would be a courtesy, non-binding review as they do not have jurisdiction over development of the site. 3. Expansion of the historic Manor House shall be located generally to the north of the existing structure. The expansion shall not interfere with or diminish historic views established in the Historic Ordinance. The expansion shall not exceed a 29 maximum floor plate of 7,200 s.f. and shall be in conformance with the facade easement granted to the Colorado Historical Foundation. All development will be coordinated with the Colorado Historical Society and Colorado Historical Foundation. Staff Comment: The proposed expansion is to the north of the existing structure and, like the hotel expansion, does not diminish the historic views per the Historic Ordinance. The proposed floorplate is approximately 7,100 square feet, less than the maximum allowed. As mentioned above, the Colorado Historical Foundation has reviewed the proposal with no adverse findings. A referral of the proposal was sent to the Colorado Historical Society (History Colorado). As of this writing, no response has been received, although any comments would be a courtesy, non-binding review as they do not have jurisdiction over development of the site. 4. Two primary access points have been designated from public road right of way for Parcel 1. a. An access point has been designated at the terminus of the public right of way at the southwest of the Parcel to serve the relocated main guest entrance in the westward expansion of the Stanley Hotel. Extension of a private roadway from this point is the responsibility of the Stanley Hotel. b. A second primary access point is located at the intersection of the existing entry drive to the Stanley Hotel and the public right of way to the southeast of the existing Stanley Hotel. Staff Comment: No changes are proposed to the western access point. The eastern access point is proposed to be shifted approximately 600 feet west to align with the existing intersection of Steamer Parkway. 5. Parking requirements for expansion of facilities in Parcel 1 shall be met in the following phasing approach: a. The temporary parking lot located on the grass area to the south and east of the Stanley Hotel may be used only as overflow parking until such time as new construction occurs for the addition to the Stanley Hotel, or an addition is added to the Manor House. At such time the temporary lot will 30 be removed and revegetated. The existing parking area to the west of the Stanley Hotel may remain in use. b. Additional parking for Parcel 1 will occur behind the front facade of the Stanley Hotel complex unless otherwise noted. As an alternative, temporary parking may be constructed at and around the Carriage House (proposed Cultural Arts Center Site), subject to TRC approval. This parking shall be paved, landscaped and screened. The Town shall have no obligation to replace this parking upon construction of the Cultural Arts Center. Staff Comment: The temporary parking lot (subsection ‘a’ above) will be revegetated with this proposal. Removal of this parking area, along with removal of the tennis court and swimming pool, will improve the historic character. A new parking lot is proposed south of the existing Concert Hall and proposed Film Center. The proposed parking lot does not comply with the requirement in subsection ‘b’ above as it would not be behind the front façade of the Stanley Hotel complex. However, there do not appear to be any practical locations for parking behind the front façade. The proposed parking is located east of the front of the Stanley Hotel, which will allow for open space in front of the hotel and minimize visual impacts of views to the hotel. Visual impacts of parking are also mitigated by proposed landscaping and breaking it up into different tiers. The Technical Review Committee has the right, by majority vote, to grant variances or modify the Guidelines based on the applicant's ability to demonstrate innovative approaches, design solutions or future market conditions which the committee feels is advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan. The ARC forwarded to TRC a recommendation to approve a variance to the parking lot location as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan. 6. Favorable consideration shall be given by the Technical Review Committee to an applicant who provides a detailed circulation and parking plan prepared by a 31 qualified transportation consultant which clearly delineates the phasing and construction of all proposed access, parking, and related circulation issues. Staff Comment: A traffic impact study (TIS) and parking plan have been provided. Staff and Keller Engineering, a consultant to the Town, have reviewed the TIS and request updates as outlined in the attached documents. Updates shall be addressed with the Final Package. 7. The use of exotic, non-native landscape species previously introduced on Parcel 1, including blue grass lawns, may be used surrounding the Hotel, Hotel expansion, and Manor House, Stanley Hall and proposed performing arts center. Staff Comment: Proposed trees are mostly native, with the exception of Crabapple trees, which are recommended non-native trees, and Austrian and Scotch Pines, trees well adapted to the Colorado climate. Shrub species are not called out on the landscape plan. 8. Section 17.44.060, F of the Historic District Ordinance must be referred to for development of Parcel 1. Applicable standards in the referenced ordinance include: a. Conformance with conservation easements Staff Comment: Addressed per #1 above b. Compliance with Secretary of Interior Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings which includes the following recommendations for new additions: i. Constructing a new addition on a secondary or non-character defining elevation and limiting its size and scale in relationship to the historic building. Staff Comment: New additions are proposed on secondary, non- character defining elevations (i.e. the rear of the buildings). ii. Constructing a new addition that results in the least possible loss of historic materials so that character-defining features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed. 32 Staff Comment: Minimal historic material will be lost, with the additions connecting to the smallest facades on the existing buildings (east and west wings). iii. Designing a new addition that is compatible with the historic building. Staff Comment: The new additions are compatible by using scale proportion, forms, and materials similar to the existing buildings. iv. Ensuring that the addition is subordinate and secondary to the historic building and is compatible in massing, scale, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and color. Staff Comment: As the Colorado Historic Foundation review states: “The largest parts of the addition’s location and footprint sit behind (north of) primary views of the Stanely Hotel and Lodge and connect to non-primary elevations, ensuring that the addition appears subordinate and secondary to the historic structures from major viewsheds. v. Using the same forms, materials, and color range of the historic building in a manner that does not duplicate it, but distinguishes the addition from the original building. Staff Comment: Similar forms, materials, and color range of the historic buildings are used in the additions. As the Colorado Historic Foundation Review States “The addition’s architectural design is compatible with the historic, applying the same forms, materials, and color palette in a manner that subtly distinguishes it from the historic buildings.” vi. Basing the alignment, rhythm, and size of the window and door openings of the new addition on those of the historic building. Staff Comment: The alignment, rhythm, and size of the window and door openings appear similar to the historic buildings. 33 vii. Incorporating a simple, recessed, small-scale hyphen, or connection, to physically and visually separate the addition from the historic building. Staff Comment: The new additions are physically and visually separated from the historic buildings by recessed connections, changes in colors, and different rooflines. viii. Distinguishing the addition from the original building by setting it back from the wall plane of the historic building. Staff Comment: The new additions feature recessed connections and/or changes in color to distinguish old and new. ix. Ensuring that the addition is stylistically appropriate for the historic building type (e.g., whether it is residential or institutional). Staff Comment: The new additions are stylistically consistent with the historic hotel use. x. Considering the design for a new addition in terms of its relationship to the historic building as well as the historic district, neighborhood, and setting. Staff Comment: The new additions fit the context of the historic district. c. Additions to existing buildings. Additions to the Stanley Hotel Complex buildings shall be designed so that they will not destroy any significant historic architectural feature. Additions should be set back from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent, or set apart from the main building and connected with an appropriate link. Additions should be compatible in scale and size with the existing buildings, be visually subordinate to the building, and no taller than the building being added on to. Similar materials, window patterns and building lines shall be incorporated. Additions should be recognized as a product of their own time and be distinguishable from the historic building element, while remaining visually compatible. New design that 34 creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the Stanley Hotel Complex buildings is not permitted. Staff Comment: The additions will not destroy any significant historic architectural feature, are set apart from the main building and connected with an appropriate link, and are compatible in scale and size with the existing buildings and visually subordinate. Advantages: The proposal is consistent with the intent of the Master Plan. Disadvantages: The application is inconstant with two standards within the Master Plan, including the location of the parking lot beyond the front façade of the hotel and use of white color walls. However, staff recommends TRC approve variances to these items as design solutions advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan and with existing development on the property. Level of Public Interest: Public interest in this proposal appears moderate. As of this writing, three public comments have been received. These comments largely focus on issues of access and traffic. Public comments are available at estes.org/currentapplications. Action Recommended: At their October 21, 2025 meeting the ARC forwarded to the TRC a recommendation to approve the Preliminary Package, including the following variances and conditions of approval, consistent with staff’s recommendation: Variances to Allow: 1. White walls. 2. New parking lot in front of the front façade of the hotel complex. 35 Conditions of Approval: 1. Details on materials used in and around drainage facilities shall be provided with the Final Package to demonstrate river rock and cobbles are used rather than angular rip-rap or exposed concrete. 2. The Final Package shall quantify the proposed loss of significant trees and how that loss will be offset with new plantings. 3. The Final Package shall include additional information to ensure slopes greater than 3-to-1 are properly stabilized. 4. Sight distance shall be shown on Final Package landscape plan to ensure compliance with Master Plan requirements. 5. Details on site furnishing and paving shall be provided with the Final Package application. 6. Limits of disturbance and tree protection standards shall be shown on construction plans. 7. Additional landscaping, to the maximum extent possible, shall be provided between parking lots B and C to soften views of the new additions. 8. The Final Package shall address how the visual impact of retaining wall height in excess of 5 feet will be mitigated. Staff recommends the following additional conditions of approval, which were not included for ARC consideration due to Public Works review being incomplete at the time of that meeting: 9. All comments in the Kellar Engineering letter dated October 22, 2025, concerning the Traffic Impact Study shall be addressed with the Final Package 10. All comments in the Public Works letter dated October 23, 2025, shall be addressed with the Final Package, including but not limited to: a. Concrete curb and gutter shall be constructed to match adjacent construction on Steamer Parkway along the Lot 1 frontage, with a gutter width of 24 inches where possible. b. The sidewalk at the northeast corner of the new entrance shall continue south to Steamer Parkway, including a curb ramp. 36 c. The existing concrete trail on the south side of Steamer Parkway, adjacent to Lot 4, shall be extended west approximately 175 feet. Sample Motion: 1. I move to approve TRC Resolution 25-01. 2. I move to deny approval of the Preliminary Package for the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion, finding that the application does not comply with the Master Plan. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Statement of Intent 3. TRC Narrative 4. CHF Letter of Support 5. Architectural Design 6. Parking Operations Plan 7. Traffic Impact Study (linked here due to size) 8. Traffic Impact Study Review Comments 9. Existing Conditions Survey 10. Civil Plans 11. Drainage Report (linked here due to size) 12. Landscape Plan 13. Lighting Plans 14. Public Works Comments 37 TRC RESOLUTION 01-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT MASTER PLAN APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS THE PRELIMINARY PACKAGE FOR THE STANELY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION WHEREAS, the Preliminary Package of the project referenced in the title of this resolution meets the requirements of the Stanley Historic District Master Plan for a preliminary package; WHEREAS, while adequate for a Preliminary Package, the materials include insufficient detail for the Technical Review Committee (TRC) to determine whether the plans meet the Final Package requirements of the Master Plan and the applicable development agreement with regard to the conditions listed below and; WHEREAS, a Final Package in conformance with the Stanley Historic District Master Plan shall be submitted for TRC review and decision. NOW, THEREFORE, THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion project Preliminary Package meets the standards and requirements in the Stanley Historic District Master Plan and Estes Park Municipal Code Chapter 17.44, subject to the variances below: 1. Design Guidelines – C. Building Design #9 states, in part: “White walls are not permitted.” TRC approves a variance to allow white walls as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan. 2. Parcel 1 Development Standards – Special Conditions #10 states, in part: “Additional parking for Parcel 1 will occur behind the front facade of the Stanley Hotel complex unless otherwise noted." TRC approves a variance to allow parking in front of the front facade of the Stanley Hotel complex as a design solution advantageous to, and in conformity with, the intent of the Master Plan. The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion project Preliminary Package is approved, conditioned upon submittal, review, and approval of the following items in conjunction with submittal, review, and approval by TRC of the Final Package for the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion: 1. Details on materials used in and around drainage facilities shall be provided with the Final Package to demonstrate river rock and cobbles are used rather than angular rip-rap or exposed concrete. 2. The Final Package shall quantify the proposed loss of significant trees and how that loss will be offset with new plantings. 3. The Final Package shall include additional information to ensure slopes greater than 3-to-1 are properly stabilized. 38 4. Sight distance shall be shown on Final Package landscape plan to ensure compliance with Master Plan requirements. 5. Details on site furnishing and paving shall be provided with the Final Package application. 6. Limits of disturbance and tree protection standards shall be shown on construction plans. 7. Additional landscaping, to the maximum extent possible, shall be provided between parking lots B and C to soften views of the new additions. 8. The Final Package shall address how the visual impact of retaining wall height in excess of 5 feet will be mitigated. 9. All comments in the Kellar Engineering letter dated October 22, 2025, concerning the Traffic Impact Study shall be addressed with the Final Package. 10. All comments in the Public Works letter dated October 23, 2025 shall be addressed with the Final Package, including but not limited to: a. Concrete curb and gutter shall be constructed to match adjacent construction on Steamer Parkway along the Lot 1 frontage, with a gutter width of 24 inches where possible. b. The sidewalk at the northeast corner of the new entrance shall continue south to Steamer Parkway, including a curb ramp. c. The existing concrete trail on the south side of Steamer Parkway, adjacent to Lot 4, shall be extended west approximately 175 feet. DATED this day 30th of October, 2025 TOWN OF ESTES PARK Travis Mactialek Chair, Technical Review Committee ATTEST: Jackie Williamson Recording Secretary 39 September 29, 2025 Mr. Steve Careccia Community Development Director Town of Estes Park 170 MacGregor Ave. PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Stanley Hotel and Manor House (Lodge) Expansion – Statement of Development Intent; Land Use Summary Dear Mr. Careccia, On behalf of Stanley Partnership for Art Culture and Education, LLC. (SPACE), Owner of the Stanley Campus and our client for the Stanley Hotel Expansion, this letter is being provided as an exhibit to illustrate the intended land uses associated with the Stanley Hotel Expansion Project. The Hotel and Manor House Expansion project is currently going through the Stanley Historic District Technical Review Committee process, and as part of that process we want to ensure that the building expansion design is within the allowable Land Use limits. The allowable land use is tied to the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Guidelines. Exhibit F of this document provides a Land Use Summary for each Stanley Parcel. The Hotel and Manor House Expansion is located within Parcel 1. The Land Use Summary provides allowable Units/GFA for several uses which will be housed within the new construction of the Hotel and Manor House Expansion. The Master Plan provides a Land Use Summary for each Stanley Parcel. The Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion is located within Parcel 1. The Land Use Summary provides allowable Gross Square Footage (GSF) allowances for several uses which will be housed within the new construction of the Hotel and Manor House expansion. The summary of allowable land uses that apply to this project are as follows: 75,000 GSF – Stanley Hotel Expansion 14,000 GSF – Manor House Expansion 22,800 GSF - Accommodations 5,000 GSF – Retail Associated with the Hotel Per the Stanley Historic District Master Plan, the total allowable development Gross Square Footage for the above allowable development on Parcel 1, for the Hotel is 116,800 GSF. The current planning of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion follows these allowed uses in its planning as described below: The Hotel Expansion and Manor House Expansions tie together as a contiguous expansion linking the 40 Steve Careccia Town of Estes Park Community Development September 29, 2025 Page 2 two existing buildings. The Hotel and Manor House Expansion is an allowed use and houses multiple guest stay rooms, a main lobby for check-in, concierge, guest relaxation, exhibits, etc., back-of-house engineering, housekeeping, MEP support, staff lockers and break room, minimal meeting/conference space, kitchen storage and circulation. In the calculation of area within the Hotel and Manor House Expansion, we have included both allowable areas combined when evaluating actual area designed for the expansion. Per BOMA (Building Owners and Managers Association) National Standards, we have calculated areas to include stairs and elevators at their lowest level only. Stairs, elevators and other floor penetrations are not calculated above the lowest floor level at which they occur. This approach is also consistent in the calculation of building occupancy per the International Building Code. There are several outdoor patios at both ground and roof level that are not included within the SF calculations as they don’t count against land use limitations. Additionally, the Hotel and Manor House expansion will contain functions that serve as support facilities (storage, utilities, maintenance, etc.) that will serve the entire Stanley Campus. It is our understanding that these types of uses are a “Use by Right” and do not fall under the Land Use Summary limitations. This has been confirmed with the Town of Estes Park Planning Department. These functions are being consolidated to this location from numerous locations on the campus to allow for removal of unsightly facilities, provide for more efficient campus operations. It should be noted that the majority of support facilities will be located in the basement of the Hotel and Manor House expansion, out of public view. This is a primary benefit of relocating these types of uses to this location. SPACE (Stanley Ownership) is including this component in the Film Center project at considerable expense and effort with the goal of enhancing the quality of the overall Stanley property through the elimination of unsightly infrastructure. The gross square footage currently being planned in the facility is within the allowable area identified in the Land Use Summary as defined by the different uses shown above. The planned SF related to the uses located within the Hotel and Manor House Expansion is summarized as follows: Hotel and Manor House Expansion: • 85,980 GSF – Hotel guest rooms, lobby, support and circulation functions • Note: the allowable square footage of the expansion per the Historic District Master Plan is 75,000 GSF (Main Hotel) + 14,000 GSF (Manor House) + 5,000 GSF (Retail) + 22,800 GSF (Accommodations) = 116,800 GSF. 30,820 GSF of development associated with the Hotel and Manor House expansion remains available for future development per the allowances within the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. We also wish to point out several key elements of the Hotel and Manor House expansion design that we believe are very positive planning attributes of the project. 1. The Hotel and Manor House expansion total Gross Square Footage is 30,820 GSF smaller than the allowed GSF by the Historic District Master Plan. 2. The allowable floorplate of the Hotel and Manor House expansion, per the Historic District Master Plan guidelines is 33,000 sf (Hotel expansion) + 7,200 sf (Manor House expansion) = 40,200 sf total. The designed building floorplate is currently 28,249 sf, well below the allowable. 41 Steve Careccia Town of Estes Park Community Development September 29, 2025 Page 3 3. The 1994 Master Plan illustrates and describes the Hotel and Manor House expansions to the north of the existing buildings. Our plan places the expansion to the north in compliance with the Master Plan and consolidates those to a single building, thus limiting land use impacts in a positive manner and providing enhanced service and customer use of the facilities. 4. Approximately 1/3rd of the planned square footage of the Hotel and Manor House expansion will be located below grade and won’t be visible. 5. The Hotel and Manor House expansion replaces non-code compliant exits at the existing Hotel and Manor House with new, code compliant exiting. Life Safety, including fire protection and exiting are greatly enhanced from current conditions. 6. The Hotel and Manor House expansion design will not require a height variance. The building will be designed within current height guidelines. 7. The Colorado Historical Foundation has been a key advisor in the planning and design of the Hotel and Manor House expansion project. MOA Architecture has met multiple times with CHF representatives and the CHF Board to ensure the design and planning adhere to Stanley Historical District best planning practices. The CHF has provided positive support of the current design under separate letter to the Town of Estes Park. I have previously coordinated this information with The Town of Estes Park Planning Department to confirm the project is permissible subject to compliance with applicable standards and procedures. The following is correspondence of the Town of Estes Park confirmation of development intent for the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Project. It is our hope that this letter helps to clarify our intent to conform to the Land Use Summary requirements of the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Guidelines. If you have any questions or would like to discuss our approach, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, Jack M. Mousseau, AIA MOA ARCHITECTURE Principal 303-915-0482 (mobile) 303-558-4976 (office) jmousseau@moaarch.com 42 Steve Careccia Town of Estes Park Community Development September 29, 2025 Page 4 43 Steve Careccia Town of Estes Park Community Development September 29, 2025 Page 5 44 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Estes Park, CO Technical Review Committee Submission TRC Project Review Request and Project Narrative September 29, 2025 MOA ARCHITECTURE 45 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 2 September 29, 2025 Mr. Steve Careccia Community Development Director Town of Estes Park 170 MacGregor Ave. PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Technical Review Committee, Final Review Request Dear Mr. Careccia, As you know, the Stanley Partnership for Art Culture and Education, LLC. (SPACE) has been working with the Town of Estes Park Planning Department through the preliminary Technical Review Committee (TRC) process for the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion project. This letter serves as our formal request to schedule the Final TRC Review and Approval. Accompanying this letter, you will find our planning documents, as required for TRC review. As you recall, representatives of Grand Heritage Hotel Group, SPACE, including myself, along with MOA Architecture met with city officials on February 15, 2024 for the TRC pre-application meeting. Our submission includes TRC review documents as requested during the pre-application meeting. We look forward to scheduling the final review as soon as possible and discussing this exciting project with the TRC committee. Sincerely, Mr. John Cullen Stanley Partnership for Art Culture and Education, LLC. Development Director 410-585-4300 jcullen@grandheritage.com 46 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 3 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Design Narrative The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Design Narrative provides a detailed description of the Hotel and Manor House Expansion. The Design Narrative is in support of and coordinated with the Concept Design Drawings. History of the Stanley Hotel - The story of the Stanley Hotel itself began in 1903 when Yankee inventor Freelan Oscar Stanley arrived in the valley, weak and underweight from the symptoms of consumption. To his amazement, just one season here was enough to restore his health to better than before! Overjoyed, he vowed to return each summer for the rest of his life. However, he and his wife Flora were used to the sophistication of East Coast society, and the little community of Estes Park offered little to stimulate and challenge this multi-talented genius. Together, they resolved to build a beautiful grand hotel – and when the Stanley Hotel opened in 1909, the first guests who pulled up in stylish Stanley-designed steam cars were astonished at what they saw. Here in this mountain wilderness, surrounded by the rustic haunts of the hunter and homesteader, was an edifice that withstood comparison to the posh hotels “back east.” Electric lights, telephones, en suite bathrooms, a staff of uniformed servants and a fleet of automobiles were at their disposal. Naturally, Stanley had also done much to develop the burgeoning town. By 1917, it was an official municipality with waterworks, a power plant and civic organizations that were all, in some way, thanks to Stanley. By the 1970s the hotel’s splendor had faded due to lack of care and investment. It might eventually have succumbed to the wrecking ball, if not for a fortuitous visit by author Stephen King. A stay of one night was enough to inspire his third major work and first hardcover bestseller The Shining, which remains a landmark masterpiece in a long and well-known list of novels. 47 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 4 Under the ownership of Grand Heritage Hotel Group, and now the Stanley Partnership for Art Culture and Education, LLC., the hotel stands today as a beautifully restored testament to its glory days, when it served as a holiday retreat for wealthy urbanites. A range of tours highlights the history of this magnificent historical structure while a tempting menu of amenities, culinary experiences and lavish spa treatments provide all the comfort and glamour required by even the most discerning modern visitors. The existing 140-room Stanley Hotel features a wood and steel frame built on a rocky hillside set against the backdrop of Lumpy Ridge. The south-facing hotel with unobstructed views of Longs Peak and other mountains of the Continental Divide was built with lumber hauled up from Denver on wagons and carts, as well as timber harvested from Hidden Valley in what is now Rocky Mountain National Park. Stanley Historic District Master Plan and Hotel and Manor House Expansion – The Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines is the planning document guiding the development within the Stanley Historic District. The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion has been planned and designed in conformance with requirements as identified within this document. A variety of expansions to the Stanley campus and building development projects have been long anticipated within the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. The existing operation of the hotel was anticipated to expand and include expansion to the Main Hotel, the Manor House (sometimes referred to as the Lodge) and ancillary support uses including retail, restaurant and conference and wellness functions. The addition is planned to the north of the existing Stanley Hotel and Manor House buildings and will connect directly to the existing floors of these two buildings. The expansion serves to link the existing Hotel and Manor House with a two-story connector, allowing guests to remain inside as they walk throughout the Hotel and Manor House complex. Currently, these two existing buildings are not connected. Aerial Photo of the Existing Stanley Campus 48 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 5 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Project Description - The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion includes the addition of 65 guestroom units, a new north hotel lobby, and hotel support spaces connected directly to the existing Stanley Hotel and Manor House Buildings. The Hotel Expansion is developed over four floor levels, all of which connect directly to the Stanley Hotel. Levels One and Two also connect to the existing Manor House building. The hotel expansion will bring back the Porte Cochère, a covered parking area in front of the north lobby that allows guests to enter and exit their vehicles out of the weather. Inside, a prominent feature in the new north lobby will be a grand staircase, complete with spindles in sets of four designs to represent the four seasons. Additionally, as the original Stanley Hotel had a connecting link between the Hotel and the Manor House building, the expansion will have a connecting link at Level Two, allowing guests to walk between the buildings, out of the weather. The architectural style established for the Hotel and Manor House expansion is compatible with the existing architectural style but does not directly copy the historic style of the existing Stanley Hotel and Manor House. The design team has looked to the existing buildings for scale, massing and spacing. The Hotel and Manor House expansion reflects the proportion, roof forms and modern interpretations of details found at the existing Hotel and Manor House. The original Stanley Hotel had a porte cochère, a covered parking area in front of the hotel that allowed guests to enter and exit their vehicles out of the weather. Inside, the most prominent feature in the lobby was the grand staircase, complete with spindles in sets of four designs to represent the four seasons. Additionally, the original Stanley Hotel had a connecting link between the Hotel and the Manor House building, allowing guests to walk between the buildings, out of weather. This feature no longer exists today. F.O. Stanley’s original design of the Stanley Hotel envisioned a square building plan wrapping an open central courtyard. Due to cost overruns, F.O. Stanley never completed his vision for the north expansion. The Hotel and Manor House expansion completes F.O. Stanley’s original vision of a central courtyard surrounding the hotel and the completion of the north wing. The Hotel and Manor 49 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 6 House expansion is complete with a porte cochère, as originally provided, brings an added level of luxury and convenience for guests. The Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion is programmed at 85,980 SF over 4 floors - With an average floor to floor height of 10’ and a total height of 42’, much of the building is set below grade and into the hillside, giving it an appearance of a much smaller building. The floors of the building provide the following functions: • Level 1 – This level corresponds to the main Stanley Hotel lobby level. Level 1 will connect directly to the main hotel back of house kitchen and mechanical/electrical plant. Level 1 will primarily house loading dock and receiving functions, the hotel engineering and support facilities, housekeeping facilities for the hotel and a new mechanical/electrical plant that will serve the new expansion and tie into the systems for the existing hotel. There is a public lounge and lobby facing the interior courtyard that serves as an interior lounge space as well as a vertical connection from the courtyard up through the levels of the hotel expansion and new north lobby. This level will link the Hotel Expansion, existing Main Hotel and the Manor House building with a service corridor and centralized housekeeping. • Level 2 – This level hosts the new North Grand Lobby of the hotel expansion. The North Grand Lobby will serve overnight guests only. Day visitors will not have access to the North Lobby. The North Grand Lobby will capture much of the character and history of the original hotel lobby, with similar finishes, details and a grand staircase complete with custom balustrades depicting the 4 seasons, a unique feature of the Stanley Hotel. The lobby will feature hotel check-in, concierge, refreshment station, historical displays and seating throughout the lobby. To the east and west of the North Grand Lobby, 29 new guestrooms are arranged in a configuration that aligns with the existing Hotel and Manor House guestroom corridors and links the Hotel and Manor House through a common guestroom corridor configuration. Guestrooms will be a variety of size configuration, all with finely appointed finishes and ensuites. • Level 3 – Level Three of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion links the existing floors of the Stanely Hotel and Manor House buildings. The lobby below is a two-story space with an overlook from Level Three down into the public north lobby. Level Three is entirely occupied by 28 new guestrooms arranged in a configuration that aligns with the existing Hotel and Manor House guestroom corridors. Guestrooms will be a variety of size configuration, all with finely appointed finishes and ensuites. • Level 4 – Level Four of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion provides a limited number of new guestrooms linking to the existing northwest corridor of the Stanley Hotel. This connection extends a new fire stair to Level Four, serving the existing hotel and new expansion. The guestrooms directly linking to the Stanley Hotel include a variety of sizes and configurations, all with finely appointed finishes and ensuites. 50 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 7 The Stanely Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Campus Location Plan The Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion lies directly to the north of the existing Main Hotel and the adjacent Manor House building. The expansion is sited in what is currently a sloping hillside and adjacent parking on the north side of the existing buildings. This is consistent with the development standards from the Historic District Master Plan and was coordinated with the Colorado Historical Foundation, the historic easement holder for the property. This location allows the Hotel and Manor House expansion to tie directly into the existing floor levels of the Main Hotel and Manor House, creating a fully connected hotel complex. The Hotel and Manor House expansion will be substantially hidden from view from the south side of the Stanley campus, retaining the Main Hotel and Manor House as the dominant visual elements. Placement of the Hotel and Manor House expansion in an orthogonal arrangement that creates a composition with the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Building. The buildings maintain a relatively consistent north/south and east/west axis. The Hotel and Manor House expansion maintains this axial arrangement with the design of its roof forms. Strong horizontal roof lines and other important horizontal datums fit comfortably together with the composition of buildings. 51 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 8 Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Site Plan The Hotel and Manor House expansion relocated the existing north parking approximately 60’ further to the north to allow site area for the building. The reconfiguration of parking and vehicular drive in this area will provide a new exterior canopy for guests to enter the hotel under cover from weather. A new loading and receiving yard is located on the far west end of the expansion. This provides a single location for deliveries, trash removal and maintenance vehicles and operations that is out of site from guest functions. The building configuration avoids a primary transformer just to the northwest of the building. The Main Hotel interior courtyard will be replanned in conjunction with the Hotel expansion. Additional parking to accommodate the expansion of the Hotel and Manor House will occur in conjunction with the relocation of the Stanley Campus Entry Drive, described on the following pages. This is in keeping with the Historic District Master Plan design guidelines which state, “The concept of joint parking for the District is encouraged by means of joint access/joint parking.” Approximately 136 parking stalls will be provided in a new lot adjacent to and accessed off the reconfigured entry drive for the hotel complex. The 136 parking stalls replace stalls lost with the expansion, as well as provides additional stalls to accommodate the 65 new guestrooms at a 1.25 stall per guestroom ratio per the Historic District Master Plan guidelines for parking. The adjacent Stanley Event Center project also includes the demolition of the old pool complex located just to the south of the Main Hotel. Some of the earth removed during the excavation for the Event Center and Hotel and Manor House expansion 52 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 9 will be placed in the location of the old pool and will be graded to create an outdoor “great lawn”, that will be used for outdoor events and activities at the hotel complex. Stanley Campus Entry Drive Relocation The Stanely Hotel and Manor House expansion project scope will include the relocation of the current entry drive to the Stanley Campus. Currently, the entry drive accesses the campus from the east side, off of Steamer Parkway. The original entry drive configuration into the Stanley Campus came from the south, in the approximate location of the relocation shown here. The current configuration causes serious traffic congestion entering the property during peak season and large events. Traffic backs up along Steamer Parkway leading to a hazardous situation. The new relocation allows for the straight continuation of the access road off of Highway 34, without the multiple right and left turns to access the campus. This also provides additional stacking length for cars entering the campus. The existing entry security building will be relocated to the new drive location. The relocation returns the entry configuration to its historic precedent, reduces traffic congestion, and simplifies vehicular movements into and out of the campus. Additionally, the hotel expansion parking will link off the entry drive and connect to the Carriage House parking lot. The entry drive relocation includes the demolition of the current entry drive. This will be replaced by landscaping as a foreground to the Stanley Event Center. The entry drive relocation also includes a roadway connection between the new entry drive and the Aspire Hotel. Additional parking may be placed along this roadway to serve the overall Stanley Campus. Existing Stanley Campus Entry Drive Configuration 53 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 10 The following diagrams illustrate anticipated new roadway, parking, sidewalk and landscape elements. New Entry Drive Relocation Concept Plan 54 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 11 New Entry Drive Pedestrian Sidewalk Plan Landscape Development Plan 55 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 12 North Porte Cochere Lobby Entry of the Stanely Hotel and Manor House Expansion North Side of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion 56 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 13 Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion - Level One Level One of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion links directly to the lobby level of the Existing Hotel and a new basement level to the north of the existing Manor House building. This level allows direct connection between the existing hotel kitchen and mechanical/electrical plants and the new addition. The primary use of this level is for back of house Engineering and Support functions to support the operations of the Stanley Hotel, Manor House and Campus as a whole. A new delivery and receiving area is located on the west side of the expansion and will replace the existing receiving yard. Mechanical and Electrical equipment rooms will support the building systems needs for HVAC, plumbing and electrical services. A centralized housekeeping facility will serve both the Hotel and Lodge guestrooms. The north addition will enclose the current courtyard and provide a new interior public lounge on the north side of the courtyard. The lounge will be linked vertically throughout the addition via elevators and a public stair. The majority of this level will be sub-grade (basement level). The entire north façade of the addition at this level backs into the existing hillside and will be supported by a concrete foundation wall. The limited south façade does daylight at this level, including the receiving area, the public lounge and the connector between buildings. 57 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 14 Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion - Level Two Level Two of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion links directly to the north parking area which will serve the Hotel and Manor House guests. This level is approximately 15’ above the existing hotel lobby to the south. The Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion provides a new lobby that will only serve overnight guests. The existing south lobby becomes so overcrowded with day tourists, that overnight guests have difficulty maneuvering through tourists to engage with the hotel reception functions. The new north lobby will alleviate that congestion. The north lobby will have hotel reception, lobby/lounge, guest seating, refreshment station, concierge station, etc. Its design will mimic the existing south lobby in feel, finish and character. Centralized passenger elevators within the lobby will link all levels of the hotel expansion to all levels of the existing Hotel and Lodge. Guestrooms are located to the east and west of the hotel lobby. The guestrooms east of the lobby connect across to the Manor House building and provide interior circulation for all guests. Level Two includes 29 guestrooms in a variety of sizes and configurations as illustrated on the floor plan. All guestrooms include a bathroom ensuite with shower, vanity and toilet compartment. The ensuites will be designed to the same quality and finish specifications as the recently completed ensuite renovations in the Main Hotel. Stair cores at each of the interfaces between the Hotel and Manor House expansion and the existing Hotel and Manor House provide new code compliant fire stairs serving the existing facilities and Hotel Expansion. This will serve to greatly enhance the life safety design of the Stanley Hotel. 58 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 15 Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion - Level Three Level Three of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion links the existing floors of the Stanely Hotel and Manor House buildings. The lobby below is a two-story space with an overlook from Level Three down into the public north lobby. Level Three is entirely occupied by 28 new guestrooms. The guestrooms directly linking to the Stanley Hotel include a variety of sizes and configurations as illustrated on the floor plan. The central Sundance Suite occupies a position of prominence and provides a “presidential level” guest experience with two guest bedrooms, a main living space with private outdoor patio, an enhanced ensuite with private wardrobe and a private theater. The guestrooms directly linking to the Manor House also include a variety of sizes and configurations as illustrated on the floor plan. All guestrooms include a bathroom ensuite with shower, vanity and toilet compartment. The ensuites will be designed to the same quality and finish specifications as the recently completed ensuite renovations in the Main Hotel. Level Three does not connect across to the Manor House building. 59 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 16 Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion - Level Four Level Four of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion provides a limited number of new guestrooms linking to the existing northwest corridor of the Stanley Hotel. This connection extends a new fire stair to Level Four, serving the existing hotel and new expansion. The guestrooms directly linking to the Stanley Hotel include a variety of sizes and configurations as illustrated on the floor plan. All guestrooms include a bathroom ensuite with shower, vanity and toilet compartment. The ensuites will be designed to the same quality and finish specifications as the recently completed ensuite renovations in the Main Hotel. There is a small expansion area on the northeast corner of the existing Stanley Hotel, which allows the extension of one passenger elevator and the fire stair to connect to the existing Hotel. This serves to provide life safety exiting elevator access throughout the existing floors of the Stanley Hotel. Level Four does not extend across to the Manor House building. 60 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 17 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Land Use Summary The allowable land uses on the Stanley property are tied to the Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Guidelines. The graphic below is the land use summary from the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. 61 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 18 Stanley Historic District Master Plan – Land Use Summary The Master Plan provides a Land Use Summary for each Stanley Parcel. The Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion is located within Parcel 1. The Land Use Summary provides allowable Gross Square Footage (GSF) allowances for several uses which will be housed within the new construction of the Hotel and Manor House expansion. The summary of allowable land uses that apply to this project are as follows: • 75,000 GSF – Stanley Hotel Expansion • 14,000 GSF – Manor House Expansion • 22,800 GSF - Accommodations • 5,000 GSF – Retail Associated with the Hotel Per the Stanley Historic District Master Plan, the total allowable development Gross Square Footage for the above allowable development on Parcel 1, for the Hotel is 116,800 GSF 62 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 19 Stanley Historic District Master Plan – Land Use Summary 63 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 20 The current planning of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion follows these allowed uses in its planning as described below: The Hotel Expansion and Manor House Expansions tie together as a contiguous expansion linking the two existing buildings. The Hotel and Manor House Expansion is an allowed use and houses multiple guest stay rooms, a main lobby for check-in, concierge, guest relaxation, exhibits, etc., back-of-house engineering, housekeeping, MEP support, staff lockers and break room, minimal meeting/conference space, kitchen storage and circulation. In the calculation of area within the Hotel and Manor House Expansion, we have included both allowable areas combined when evaluating actual area designed for the expansion. Per BOMA (Building Owners and Managers Association) National Standards, we have calculated areas to include stairs and elevators at their lowest level only. Stairs, elevators and other floor penetrations are not calculated above the lowest floor level at which they occur. This approach is also consistent in the calculation of building occupancy per the International Building Code. There are several outdoor patios at both ground and roof level that are not included within the SF calculations as they don’t count against land use limitations. Additionally, the Hotel and Manor House expansion will contain functions that serve as support facilities (storage, utilities, maintenance, etc.) that will serve the entire Stanley Campus. It is our understanding that these types of uses are a “Use by Right” and do not fall under the Land Use Summary limitations. This has been confirmed with the Town of Estes Park Planning Department. These functions are being consolidated to this location from numerous locations on the campus to allow for removal of unsightly facilities, provide for more efficient campus operations. It should be noted that the majority of support facilities will be located in the basement of the Hotel and Manor House expansion, out of public view. This is a primary benefit of relocating these types of uses to this location. Grand Heritage Hotel Group is including this component in the Film Center project at considerable expense and effort with the goal of enhancing the quality of the overall Stanley property through the elimination of unsightly infrastructure. The gross square footage currently being planned in the facility is within the allowable area identified in the Land Use Summary as defined by the different uses shown above. The planned SF related to the three uses located within the Film Center and the Carriage House is summarized as follows: Hotel and Manor House Expansion: • 85,980 GSF – Hotel guest rooms, lobby, support and circulation functions • Note: the allowable square footage of the expansion per the Historic District Master Plan is 75,000 GSF (Main Hotel) + 14,000 GSF (Manor House) + 5,000 GSF (Retail) + 22,800 GSF (Accommodations) = 116,800 GSF. 30,820 GSF of development associated with the Hotel and Manor House expansion remains available for future development per the allowances within the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. We also wish to point out several key elements of the Hotel and Manor House expansion design that we believe are very positive planning attributes of the project. 1. The Hotel and Manor House expansion total Gross Square Footage is 30,820 GSF smaller than the allowed GSF by the Historic District Master Plan. 2. The allowable floorplate of the Hotel and Manor House expansion, per the Historic District Master Plan guidelines is 33,000 sf (Hotel expansion) + 7,200 sf (Manor House expansion) = 40,200 sf total. The designed building floorplate is currently 28,249 sf, well below the allowable. 64 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 21 3. The 1994 Master Plan illustrates and describes the Hotel and Manor House expansions to the north of the existing buildings. Our plan places the expansion to the north in compliance with the Master Plan and consolidates those to a single building, thus limiting land use impacts in a positive manner and providing enhanced service and customer use of the facilities. 4. Approximately 1/3rd of the planned square footage of the Hotel and Manor House expansion will be located below grade and won’t be visible. 5. The Hotel and Manor House expansion replaces non-code compliant exits at the existing Hotel and Manor House with new, code compliant exiting. Life Safety, including fire protection and exiting are greatly enhanced from current conditions. 6. The Hotel and Manor House expansion design will not require a height variance. The building will be designed within current height guidelines. 7. The Colorado Historical Foundation has been a key advisor in the planning and design of the Hotel and Manor House expansion project. MOA Architecture has met multiple times with CHF representatives and the CHF Board to ensure the design and planning adhere to Stanley Historical District best planning practices. The CHF has provided positive support of the current design under separate letter to the Town of Estes Park. 65 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 22 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Colorado Historic Foundation Review The following is correspondence of the Colorado Historical Foundations review of the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion design. 66 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 23 67 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 24 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Town of Estes Park Development Intent Approval The following is correspondence of the Town of Estes Park confirmation of development intent for the Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Project. 68 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 25 69 The Stanley Hotel & Manor House Expansion TRC Narrative 26 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion – Programming Summary The following is a summary of program areas for the Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion including expansion of the Main Hotel and Manor Buildings. (Note: the allowable square footage of the expansion per the Historic District Master Plan is 75,000 GSF (Main Hotel) + 14,000 GSF (Manor House) + 5,000 GSF (Retail) + 22,800 GSF (Accommodations) = 116,800 GSF. The actual planned square footage of the project is 85,980 SF which is well below the allowable square footage. Stanley Hotel and Manor House expansion Building Floorplate The allowable floorplate of the Hotel and Manor House expansion, per the Historic District Master Plan guidelines is 33,000 sf (Hotel expansion) + 7,200 sf (Manor House expansion) = 40,200 sf total. The designed building floorplate is currently 28,249 sf, well below the allowable. 70 Post Office Box 363 Golden, Colorado 80402 303.894.2503 cohf.org Mobilizing resources to support and inspire Colorado’s people in their preservation of meaningful places, heritage, and history. Page 1 of 2 November 18, 2024 John Cullen The Stanley Hotel 333 E. Wonderview Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear John: Thanks to you and your team for presenting the updated Hotel and Lodge Addition design to our Easement Design Review Committee Friday, November 8, 2024 (see attached MOA presentation with the same date). Following this last review, I’m pleased to express our support for this project as presented. In reviewing the terms of our easements on both the Hotel and Manor House, and after evaluating the addition’s impact on key views of the historic buildings as seen by its visitors, we support the expansion for the following reasons: • The largest parts of the addition’s location and footprint sit behind (north of) primary views of the Stanley Hotel and Lodge (aka. the Manor House) and connect to non-primary elevations, ensuring that the addition appears subordinate and secondary to the historic structures from major viewsheds. • The addition’s placement and design capitalize on the topographical features of the Stanley site. With the steep grade behind (north of) the Hotel and Manor House, efforts have been made to build part of the addition underground so that its vertical volume does not overwhelm the historic structures. • The recessed “zippers” linking the addition to the back of the existing structures visually separate and simply distinguish the addition from the historic structures with minimal loss of historic materials while retaining articulation of historic features such as rooflines, corners, and cornice detailing. • The “connector” linking the major addition sections is designed for visual minimization. Its two stories are shorter than the surrounding massing, set into (as opposed on atop) the natural topography. It will be finished with understated materials and landscaping designed to make it visually recede. • The addition’s architectural design is compatible with the historic, applying the same forms, materials, and color palette in a manner that subtly distinguishes it from the historic buildings. To depart from the Stanley Historic District theme would create visual dissonance and make the addition stand out oddly within the historic district. Additionally, as discussed in our design review letter dated January 12, 2023, we affirm our approval of reconfiguring the property entrance road to its historic location, adding necessary parking 71 Mobilizing resources to support and inspire Colorado’s people in their preservation of meaningful places, heritage, and history. Page 2 of 2 improvements to the east of that entry road, and removing the non-historic pool and related structures from the open space south of the Hotel (all as indicated in the attached MOA presentation from November 8, 2024). As these changes relate to our open space easement south of the Hotel, we are pleased that this area will be maintained as an open green space or a grand lawn (i.e. no new structures, roadways, or parking). We also appreciate efforts to provide green breaks within the new parking areas so that it doesn’t read as one large mass of shiny cars in the historic district’s east open space area. Though the project is approved, we request additional consultation with your design team to explore a few final details and are confident we can collectively identify solutions so as not to disrupt initial construction planning. We request further discussion on: • The addition’s window and door mullion patterns, • The addition-connector’s north façade materiality and fenestration, • How the connector’s ground-level mechanical grate on the north will be screened from view. As a reminder, deviations from the massing, footprint, height, and general conceptual designs as presented November 8 2024 (attached) will require further review and approval by the Foundation. As a partner in stewarding The Stanley for 40 years, the Foundation’s easement responsibilities include review and written approval of proposed changes to the exteriors of the Hotel and Manor House as well as to the property's landscape features, site, and environment, including any proposed new construction that might alter the character of this historic Colorado icon. Per the easements, the Foundation evaluates proposed alterations for alignment with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation (“SOI Standards”) which promote best practices in historic preservation and anticipate the need for properties to adapt and change over time. Concurrently, we understand that the lodging expansion is critical to the site’s business plan and operational efficiency. Long-term economic viability is a crucial factor in sustaining a historic property’s future. Though the Foundation may, in its sole judgement, approve construction or other modifications according to the terms of its respective conservation easements, we are willing to participate in design review with or provide this commentary to reviewers from other agencies such as the Town of Estes Park, the State Historic Preservation Office, or the National Park Service as may be appropriate. Our approval is distinct from any other agency that may have an interest in, or authority over, the site’s design and construction, and we are happy to help resolve differences as they may arise. In partnership, Catherine Stroh Executive Director CC: Jack Mousseau, MOA Architecture; Dominick Sekich, Colorado Historical Foundation President 72 PREVIOUS CONNECTOR CONCEPT CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3 WHITE LAP SIDING STONE CLADDING BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING SOUTH ELEVATION LOWER SILL HEIGHT SYMMETRICAL WINDOW MUNTINS ADDED TO FENESTRATION 73 PREVIOUS CONCEPT UPDATED HOTEL WINDOWSREDUCED MUNTIN DIVISION INCREASED MUNTIN DIVISION AND INCREASED BOTTOM RAIL HEIGHT PREVIOUS CONCEPT UPDATED LOBBY WINDOWS 74 T H E S T A N L E Y H O T E L A N D M A N O R H O U S E E X P A N S I O N E S T E S P A R K , C O Te c h n i c a l R e v i e w C o m m i t t e e S u b m i s s i o n S e p t e m b e r 2 9 , 2 0 2 5 75 2 SHEET INDEX SHEET INDEX 1 - Cover Sheet 2 - Sheet Index 3 - Historic Photo 4 - Campus Evolution Photo 5 - Campus Evolution Comparison 6 - Campus Master Plan 7 - TRC Review Scope Site Plan 8 - Site Plan 9 - Signage Locations 10 - Base Plane Roof Plan 11 - Base Plan Floor Plan 12 - Building Elevations Hotel 13 - Building Elevations Lodge 14 - Material Overview 15 - Level 1 Floor Plan 16 - Level 2 Floor Plan 17 - Level 3 Floor Plan 18 - Level 4 Floor Plan 19 - Building Program 20 - Rendering Aerial Northwest 21 - Rendering Aerial Northeast 22 - Rendering Aerial Southeast 23 - Rendering Aerial Southwest 24 - Rendering - South Approach 01 25 - Rendering - South Approach 02 26 - Rendering - View Looking East 27 - Rendering - View Looking Southwest 28 - Rendering - View Looking Southeast 29 - Rendering - View Looking Northwest 30 - Rendering - View Looking Northeast 31 - Rendering - View Looking South 01 32 - Rendering - View Looking South 02 33 - Rendering - View Looking West 76 3 HISTORIC PHOTO 77 4 HISTORIC VIEW HOTEL LODGE CONCERT HALL CARRIAGE HOUSE CAMPUS EVOLUTION 78 5 FILM CENTER HISTORIC VIEW FUTURE EXPANSION VIEW HOTEL CARRIAGE HOUSE CAMPUS EVOLUTION COMPARISON LODGECONNECTOR CONCERT HALL 79 6 THE STANLEY CAMPUS MASTER PLAN 80 7 TRC REVIEW SCOPE SITE PLAN Hotel and Manor House Expansion campus entry relocation and parking site area Hotel and Manor House Expansion building site, parking and landscape site area 81 8 SITE PLAN CONCERT HALL CARRIAGE HOUSE 82 9 SIGNAGE LOCATIONS The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion will include the relocation of the existing monument sign currently located at the entrance to the campus off of Steamer Parkway. The entrance sign will be relocated or reconstructed (if relocation is deemed unfeasible) to the center island of the existing road linking Wonderview Ave. with Steamer Parkway. This is the current location of the “Stanley Historic District” signage. This sign will be replaced with one identifying “The Stanley”. The relocated monument sign will be coordinated with line of sight requirements at this traffic intersection just as the current monument sign is. Additional site signage will consist of directional and building identification 83 10 BASE PLANE - ROOF PLAN EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY VENTILATOR -NOT COUNTED IN HEIGHT CALCULATION MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/22/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT DIAGRAM AP105333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 INTERIOR COURTYARD INTERIOR COURTYARD ROOF 1 - HOTEL MIDPOINT: 7685.79 FT ROOF 3 - LODGE MIDPOINT: 7682.09 FT ROOF 2 - CONNECTOR HIGHEST POINT: 7667.87 FT HOTEL Ground Elevations (FT) SP1H = 7657.35 SP2H = 7657.2 SP3H = 7657.97 SP4H = 7657.97 SP5H = 7657.97 SP6H = 7657.3 SP7H = 7657.22 SP8H = 7655.26 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7657.28 FEET +30 FEET = 7687.28 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7687.28 FEET ROOF 1 = HOTEL EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7677.765 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7693.81 FT MIDPOINT = 7685.79 FT 7685.79 FT < 7687.28 FT = ROOF 1 COMPLIES CONNECTOR Ground Elevations (FT) SP1C = 7657.22 SP2C = 7650.78 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654 FEET +30 FEET = 7684 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684 FEET ROOF 2 = CONNECTOR HIGHEST POINT OF ROOF SURFACE (FLAT ROOF): 7667.87 FT < 7684 FT = ROOF 2 COMPLIES LODGE Ground Elevations (FT) SP1L = 7655.8 SP2L = 7654.6 SP3L = 7654.8 SP4L = 7654.92 SP5L = 7654.8 SP6L = 7653.35 SP7L = 7651.0 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654.18 FEET +30 FEET = 7684.18 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684.18 FEET ROOF 3 = LODGE EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7676.095 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7688.09 FT MIDPOINT = 7682.09 FT 7682.09 FT < 7684.18 FT = ROOF 3 COMPLIES EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY VENTILATOR -NOT COUNTED IN HEIGHT CALCULATION MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/22/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT DIAGRAM AP105333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 INTERIOR COURTYARD INTERIOR COURTYARD ROOF 1 - HOTEL MIDPOINT: 7685.79 FT ROOF 3 - LODGE MIDPOINT: 7682.09 FT ROOF 2 - CONNECTOR HIGHEST POINT: 7667.87 FT HOTEL Ground Elevations (FT) SP1H = 7657.35 SP2H = 7657.2 SP3H = 7657.97 SP4H = 7657.97 SP5H = 7657.97 SP6H = 7657.3 SP7H = 7657.22 SP8H = 7655.26 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7657.28 FEET +30 FEET = 7687.28 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7687.28 FEET ROOF 1 = HOTEL EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7677.765 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7693.81 FT MIDPOINT = 7685.79 FT 7685.79 FT < 7687.28 FT = ROOF 1 COMPLIES CONNECTOR Ground Elevations (FT) SP1C = 7657.22 SP2C = 7650.78 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654 FEET +30 FEET = 7684 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684 FEET ROOF 2 = CONNECTOR HIGHEST POINT OF ROOF SURFACE (FLAT ROOF): 7667.87 FT < 7684 FT = ROOF 2 COMPLIES LODGE Ground Elevations (FT) SP1L = 7655.8 SP2L = 7654.6 SP3L = 7654.8 SP4L = 7654.92 SP5L = 7654.8 SP6L = 7653.35 SP7L = 7651.0 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654.18 FEET +30 FEET = 7684.18 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684.18 FEET ROOF 3 = LODGE EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7676.095 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7688.09 FT MIDPOINT = 7682.09 FT 7682.09 FT < 7684.18 FT = ROOF 3 COMPLIES * GO TO SHEETS 12-13 FOR ELEVATIONS SHOWING GROUND AND ROOF PLANE CALL-OUTS 84 11 BASE PLANE - FLOOR PLAN DN SP1H: 7657.35' SP3H: 7657.97' SP5H: 7657.97'SP7H: 7657.22' SP1C: 7657.22' SP2L: 7654.6' SP4L: 7654.92' SP6L: 7653.35' SP7L: 7651.0' SP2C: 7650.78' EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY SP4H: 7657.97'SP2H: 7657.2' SP6H: 7657.3' SP3L: 7654.8' SP1L: 7655.8'SP5L: 7654.8' SP8H: 7655.26' MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/22/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT DIAGRAM AP106333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 INTERIOR COURTYARD INTERIOR COURTYARD HOTEL Ground Elevations (FT) SP1H = 7657.35 SP2H = 7657.2 SP3H = 7657.97 SP4H = 7657.97 SP5H = 7657.97 SP6H = 7657.3 SP7H = 7657.22 SP8H = 7655.26 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7657.28 FEET +30 FEET = 7687.28 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7687.28 FEET ROOF 1 = HOTEL EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7677.765 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7693.81 FT MIDPOINT = 7685.79 FT 7685.79 FT < 7687.28 FT = ROOF 1 COMPLIES CONNECTOR Ground Elevations (FT) SP1C = 7657.22 SP2C = 7650.78 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654 FEET +30 FEET = 7684 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684 FEET ROOF 2 = CONNECTOR HIGHEST POINT OF ROOF SURFACE (FLAT ROOF): 7666.83 FT < 7684 FT = ROOF 2 COMPLIES LODGE Ground Elevations (FT) SP1L = 7655.8 SP2L = 7654.6 SP3L = 7654.8 SP4L = 7654.92 SP5L = 7654.8 SP6L = 7653.35 SP7L = 7651.0 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654.18 FEET +30 FEET = 7684.18 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684.18 FEET ROOF 3 = LODGE EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7676.095 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7688.09 FT MIDPOINT = 7682.09 FT 7682.09 FT < 7684.18 FT = ROOF 3 COMPLIES DN SP1H: 7657.35' SP3H: 7657.97' SP5H: 7657.97'SP7H: 7657.22' SP1C: 7657.22' SP2L: 7654.6' SP4L: 7654.92' SP6L: 7653.35' SP7L: 7651.0' SP2C: 7650.78' EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN IN GRAY SP4H: 7657.97'SP2H: 7657.2' SP6H: 7657.3' SP3L: 7654.8' SP1L: 7655.8'SP5L: 7654.8' SP8H: 7655.26' MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/22/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT DIAGRAM AP106333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 INTERIOR COURTYARD INTERIOR COURTYARD HOTEL Ground Elevations (FT) SP1H = 7657.35 SP2H = 7657.2 SP3H = 7657.97 SP4H = 7657.97 SP5H = 7657.97 SP6H = 7657.3 SP7H = 7657.22 SP8H = 7655.26 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7657.28 FEET +30 FEET = 7687.28 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7687.28 FEET ROOF 1 = HOTEL EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7677.765 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7693.81 FT MIDPOINT = 7685.79 FT 7685.79 FT < 7687.28 FT = ROOF 1 COMPLIES CONNECTOR Ground Elevations (FT) SP1C = 7657.22 SP2C = 7650.78 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654 FEET +30 FEET = 7684 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684 FEET ROOF 2 = CONNECTOR HIGHEST POINT OF ROOF SURFACE (FLAT ROOF): 7666.83 FT < 7684 FT = ROOF 2 COMPLIES LODGE Ground Elevations (FT) SP1L = 7655.8 SP2L = 7654.6 SP3L = 7654.8 SP4L = 7654.92 SP5L = 7654.8 SP6L = 7653.35 SP7L = 7651.0 AVERAGE GROUND ELEVATION = 7654.18 FEET +30 FEET = 7684.18 FEET MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT= 7684.18 FEET ROOF 3 = LODGE EXPANSION TOP PLATE : 7676.095 FT TALLEST RIDGE: 7688.09 FT MIDPOINT = 7682.09 FT 7682.09 FT < 7684.18 FT = ROOF 3 COMPLIES * GO TO SHEETS 12-13 FOR ELEVATIONS SHOWING GROUND AND ROOF PLANE CALL-OUTS 85 LEVEL 1H100' -0" LEVEL 2H114' -3" LEVEL 3H124' -5" LEVEL 4H134' -2"ROOF L132' -9" ROOF H143' -3 1/8" UPPER LEVEL 1H104' -0" ROOF 1 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7657.28 ROOF 1 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7687.28 ROOF 1 MIDPOINT 7685.79 ROOF 1 TALLEST RIDGE 7693.81 ROOF 1 TOP PLATE 7676.42 CS RS1 CS CS CS ST RS2 RS1 RS1 RS2 SEE 4/TRC-201 FOR PERSPECTIVE OF WEST ZIPPER CONDITION EX I S T I N G NE W EX I S T I N G NE W LEVEL 2H114' -3" LEVEL 3H124' -5" LEVEL 4H134' -2"ROOF L132' -9" ROOF H143' -3 1/8" ROOF 1 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7657.28 ROOF 1 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7687.28 ROOF 1 MIDPOINT 7685.79 ROOF 1 TOP PLATE 7676.42 ROOF 1 TALLEST RIDGE 7693.81 VENTILATOR -NOT COUNTED IN HEIGHT CALCULATION CS ST RS2 RS1 CS CS CS CS CS RS1 RS1 RS1RS2RS2 ST ST LEVEL 1H100' -0" LEVEL 2H114' -3" LEVEL 3H124' -5" LEVEL 4H134' -2" ROOF H143' -3 1/8" UPPER LEVEL 1H104' -0" ROOF 1 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7657.28 ROOF 1 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7687.28 ROOF 1 MIDPOINT 7685.79 ROOF 1 TOP PLATE 7676.42 RS2 CS RS1 EX I S T I N G NE W EXISTING BUILDING MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/26/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS TRC - 201333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 3/32" = 1'-0" WEST HOTEL ELEVATION TRC1 3/32" = 1'-0" NORTH HOTEL MAIN ENTRY ELEVATION TRC2 3/32" = 1'-0" EAST HOTEL ELEVATION TRC3 NOT TO SCALE WEST ZIPPER PERSPECTIVE4 86 LEVEL 2L111' -5 1/2" LEVEL 3L121' -7 1/2" ROOF H143' -3 1/8" ROOF 3 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7654.18 ROOF 3 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7684.18 ROOF 3 MIDPOINT 7682.09 ROOF 3 TALLEST RIDGE 7688.34 ROOF 3 TOP PLATE 7676.34 ROOF 2 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7654.00 ROOF 2 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7684.00 ROOF 2 HIGHEST POINT 7667.89 RS2 CS RS1 ST CS CS ST RS1RS1 CS RS2 LEVEL 2L111' -5 1/2" LEVEL 3L121' -7 1/2" ROOF L132' -9" LEVEL 1L98' -5 1/2" UPPER LEVEL 1L101' -5 1/2" ROOF 3 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7654.18 ROOF 3 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7684.18 ROOF 3 MIDPOINT 7682.09 ROOF 3 TALLEST RIDGE 7688.34 ROOF 3 TOP PLATE 7676.34 RS2 CS RS1 ST EX I S T I N G NE W LEVEL 2H114' -3" LEVEL 3H124' -5" LEVEL 4H134' -2" LEVEL 2L111' -5 1/2" LEVEL 3L121' -7 1/2" ROOF H143' -3 1/8" ROOF 2 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7654.00 ROOF 2 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7684.00 ROOF 2 HIGHEST POINT 7667.87 BEYOND LEVEL 2L111' -5 1/2" LEVEL 3L121' -7 1/2" ROOF L132' -9" LEVEL 1L98' -5 1/2" UPPER LEVEL 1L101' -5 1/2" ROOF 3 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7654.18 ROOF 3 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7684.18 ROOF 3 MIDPOINT 7682.09 ROOF 3 TOP PLATE 7676.34 ROOF 3 TALLEST RIDGE 7688.09 RS2 CS RS1 ST CS EX I S T I N G NE W MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/26/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS TRC - 202333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 3/32" = 1'-0" NORTH LODGE ELEVATION TRC1 3/32" = 1'-0" EAST LODGE ELEVATION TRC2 3/32" = 1'-0" SOUTH LODGE EXPANSION ELEVATION TRC3 3/32" = 1'-0" WEST LODGE ELEVATION TRC4 87 LEVEL 1H100' -0" LEVEL 2H114' -3" LEVEL 3H124' -5" LEVEL 4H134' -2"ROOF L132' -9" ROOF H143' -3 1/8" UPPER LEVEL 1H104' -0" EXISTING BUILDING ROOF 1 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7657.28 ROOF 1 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7687.28 ROOF 1 MIDPOINT 7685.79 ROOF 1 TALLEST RIDGE 7693.81 ROOF 1 TOP PLATE 7676.42 CS RS1 CS CS CS ST RS2 RS1 RS1 RS2 SEE 4/TRC-201 FOR PERSPECTIVE OF WEST ZIPPER CONDITION EX I S T I N G NE W EX I S T I N G NE W LEVEL 2L111' -5 1/2" LEVEL 3L121' -7 1/2" T.O. FOUNDATION L92' -3" ROOF L132' -9" LEVEL 1L98' -5 1/2" UPPER LEVEL 1L101' -5 1/2" (E) BASEMENT L89' -7 1/2" EXISTING BUILDING ROOF 3 AVG. GROUND ELEVATION 7654.18 ROOF 3 MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 7684.18 ROOF 3 MIDPOINT 7682.09 ROOF 3 TALLEST RIDGE 7688.34 ROOF 3 TOP PLATE 7676.34 RS2 CS RS1 ST EX I S T I N G NE W MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/26/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS TRC-203333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 3/32" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION TRC1 3/32" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION TRC2 88 14 MATERIAL OVERVIEW CEDAR SIDING: 4” EXPOSED PROFILE COLOR: ARCTIC WHITE CS ST RS1 RS2 STONE: TO MATCH EXISTING STANLEY STONE ROOF SHINGLE: CERTAINTEED LANDMARK COLOR: COTTAGE RED ROOF SHINGLE: CEDAR SHAKE COLOR: STANLEY RED FACADE FACADE WAINSCOT SLOPED ROOF DORMERS / ZIPPERS 89 15 DN DN DN DW D W DN UP DN DN UP UP DN DN DN DN DN DN COURTYARD EXISTING MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL EXISTING KITCHEN EXISTING TRANSFORMER YARD EXISTING LODGE STAIR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR STAIR STAIR EXISTING RESTAURANT VESTIBULE EXISTING FREEZERS COURTYARD T.O. SLAB 100' - 0" T.O. SLAB 98' - 2 1/2" WATER ENTRY T.O. SLAB 98' - 2 1/2" T.O. SLAB 100' - 0" T.O. SLAB 100' - 0" EXISTING RESTAURANT EXISTING CHECK-IN EXISTING LOBBY EXISTING MUSIC ROOM MACGREGOR ROOM EXISTING ELEVATOR EXISTING CORRIDOR AND GUESTROOMS EXISTING BILLIARDS ROOM ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING MULTI-USE CHILLER WELL MECHANICAL LOCKERS DRY STORAGE HOUSEKEEPING STORAGE EMPLOYEE CAF. DRY STORAGE STAIR T.O. SLAB 98' - 2 1/2"T.O. SLAB 100' - 0 1/2" T.O. SLAB 101' - 2 1/2" T.O. SLAB 98' - 2 1/2" COOLER FREEZER RECEIVING 89 " MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/16/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION LEVEL 1 - OVERALL TRC - 101333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 1" = 20'-0" LEVEL 1 - OVERALL TRC1 LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN 20’40’0’ LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN 90 16 LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN DN DN DN UP DN UP OUTDOOR PATIO EXISTING LODGE EXISTING HOTEL EXISTING HOTEL EXISTING HOTEL OUTDOOR PATIO OUTDOOR PATIOS RECEPTION T.O. SLAB 114' - 3" T.O. SLAB 111' - 2 1/2" STAIR A STAIR C STAIR E STAIR G STAIR F ELEVATOR E1 ELEVATOR E2 LOBBY OFFICE LIBRARY HK 3' - 2" 3' - 2" 3' - 2"3' - 2 " 3' - 2 " STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q DELUXE ADA Q STANDARD Q DELUXE Q DELUXE Q DELUXE K DELUXE Q STANDARD Q DELUXE K DELUXE Q STANDARD K STANDARD K STANDARD K STANDARD ADA K DELUXE K STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q DELUXE ADA Q STANDARD K STANDARD K STANDARD K DELUXE Q 0" ELEC/IT HK ELEC 1' - 4 " 2' - 8"2' - 8" MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/16/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION LEVEL 2 - OVERALL TRC - 102333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 1" = 20'-0" LEVEL 2 - OVERALL TRC1 20’40’0’ LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN 91 17 LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN DW DN DN OPEN TO BELOW EXISTING HOTEL EXISTING HOTEL EXISTING HOTEL STAIR D STAIR A STAIR C ELEVATOR E1 ELEVATOR E2 STAIR E STAIR F STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q DELUXE ADA Q DELUXE Q DELUXE Q DELUXE K STANDARD Q STANDARD Q DELUXE K DELUXE Q F.O. STANLEY SUITE HK DELUXE Q DELUXE K STANDARD K STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q DELUXE Q STANDARD ADA K STANDARD K STANDARD K DELUXE Q IT ELEC MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/16/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION LEVEL 3 - OVERALL TRC - 103333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 1" = 20'-0" LEVEL 3 - OVERALL TRC1 20’40’0’ LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN 92 18 LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN /1 A-104A /1 A-104A EXISTING GUESTROOMS EXISTING GUESTROOMS EXISTING GUESTROOMS ATTIC ATTIC ATTIC ATTIC ATTIC ATTIC ATTIC STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD Q STANDARD K DELUXE Q STANDARD ADA K MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/16/25 STANLEY HOTEL AND MANOR HOUSE EXPANSION LEVEL 4 - OVERALL TRC - 104333 E Wonderview Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 1" = 20'-0" LEVEL 4 - OVERALL TRC1 20’40’0’ LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN 93 19 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion - Building Program 7/1/2025 Total Area of Net Area .01 Electrical 1 .02 Engineering 1 .03 Engineering & Mechanical 1 .04 Housekeeping 1 .05 Lounge 1 .06 Mechanical 1 25,700 .01 Lobby 1 .02 Lounge 1 .03 Housekeeping 3 .04 Public Restrooms 1 .05 Staff Office 1 .06 Guest Room - Standard 21 .07 Guest Room - Premium 8 22,920 .01 Lounge 1 .02 Housekeeping 1 .03 Guest Room - Standard 18 .04 Guest Room - Premium 9 .05 Guest Room - Presidential Suite 1 15,561 .01 Housekeeping 1 .02 Guest Room - Standard 6 .03 Guest Room - Premium 2 3,817 67,998 Circulation Factor for NSF to GSF Actual 26.4% GSF Total Area Not Including Circulation Factor PROPOSED 81,598 GSF Total Area ACTUAL 85,980 Building Area Level 4 6,267 Level 3 21,935 Level 2 27,445 Level 1 30,333 #REF! ϭ BUILDING PROGRAM 94 20 RENDERING - AERIAL NORTHWEST 95 21 RENDERING - AERIAL NORTHEAST 96 22 RENDERING - AERIAL SOUTHEAST 97 23 RENDERING - AERIAL SOUTHWEST 98 24 RENDERING - SOUTH APPROACH 01 HOTEL APPROACH HAS LOW VISUAL IMPACT FROM SOUTH APPROACH 99 25 RENDERING - SOUTH APPROACH 02 HOTEL EXPANSION APPROACH HAS LOW VISUAL IMPACT FROM SOUTH APPROACH 100 26 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING EAST EXISTING CONDITION EXISTING 101 27 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWEST EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING CONDITION 102 28 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING SOUTHEAST EXISTING EXISTING 103 29 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING NORTHWEST EXISTING EXISTING 104 30 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST EXISTING EXISTING 105 31 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING SOUTH 1 EXISTING CONDITION 106 32 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING SOUTH 2 EXISTING CONDITION 107 33 RENDERING - VIEW LOOKING WEST EXISTING CONDITION EXISTING 108 The Stanley Hotel and Manor House Expansion Estes Park, CO Technical Review Committee Submission Parking Operations Plan September 29, 2025 MOA ARCHITECTURE 109 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 1 Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan Project Outline The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion lies directly to the north of the existing Main Hotel and the adjacent Lodge building. The Hotel Expansion is sited in what is currently a sloping hillside and adjacent parking on the north side of the existing buildings. This location allows the Hotel Expansion to tie directly into the existing floor levels of the Main Hotel and Lodge, creating a fully connected hotel complex. The Hotel Expansion will be substantially hidden from view from the south side of the Stanley campus, retaining the Main Hotel and Lodge as the dominant visual elements. The Stanley Historic District Master Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines is the planning document guiding the development within the Stanley Historic District. The Stanley Hotel Expansion has been planned and designed in conformance with requirements as identified within this document. A variety of expansions to the Stanley campus and building development projects have been long anticipated within the Stanley Historic District Master Plan. The existing operation of the hotel was anticipated to expand and include expansion to the Main Hotel and the Lodge. The addition is planned to the north of the existing Stanley Hotel and Lodge buildings and will connect directly to the existing floors of these two buildings. The expansion serves to link the existing Hotel and Lodge with a two-story connector, allowing guests to remain inside as they walk throughout the Hotel and Lodge complex. Currently, these two existing buildings are not connected. 110 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 2 The original Stanley Hotel had a porte cochère, a covered parking area in front of the hotel that allowed guests to enter and exit their vehicles out of the weather. Inside, the most prominent feature in the lobby was the grand staircase, complete with spindles in sets of four designs to represent the four seasons. Additionally, the original Stanley Hotel had a connecting link between the Hotel and the Lodge building, allowing guests to walk between the buildings, out of weather. This feature no longer exists today. F.O. Stanley’s original design of the Stanley Hotel envisioned a square building plan wrapping an open central courtyard. Due to cost overruns, F.O. Stanley never completed his vision for the north expansion. The Hotel Expansion completes F.O. Stanley’s original vision of a central courtyard surrounding the hotel and the completion of the north wing. The Hotel Expansion is complete with a porte cochère, as originally provided, brings an added level of luxury and convenience for guests. The Stanley Hotel Expansion includes the addition of 65 guestroom units, a new north hotel lobby, and hotel support spaces connected directly to the existing Stanley Hotel and Lodge Buildings. The Hotel Expansion is developed over four floor levels, all of which connect directly to the Stanley Hotel. Levels One and Two also connect to the existing Lodge building. The hotel expansion will bring back the Porte Cochère, a covered parking area in front of the north lobby that allows guests to enter and exit their vehicles out of the weather. Inside, a prominent feature in the new north lobby will be a grand staircase, complete with spindles in sets of four designs to represent the four seasons. Additionally, as the original Stanley Hotel had a connecting link between the Hotel and the Lodge building, the Hotel Expansion will have a connecting link at Level Two, allowing guests to walk between the buildings, out of the weather. 111 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 3 Scope of the Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan The Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan will cover three primary elements of the project. 1. First, the Stanely Hotel and Lodge Expansion project will include additional parking requirements and impacts of the guestroom expansion itself. The 65-room expansion to the north of the existing hotel requires 82 new parking spaces (as will be further explained in this document) as required by the Stanley Historic District Masterplan. These new parking stalls will be provided in addition to existing parking for the Hotel and Lodge. 2. Second, the Stanely Hotel and Lodge Expansion project will include the relocation of the current entry drive to the Stanley Campus. Currently, the entry drive accesses the campus from the east side, off of Steamer Parkway. The original entry drive configuration into the Stanley Campus came from the south, in the center of the campus. The new relocation allows for the straight continuation of the access road off Highway 34, without the multiple right and left turns to access the campus. 3. Third, the Stanely Hotel and Lodge Expansion project will include the replacement of the existing gravel overflow parking lot to the south of the Hotel with new, permanent paved parking lots to the south and east of the Hotel. This portion of the project is intended to provide a permanent and enhanced level of service for guests and visitors. The current number of parking stalls in the gravel lot will entirely be replaced in permanent lots with no reduction in existing parking numbers. 112 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 4 The Stanley Film Center and Prior Stanley Campus Parking Operations Plan The Stanley Film Center went through a TRC review process in 2020, including an approved Parking Operations Plan and Traffic Impact Study. This included an evaluation of Vehicle Trip Generation and Parking Requirements for the Film Center. All required parking as anticipated by the Film Center have been provided on site and are currently accommodated for. As the Film Center project evaluated campus parking needs for that facility, this report deals only with the additional Hotel and Lodge Expansion guest rooms and the relocation of some existing parking and the entry drive. This report does coordinate with prior information and planning from the Stanley Film Center Parking Operations Plan. 113 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 5 Parking Expansion for New Guest Rooms Additional parking to accommodate the expansion of the Hotel will occur in conjunction with the relocation of the Stanley Campus Entry Drive, described within this document. This is in keeping with the Historic District Master Plan design guidelines which state, “The concept of joint parking for the District is encouraged by means of joint access/joint parking.” Eighty- two new parking stalls will be provided to accommodate the 65 new guest rooms (1.25 stalls per guestroom per the Historic District Masterplan requirements) These are located in a new lot South and East of the Hotel and accessed off the reconfigured entry drive for the Hotel complex to accommodate the Hotel expansion. Additionally, the unpaved parking lots south of the Hotel and Lodge will be replaced by permanent paved lots further to the east of the Hotel as well. The new paved lots will accommodate the same approximate vehicles as the unpaved lots currently do. The following Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Site Plan illustrates proposed new roadway, parking, sidewalk and landscape elements. Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Site Plan 114 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 6 Relocation of the Entry Drive The Stanely Hotel Expansion project scope will include the relocation of the current entry drive to the Stanley Campus. Currently, the entry drive accesses the campus from the east side, off of Steamer Parkway. The original entry drive configuration into the Stanley Campus came from the south, in the approximate location of the relocation shown here. The current configuration causes serious traffic congestion entering the property during peak season and large events. Traffic backs up along Steamer Parkway leading to a hazardous situation. The new relocation allows for the straight continuation of the access road off of Highway 34, without the multiple right and left turns to access the campus. This also provides additional stacking length for cars entering the campus. The existing entry parking control building will be relocated to the new drive location. The relocation returns the entry configuration to its historic precedent, reduces traffic congestion, and simplifies vehicular movements into and out of the campus. Additionally, the hotel expansion parking (82 stalls) will link off the entry drive and connect to the Carriage House parking lot. The entry drive relocation includes the demolition of the current entry drive. This will be replaced by landscaping as a foreground to the Stanley Film Center. Demolition of the existing entry drive, and relocation of the campus access point has been discussed and reviewed with Estes Valley Fire Protection District and has received their support. All new drives and intersections are designed to accommodate Estes Valley Fire’s fire vehicles. Additionally, we have coordinated emergency vehicle staging locations with Estes Valley Fire Protection District to their satisfaction. The entry drive relocation also includes a roadway connection between the new entry drive and the Aspire Hotel. Additional parking will be placed along this roadway to serve the overall Stanley Campus. Other than the new access road curb cut and the connection to the Aspire, Steamer Parkway will remain in its current configuration. 115 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 7 Existing Stanley Campus Entry Drive Configuration 116 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 8 New Entry Drive Relocation Concept Plan 117 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 9 New Parking Lots and Reconfiguration and Replacement of Existing Parking Lots The Hotel and Lodge Expansion Project includes redevelopment of parking lots to provide the additional parking required for the additional guest rooms, accommodate the site requirements for the location of the Hotel and Lodge Expansion Building and replace the existing gravel parking lot with permanent paved parking. The impacted parking lot locations and descriptions are as follows: Existing North Parking Lot: The Hotel and Lodge Expansion will shift the existing southern portion of the existing north car park approximately 15’ further to the north to allow site area for the Hotel and Lodge Expansion building. The existing north portion of the lot will remain unchanged as will the adjacent Tesla electrical vehicle lot. The reconfiguration of the southern tray of parking and vehicular drive in this area will provide a new exterior porte cochere for guests to enter the hotel under cover from weather. This area will be reduced from 113 parking stalls to 89 stalls. The displaced stalls will be relocated in the new east parking lots. The existing loading and receiving yard will remain on the far west end of the Hotel but will be redeveloped to provide more efficient operations. Loading and receiving will provide a single location for deliveries, trash removal and maintenance vehicles and operations that are out of site from guest functions. North Parking Lot Reconfiguration 118 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 10 Existing Lot 1 South Gravel Overflow Parking Lot: The existing gravel overflow parking lot located to the south of the Stanley Hotel and Lodge will be removed as part of the entry drive relocation and replaced with permanent paved parking to the east. This relocation will remove parked vehicles directly south of the hotel. The existing pool complex, which is no longer utilized, will be demolished as well. This area will be regraded utilizing excavated earth from the Film Center and Hotel Expansion sites and returned to a natural landscape setting in keeping with the Stanley environment. The overflow gravel lot is problematic in that the gravel/dirt surface is prone to potholes, surface water, mud, etc. There are approximately (approximate because there is no stall striping) 74 parking spots in the gravel lot, all of which will be replaced with new permanent parking to the east. Existing South Gravel Overflow Parking Lot and Pool Complex to be Removed 119 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 11 New Lot 1 South Parking Lots: The new southern parking lots will be accessed directly off the relocated access drive. These lots are located after the parking control building to enable Stanley parking control staff to direct visitors to the appropriate parking location. These new lots accommodate 159 parking stalls. New sidewalks will connect into existing sidewalks and provide pedestrian connectivity throughout the campus. New South Parking Lots 120 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 12 New Lot 4 Parking Lot: The new parking lot to be located on Stanley Campus Lot 4, adjacent to the Stanley Aspire building will help support overall campus parking and distribute it around the campus, rather than concentrate all parking in one area. This is beneficial to the campus as parking needs vary. This new lot will provide 17 parking stalls. This lot was originally designed at the time the Aspire was designed and constructed. The lot wasn’t constructed at that time due to funding constraints. As this portion of parking is on Lot 4, and is not subject to TRC review, it is not part of our TRC submittal. Additionally, this portion of parking is not required to meet the zoning requirements for parking the Hotel and Manor House Expansion. As such, we will make a separate submittal for site plan amendment to the Aspire Hotel site and parking. New Lot 4 Aspire Parking Lot 121 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 13 Existing Parking Needs Existing parking needs for lodging guests are currently adequately provided for. With between 350 and 450 guests per night during peak season, the 391parking spaces provided at the Hotel, Lodge and Aspire provide adequate parking resources. The Stanley property provides the following numbers of lodging rooms: Stanley Hotel 99 rooms The Lodge 40 rooms The Aspire 53 rooms TOTAL ROOMS = 192 The Stanley Historic District Master Plan parking requirement for hotel/lodging is 1.25 spaces per room. Based on a total room count of 192, the parking requirement for current lodging on-site is 240 spaces. 391 parking stalls are currently provided for lodging guests. Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Needs The Stanley Historic District Master Plan identifies parking requirements and are summarized as follows in relationship to the Hotel and Lodge Expansion. Accommodations – 1.25 parking spaces required per guestroom As a lodging accommodations facility, the Hotel and Lodge Expansion houses guestrooms, a new hotel lobby and back of house support functions. The guest room requirements for the 65 rooms is identified as follows: Accommodations – 65 rooms at 1.25/room = 82 stalls Based on a total room count of 257, including the expansion, the parking requirement for lodging including the room expansion is 322 spaces. 469 parking stalls will be provided for lodging guests with the expansion. The additional parking, beyond what is required for hotel guests will accommodate day visitors to the Stanley Campus. Following is a summary of existing and proposed parking (including the hotel and lodge expansion and the redevelopment of existing parking lots) 122 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 14 EXISTING PARKING REVISED PARKING LOT NUMBER STALLS LOT NUMBER STALLS Lot A - Main Lot 68 Lot A - Main Lot 68 Lot B - North Lower Lot 64 Lot B - North Lower Lot 40 Lot C - North Upper Lot 49 Lot C - North Upper Lot 49 Lot D - North East Lot 34 Lot D - North East Lot 34 Lot E - Tesla Lot 17 Lot E - Tesla Lot 17 Lot F - Presidential Electric 17 Lot F - Presidential Electric 17 Lot G - Gravel Overflow Lot 74 Lot G - Gravel Overflow Lot 0 Lot H - Aspire Lot 42 Lot H - Aspire Lot 42 Lot I - Aspire Overflow Lot 26 Lot I - Aspire Overflow Lot 26 Lot 1 - New South Lot 0 Lot 1 - New South Lot 70 Lot 2 - New South Lot 0 Lot 2 - New South Lot 49 Lot 3 - New South Lot 0 Lot 3 - New South Lot 40 Lot 4 - New Aspire Lot 0 Lot 4 - New Aspire Lot 20 391 472 HOTEL ROOMS HOTEL ROOMS Main Hotel 99 Main Hotel 99 Lodge 40 Lodge 40 Hotel/Lodge Expansion 0 Hotel/Lodge Expansion 65 Aspire 53 Aspire 53 192 257 PARKING REQUIREMENT PARKING REQUIREMENT rooms x 1.25 240 rooms x 1.25 321.25 Total Stalls Above Req'd 151 Total Stalls Above Req'd 150.75 Stanley Film Center and Carriage House (Post Restaurant) Parking The Stanley Film Center and Carriage House restaurant have a series of four lots that accommodate 132 total vehicles. The stalls are not counted in the Hotel, Lodge and Aspire parking counts. The 132 stalls are used during daytime hours for Stanley campus visitors. They are used by the Film Center during events at that facility. Staff Parking Staff designated parking is not included in the 469 Hotel, Lodge and Aspire parking counts. 53 staff parking spaces are assigned separately and match the needs of current and future staff. The Stanley may relocate all staff parking off site in the future in which case, there would be 53 additional guest and visitor parking spaces available. 123 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 15 Total existing parking spaces provided on the Stanley Property for Lodging Total revised parking spaces to be provided on the Stanley Property for Lodging 124 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 16 Stanley Campus Total Parking Accommodations Below is shown the total parking provided for all facilities on the Stanley Campus. FUNCTION SPACES ON SITE Stanley Hotel and Lodge + Expansion 384 Stanley Aspire 88 Stanley Film Center & Carriage House 132 Staff Parking 53 657 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge - Vehicle Trip Generation as Related to Parking Needs Vehicle trip generation for the Hotel Expansion is discussed in detail in the Traffic Impact Study. A brief summary is provided as follows with more detail available in the TIS. The project proposes expanding the existing Stanley Hotel with 65 new rooms. Access to the site is planned to be relocated from the existing location on Steamer Parkway to become the north leg of the intersection at SW Steamer Parkway. The internal roadways will continue to circulate through The Stanley Hotel campus. Vehicular traffic volumes associated with the expansion project have been analyzed for the existing, short-term (Year 2027), and long-term (Year 2045) scenarios. Using national trip rates, the project is anticipated to generate up to 519 daily trips, with up to 30 trips in the AM peak hour, and 38 trips in the PM peak hour. On Saturdays, it was calculated that there will be up to 525 daily trips with 38 peak hour trips. It was determined that the existing roadways and intersections can accommodate the projected traffic volumes for buildout conditions of the proposed new rooms in The Stanley Hotel. Parking Fees and Access Control Parking for hotel guests is provided as part of their payment for lodging at the time a booking is made. Parking charges for Film Center performance events will occur as a part of ticket pre-sales. Day visitors or event visitors not associated with an auditorium performance are required to pay for on-site parking at a rate of $10 per vehicle. Parking fees are charged between the hours of 10:00 am and 4:00 pm. Fee collection occurs at the parking control building at the entrance to the property. Restaurant visitors are anticipated to primarily visit after 4:00 pm and would not be charged for parking. Restaurant visitors arriving during parking fee collection hours will be reimbursed parking fees. Because the Stanley property (with the exception of the Aspire) has a controlled access point for guests and visitors, guests and visitors must identify the reason for their visit (lodging, performance event, restaurant, etc.), payment is collected if it hasn’t been provided as part of lodging or ticket sales, and then the vehicle is directed to available and appropriate parking areas, dependent on the reason for the visit. Direct interface with a parking control person at the entry to the Stanley property will identify if the vehicle is arriving for lodging, an auditorium event or other function. This system allows the Stanley to regulate visitors during 125 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 17 peak hours by directing them to available parking, ensure adequate parking is available, and anticipate parking contingency needs as necessary. Parking controls are not generally utilized during non-peak periods currently. Alternative Means of Site Access The expected number of patrons forecast to walk or bike to the Stanley Hotel will be provided in the Traffic Impact Study. Pedestrian and bike routing on the campus are illustrated on Graphic 2.0. On-site sidewalk systems provide a continuous, ADA-compliant path of travel from ADA parking to the Stanley Hotel. On-site sidewalks and paths tie to an off-site network of sidewalks within a ¼-mile walkable radius (15-20 minutes) of the Stanley Hotel. The running slopes connecting accessible parking spaces and entrances to the Stanley Hotel are designed to be as flat as possible, with the maximum running slope of 5%. The remaining pedestrian sidewalks and paths will be designed as accessible to the maximum extent feasible. That approach is in line with Sidewalk Design Criteria outlined in Pedestrian Facilities and the Americans with Disabilities Act. US Highway 34 is outside of the area of influence of the project as it is beyond the ¼-mile walkable radius of the Stanley Hotel. As such, we do not anticipate patrons to walk across US-34, between downtown Estes Park and the Stanley property to attend events. The expected number of patrons forecast to take private transportation (e.g., Uber, Lyft, Estes Park Shuttle, etc.) to the Stanley Hotel will also be provided in the Traffic Impact Study. Sidewalk Location Diagram 126 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 18 Estes Park Lodging Map & Bike Routes Estes Park Lodging Map & Bike Routes 127 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 19 Hotel and Lodge Service, Loading and Delivery Access The Hotel and Lodge Expansion design accommodates a service and loading yard on the west side of the building. Accessed by the existing west campus drive, the service and loading will accommodate deliveries, service vehicles, trash, etc. The service and loading area will typically host vehicles including pick-up trucks, 35-foot box trucks, trash removal vehicles, etc. Turning radius design throughout the Stanley property will accommodate these vehicles. Upon limited occasions, semi-truck access will be required. This would occur at scheduled times and semi vehicles are accommodated at the loading area. Hotel and Manor House Service and Delivery Yard 128 The Stanley Hotel and Lodge Expansion Parking Operations Plan 20 Service and Delivery Truck Turning Diagram 129 1 of 2     October 22, 2025 The Stanley Hotel Expansion Traffic Impact Study Review Comments:  Kellar Engineering (KE) has reviewed the submitted Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for The Stanley Hotel Expansion in Estes Park, CO prepared by Fox Tuttle Transportation Group, dated September 23, 2025. The TIS is for a 65-room expansion of the Stanley Hotel. The submitted TIS generally follows industry standard methods for traffic impact studies/traffic impact analysis and LCUASS Chapter 4.  KE concurs with relocating the access to the west on Steamer Pkwy to be the north leg of the Steamer Pkwy/SW Steamer Pkwy intersection with all-way stop control. KE also concurs that the northbound and southbound approaches should be reconstructed to have dedicated left-turn lanes.  The TIS shows the LOS of the southbound left-turn movement at the Wonderview Ave/SW Steamer Pkwy intersection at LOS F for the Saturday short range total peak hour. It is recommended that the applicant work with the town on potential mitigation measures if this becomes a problem in the future.  Provide a sight distance analysis at the study intersections.  Provide a queuing analysis table showing the short range total and long range total 95th percentile queue lengths during the peak hours and recommended turn lane storage lengths at the study intersections.  Provide an auxiliary lane analysis with storage length recommendations per the CDOT SHAC for the CDOT study intersections.  Provide a proposed site plan showing the relocated access and new left-turn lanes in the TIS. Figure 2 doesn’t appear to show the recommended new left-turn lanes.  It is recommended that the TIS is revised to address the above comments. 130 2 of 2 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (970) 219-1602 or skellar@kellarengineering.com. Respectfully, Kellar Engineering LLC Sean K. Kellar, PE, PTOE Colorado PE #38650   131 7644.46 76 4 4 . 5 6 76 4 1 . 0 1 764 0 . 6 5 76 3 3 . 3 6 7633 . 3 4 7632 . 8 6 7634.52 763 4 . 4 9 763 6 . 7 9 7636.78763 8 . 4 6 764 1 . 9 0 764 2 . 4 2 7641.98 7641.98 7642.09 7642.11 7641.84 76 4 1 . 8 6 764 4 . 8 9 763 6 . 2 8 763 6 . 9 1 76 3 6 . 9 1 7636.82 76 3 4 . 8 0 7647.09 764 7 . 2 6 764 4 . 0 5 764 3 . 7 7 764 4 . 4 8 7644.02 764 4 . 3 3 764 8 . 6 0 764 5 . 4 4 764 3 . 7 5 76 4 3 . 7 2 764 3 . 7 4 763 6 . 6 5 763 6 . 6 5 REVIEWED: DESIGNED: DRAWN: SHEET TITLE: SHEET NUMBER: FIELD BOOK NO.: NORTHWEST QUADRANT 1 MDG DBD DEN 5101 OF 4 PROJECT: DATE: PROJECT NO.: STANLEY HOTEL & EVENT CENTER 333 WONDERVIEW AVENUE ESTES PARK, COLORADO 09/15/2025 02401625.001 DESCRIPTION:DATE:# ISSUE: GROUP www.f-w.comEngineers | Architects | Surveyors | Scientists 223 WILLOW STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 (970) 484-7477 / info@f-w.com 0 U.S. SURVEY FEET SCALE: 1"=30' 15 30 60 SE E S H E E T 2 SEE SHEET 3 LEGEND SANITARY SEWER LINE WATER LINE GAS LINE ELECTRIC LINE FIBER OPTIC LINE PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT LOT LINE EASEMENT LINE STORM SEWER LINE CENTER LINE ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE VEGETATION DRIP LINE CURB CUT FLOW LINE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE CORRUGATED PLASTIC PIPE AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT RAMPHCR CPP PVC FL CC PAGEPG. BOOKBK. RECEPTION NUMBERREC. # INVERTINV WOOD POST POST - BOLLARD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SANITARY MARKER POST STORM MANHOLE INLET-SQUARE DOWNSPOUT - SURFACE FLOOR DRAIN INLET - RECTANGLE INLET - CURB TYPE INLET - ROUND WATER SPIGOT WATER VALVE WATER YARD HYDRANT FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION FIRE HYDRANT IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX IRRIGATION CONTROL PEDESTAL GAS VALVE GAS METER ELECTRIC METER ELECTRIC VAULT ELECTRIC PEDESTAL ELECTRIC OUTLET ELECTRIC LIGHT - POST ELECTRIC LIGHT - AREA / YARD ELECTRIC LIGHT - FLOOD ELECTRIC LIGHT - PARKING LOT ELECTRIC LIGHT - STREET ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER COMMUNICATIONS HANDHOLE / VAULT FIBER OPTIC VAULT FIBER OPTIC PEDESTAL UTILITY VAULT CLEANOUT DECIDUOUS TREE EVERGREEN TREE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL STATEMENT: THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL COORDINATES ARE BASED ON EXISTING LOT BOUNDARY MONUMENTS AND A CSV (COMMA SEPARATED VALUE) COORDINATE FILE PROVIDED BY TRAIL RIDGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR THE FOUND MONUMENTS. THE VERTICAL CONTROL VALUES ARE REFERENCED TO THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88) ACCORDING TO TRAIL RIDGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS. FARNSWORTH GROUP CALIBRATED THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL NETWORK TO THE COORDINATE VALUES PROVIDED. THIS EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS SURVEY IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OR AN IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT. THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY IS TO DEPICT THE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS AS AN AID TO PREPARE THE SITE AND BUILDING EXPANSION PLANS. SURVEYOR'S NOTES: 1) ALL EASEMENTS SHOWN HEREON WERE OBTAINED FROM THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE PLAN DRAWING PREPARED BY TRAIL RIDGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS AS PROJECT #2021022, DATED OCTOBER 25, 2021. 2) DATES OF SURVEY: JULY 1, 2025 TO AUGUST 25, 2025. 3) THE UNMANNED AERIAL SENSOR (UAS) FLIGHT WAS ON DECEMBER 7, 2024. GREASE TRAP MANHOLE 132 7603. 8 3 760 3 . 6 0 760 3 . 8 1 760 3 . 9 5 760 3 . 8 8 760 4 . 0 6 761 9 . 8 0 762 2 . 1 8762 7 . 6 5 7622 . 5 1 762 1 . 1 4 762 0 . 7 3 76 4 4 . 5 6 76 4 1 . 0 1 764 0 . 6 5 76 3 3 . 3 6 7633 . 3 4 7632 . 8 6 7634.52 763 4 . 4 9 763 6 . 7 9 7636.78763 8 . 4 6 764 2 . 4 2 7641.98 7641.98 7642.09 7642.11 7641.84 76 4 1 . 8 6 764 4 . 8 9 REVIEWED: DESIGNED: DRAWN: SHEET TITLE: SHEET NUMBER: FIELD BOOK NO.: NORTHEAST QUADRANT 2 MDG DBD DEN 5101 OF 4 PROJECT: DATE: PROJECT NO.: STANLEY HOTEL & EVENT CENTER 333 WONDERVIEW AVENUE ESTES PARK, COLORADO 09/15/2025 02401625.001 DESCRIPTION:DATE:# ISSUE: GROUP www.f-w.comEngineers | Architects | Surveyors | Scientists 223 WILLOW STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 (970) 484-7477 / info@f-w.com 0 U.S. SURVEY FEET SCALE: 1"=30' 15 30 60 SE E S H E E T 1 SEE SHEET 4 133 763 6 . 2 8 763 6 . 9 1 76 3 6 . 9 1 7636.82 76 3 4 . 8 0 REVIEWED: DESIGNED: DRAWN: SHEET TITLE: SHEET NUMBER: FIELD BOOK NO.: SOUTHWEST QUADRANT 3 MDG DBD DEN 5101 OF 4 PROJECT: DATE: PROJECT NO.: STANLEY HOTEL & EVENT CENTER 333 WONDERVIEW AVENUE ESTES PARK, COLORADO 09/15/2025 02401625.001 DESCRIPTION:DATE:# ISSUE: GROUP www.f-w.comEngineers | Architects | Surveyors | Scientists 223 WILLOW STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 (970) 484-7477 / info@f-w.com 0 U.S. SURVEY FEET SCALE: 1"=30' 15 30 60 SE E S H E E T 4 SEE SHEET 1 134 7603. 8 3 760 3 . 6 0 760 3 . 8 8 REVIEWED: DESIGNED: DRAWN: SHEET TITLE: SHEET NUMBER: FIELD BOOK NO.: SOUTHEAST QUADRANT 4 MDG DBD DEN 5101 OF 4 PROJECT: DATE: PROJECT NO.: STANLEY HOTEL & EVENT CENTER 333 WONDERVIEW AVENUE ESTES PARK, COLORADO 09/15/2025 02401625.001 DESCRIPTION:DATE:# ISSUE: GROUP www.f-w.comEngineers | Architects | Surveyors | Scientists 223 WILLOW STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 (970) 484-7477 / info@f-w.com 0 U.S. SURVEY FEET SCALE: 1"=30' 15 30 60 SE E S H E E T 3 SEE SHEET 2 135 762276237624762 576267627 7630 7615 7610 7605 7600 7600 7605 7610 7615 7620 7625 7630 76 1 0 76 1 5 76 2 0 7645 7640 762 0 76 1 5 7600 7605 76 1 0 7595 7590 76107615 7605 7600 767 0 7665 7655 7650 7650 7625 7635 7640 7645 75 8 5 7585 7590 7590 7595 760 0 7605 7583 75 8 7 75 8 6 75 8 4 7645 7650 7655 76507651 761 5 761 9 7600 75 9 9 759 8 75 9 6 759 7 75 9 5 75 9 4 75 9 3 75957596 75 9 2 75 9 1 7600 7594 7618 76 2 5 76 2 8 763 0 763 2 7633 7605 76097610 7615 7620 76 2 0 7629 7630 7631 7632 7633 7634 7635 7636 7637 7639 7640 7641 7642 7643 7644 7645 76467647 7648 7599 7600 7601 7602 7603 7604 7605 7606 7607 7608 7609 7610 7611 7612 7613 7614 7615 7616 761776187619 7620 76207620 7621 762276237624 7625 7626762 7 76287629 XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXX X X X X X DETENTION/WQ BASIN A 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 5657585960616263646566676869707172 5859 54 55 56 57 5556565757 53 56 89 89 89 90 91 92 93 94 95969798 99 00 01 02 03 0405 060606 0708 09 101010 11 12 13 161718 9192939495969798990001020304 92 93949596979899000102030405060708 96979898 989900010203040506070809 060607 0708 0910 88 8384 85 FFE (L3) = 7633.90' (ARCH 115'-0") FFE (L2.5) = 7629.40' (ARCH 110'-6") FFE (L2) = 7618.90' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE (L1) = 7603.90' (ARCH 85'-0") FFE (SERVICE) = 7600.90' (ARCH 82'-0") FFE (BASEMENT) = 7590.90' (ARCH 72'-0") STANLEY FILM CENTER K K 3 3 A A FFE (MAIN) = 7628.82' FFE (BASEMENT) = 7619.05' CONCERT HALL FFE = 7603.90CARRIAGE HOUSE > AND POOL DEMO'D PREVIOUSLY 05 10 15 10 15 05 00 00 05 10 15 20 10 05 95 00 9500 00 90 90 90 95 85 33 34 35 33 30 25 20 10 0715 10 30 30 2425 10 05 01 02 03 03 39 35 31 32 0 SCALE IN FEET 50 50 100 OV E R A L L G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N C1.0 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 1 - G R P - 0 0 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 2 P M , J L T C1.1 C1.3 C1.4 C1.5 SEE FILM CENTER PLANSC1.2 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72; 2ND LEVEL FFE=7657.97'PROP STANLEY HOTEL 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0")EXIST STANLEY HOTEL CARETAKER'S COTTAGE STEAME R P A R K W A Y EXIST FFE=7644.93; 2ND FFE=7654.93PROP LODGE STE A M E R P A R K W A Y EXIST FFE=7641.93EXIST LODGE H.R. OFFICE 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 136 7649 7650 767 0 767 1 767 2 7673 767 4 7654 7655 76 5 6 765 67656 7660 7661 7662 7663 766 4 766 5 7674 7670 7665 7660 7655 7650 7645 7640 7635 7644.46 7647.09 764 7 . 2 6 764 4 . 0 5 764 3 . 7 7764 4 . 4 8 7644.02 764 4 . 3 3 764 8 . 6 0 764 5 . 4 4 764 3 . 7 5 76 4 3 . 7 2 764 3 . 7 4 763 6 . 6 5 763 6 . 6 5 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72; 2ND LEVEL FFE=7657.97'PROP STANLEY HOTEL 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0")EXIST STANLEY HOTELCARETAKER'S COTTAGE STE A M E R P A R K W A Y FFE=7657.97' (ARCH 114'-3") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") H.R. OFFICE X X 57 58 59 62 64 67 56 57 5859 3.0% 2.8% 3.2% 3.2% 2.9 % 15.5 % 9.1 % 31. 9 % 3.1% 4.3 % 3.9% 2.8% 69.82 ME 71.39 ME 71.81 71.92 61.69 61.81 57.17 HP56.97 57.8157.7956.19 55.50 55.37 55.12 55.52 73.54 ME 75.06 ME 57.96 57.38 HP 55.26 57.00 57.43 58.14 57.96 57.96 58.14 57.43 57.22 57.22 57.75 52.77 55.44 54.74 3.0% 5.1%4.6 % 4.6% 4.0% 2.5% 8.6 % 8.8 % 72.16 72.10 ME 6.7 % 30.2% 32 . 9 % 69.45 66.77 14.7% 15.7% 2. 5 % 2. 7 % 1. 3 % 2. 4 % 39 L F 8 " P V C @ 4 . 3 4 % 129 LF 24" RCP @ 1.00% 31 LF 24" RCP @ 1.00% 53.39 50.09 46.2045.60 43.72 44.94 47.60 1.8% STAIRS 92 LF 24" RCP @ 1.0 0 % SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7655.27 8" ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION RIM 7657.05 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7655.25 EXISTING FDC RISER ROOM 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 55 56 55 56 57 DE T A I L E D G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N C1.1 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 1 - G R P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 3 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. REFER TO HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. 4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONS. 5. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE OR FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 6. IF WALL IS SHOWN, TG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE HIGH SIDE OF THE WALL. BG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE LOW SIDE OF THE WALL. REFER TO ARCH PLANS/DETAILS FOR WALL ELEVATIONS BEYOND THE ADJACENT FINISHED GRADES (EXPOSED WALL, CAP/FOOTER, ETC.) 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 137 765 5 7656765 7765 8765 9766 0766 17662 7663 76647665 766 6 766 7 766 8 766 9 767 0 767 1 765376547655 765 67656 7619 . 8 0 762 2 . 1 8 7627 . 6 5 7622 . 5 1 762 1 . 1 4 762 0 . 7 3 76 4 4 . 5 6 76 4 1 . 0 1 764 0 . 6 5 76 3 3 . 3 6 7633 . 3 4 7632 . 8 6 7634.52 763 4 . 4 9 763 6 . 7 9 7636.78763 8 . 4 6 764 1 . 9 0 764 2 . 4 2 7641.98 7641.98 7642.09 7642.11 7641.84 76 4 1 . 8 6 764 4 . 8 9 7647.09 EXIST FFE=7644.93; 2ND FFE=7654.93PROP LODGE FFE=7654.93' (ARCH 110'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7641.93' FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") EXIST FFE=7641.93EXIST LODGE FFE=7643.76' (ARCH 98'-10") 12" PVC 3.1% 3.0% 5.2 % 5.7% 3.1% 2.9% 3. 2 % 4.0% 55.02 62.07 61.60 ME 61.14 ME62.81 ME67.19 ME69.82 ME 53.58 ME 56.56 ME 53.93 53.80 54.62 54.72 52.49 44.92 54.92 44.92 44.92 57.22 57.22 54.47 54.72 54.93 54.92 55.5355.44 54.74 54.66 54.83 54.32 54.28 54.22 53.39 3.0% 3.0% 5.1% 33 . 7 % 32. 6 % 24 . 6 % 66.77 66.28 61.57 50 LF 24" RCP @ 1.00% 21 LF 24" RCP @ 2.20%19 LF 8" PVC @ 1.15% FFE=7618.90' (ARCH 100'-0") PRIVAT E D R I V E K A FFE (MAIN) = 7628.82' FFE (BASEMENT) = 7619.05' CONCERT HALL 51.47 51.71 43.72 44.94 47.60 48.22 41.93 47.86 25 . 8 % 27 . 4 % 3.4% 1.8% 1.0 % 3.4% 41.71 ME 41.69 ME WALL 92 LF 24" RCP @ 1.0 0 % 41 LF 24" RCP @ 1.00% 39 LF 24" RCP @ 1.00% 84 L F 2 4 " R C P @ 0 . 5 3 % DOUBLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7652.91 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7652.55 8" ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION RIM 7654.71 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7653.45 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7653.70 4' SD MH (ECC) RIM 7651.98 4' SD MH (ECC) RIM 7650.54 82 LF 2 4 " R C P @ 0 . 5 2 % CONNECT TO FILM CENTER STORM SYSTEM 53 54 55 44 44 45 45 46 46 47 6263646566 53 54 55565758596061 33 34 35 20212223242526272829 30 31 32 33 33 34 34 DE T A I L E D G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N C1.2 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 1 - G R P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 7 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. REFER TO HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. 4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONS. 5. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE OR FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 6. IF WALL IS SHOWN, TG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE HIGH SIDE OF THE WALL. BG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE LOW SIDE OF THE WALL. REFER TO ARCH PLANS/DETAILS FOR WALL ELEVATIONS BEYOND THE ADJACENT FINISHED GRADES (EXPOSED WALL, CAP/FOOTER, ETC.) 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 138 7605 7606 7607 7608 7609 7610 7611 7612 7613 7614 7615 7616 7617 7618 7584 758 5 758 6 758 7 76 0 0 76 0 0 76 0 0 76 0 1 760 1 7601 76 0 2 760 2 7602 7603 7604 760 5 7606 760 7 760 87609761076117612761376147615 7610 7615 7605 7600 7595 7594 7593 7590 7587 7586 7596 7597 7598 7599 7603. 8 3 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 04 05 0607 08 09 10 11 12 98 99 00010203040506070809 10 929394959697989900010203040506 85 86 87 88 89 9091929394959697989900010203 98 99 00 01 02 03 8990 0606 07 07 08 08 09 7.3 % 5.6% 6.0%5. 0 % 4.9 % 5.8% 5.7% 5.8% 4.8 % 15 . 6 % 12. 2 % 6.6% 6.8% 6.1% 6.2% 8.5% 13 . 2 % ??? 20. 3 % 25 . 3 % 27 . 6 % 10 . 1 % 8.0 % 3.3% SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7605.09 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7598.75 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7597.14 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7597.09 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7596.13 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7589.90 15 LF 18" RCP @ 0.50% 108 LF 18" RCP @ 1.00% 135 LF 30" RCP @ 4.00% 117 LF 18" RCP @ 1.00% 88 LF 30" RCP @ 1.72% 124 LF 18" RCP @ 12.07% PRIVATE DRIVE DOUBLE COMBINATION INLET RIM 7612.00 30 LF 30" RCP @ 0.64% 95 L F 3 0 " R C P @ 4 . 8 5 % 7600 7601 7602 7603 7604 7605 01 03 04 05 06 0707 08 09 10 CONNECT TO FILM CENTER STORM SYSTEM CONNECT TO FILM CENTER STORM SYSTEM 8889 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 95 L F 1 2 " R C P @ 5 . 0 0 % SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7609.15 74 LF 12" RCP @ 2.16% SINGLE VALLEY INLET FL 7591.45 SINGLE VALLEY INLET FL 7586.10DRAINAGE SWALE (TYP) DE T A I L E D G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N C1.3 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 1 - G R P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 8 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. REFER TO HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. 4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONS. 5. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE OR FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 6. IF WALL IS SHOWN, TG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE HIGH SIDE OF THE WALL. BG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE LOW SIDE OF THE WALL. REFER TO ARCH PLANS/DETAILS FOR WALL ELEVATIONS BEYOND THE ADJACENT FINISHED GRADES (EXPOSED WALL, CAP/FOOTER, ETC.)0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 139 7605 7606 75 8 3 7583 75 8 4 75 8 4 758 4 75 8 5 7586 7587 7588 758 9 75 9 0 75 9 1 7591 7592 7593 7594 7595 7596 7597 7598 7599 7596 7597 STEAME R P A R K W A Y X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 89 90 90 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 83 85 27 . 6 % 10 . 1 % 8.0 % 26.0% 2.9 % 2.7%1.1% 2.9% 1.8 % 3.8% 24" CONC FES 18" CONC FES SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7589.38 SINGLE COMBINATION INLET FL 7588.50 24" CONC FES OUTLET STRUCTURE GR 7586.78 EXIST SD MH EXIST SD MH 88 LF 30" RCP @ 1.72% EXIST 24" RCP 82 LF 24" RCP @ 1.68% 181 LF 2 4 " R C P @ 0 . 7 3 % 45 LF 24" RCP @ 1.00% ROW-VARIE SSTEAMER P A R K W A Y DETENTION/WQ BASIN REMOVE AND REPLACE INLET W/ VALLEY INLET 7600 7601 7602 7603 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 9293 94 95 96 84 85 86 878889 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 02 03 21 LF 18" RCP @ 1.59% DOUBLE VALLEY INLET FL 7589.72 DRAINAGE SWALE (TYP) CONNECT TO EXIST ROW STORM SYSTEM DE T A I L E D G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N C1.4 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 1 - G R P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 6 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. REFER TO HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. 4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONS. 5. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE OR FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 6. IF WALL IS SHOWN, TG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE HIGH SIDE OF THE WALL. BG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE LOW SIDE OF THE WALL. REFER TO ARCH PLANS/DETAILS FOR WALL ELEVATIONS BEYOND THE ADJACENT FINISHED GRADES (EXPOSED WALL, CAP/FOOTER, ETC.) 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 140 7599 7600 7601 7602 7603 7604 7605 7606 7607 7608 7609 7610 7611 7612 7613 7614 7615 75 9 1 75 9 2 7593 7594 7595 7596 7616 7617 7618 7619 7620 7621 7622 7623 7624 XXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ROW-VARIES STEAMER PARK W A Y CRUSHED REFINES PATH (RE:LSCAPE) CONC WALK (RE:LSCAPE) 76 0 8 760 9 761 0 761 1 761 2 761 3 761 4 76 1 5 76 1 6 76 1 7 76 1 8 761 9 762 0 7619 7620 7621 7610 7611 7612 7613 7614 7615 7597 7598 7599 7600 7601 7596 7597 7598 14 15 16 17 18 19 09 10 11 12 13 14 07080910 11 12 13 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 STOCKPILE SURFACE FROM STANLEY FILM CENTER DEMO 93 94 95 96 95 96 97 98 99 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11121314 DE T A I L E D G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N C1.5 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 1 - G R P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 3 : 0 1 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. REFER TO HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. 4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONS. 5. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE OR FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 6. IF WALL IS SHOWN, TG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE HIGH SIDE OF THE WALL. BG DENOTES THE FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO THE LOW SIDE OF THE WALL. REFER TO ARCH PLANS/DETAILS FOR WALL ELEVATIONS BEYOND THE ADJACENT FINISHED GRADES (EXPOSED WALL, CAP/FOOTER, ETC.) 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 141 XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXX X X X X X FFE (L3) = 7633.90' (ARCH 115'-0") FFE (L2.5) = 7629.40' (ARCH 110'-6") FFE (L2) = 7618.90' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE (L1) = 7603.90' (ARCH 85'-0") FFE (SERVICE) = 7600.90' (ARCH 82'-0") FFE (BASEMENT) = 7590.90' (ARCH 72'-0") STANLEY FILM CENTER FFE=7600.90' (ARCH 82'-0") FFE=7633.90' (ARCH 115'-0") FFE=7627.73' (ARCH 108'-10") FFE=7603.90' (ARCH 85'-0") FFE=7600.90' (ARCH 82'-0") FFE=7618.90' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7618.90' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7603.90' (ARCH 85'-0") ROW- V A R I E S ROW-VARIES ROW-VARIE S FFE=7615.90' (ARCH 97'-0") K K 3 3 A A FFE (MAIN) = 7628.82' FFE (BASEMENT) = 7619.05' CONCERT HALL FFE = 7603.90CARRIAGE HOUSE OV E R A L L U T I L I T Y P L A N C2.00 SCALE IN FEET 50 50 100 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 2 - U T P - 0 0 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 5 P M , J L T C1.1 SEE FILM CENTER PLANSC1.2 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72; 2ND LEVEL FFE=7657.97'PROP STANLEY HOTEL 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0")EXIST STANLEY HOTEL CARETAKER'S COTTAGE STEAME R P A R K W A Y EXIST FFE=7644.93; 2ND FFE=7654.93PROP LODGE STE A M E R P A R K W A Y EXIST FFE=7641.93EXIST LODGE H.R. OFFICE 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 142 7644.46 7647.09 764 7 . 2 6 764 4 . 0 5 764 3 . 7 7764 4 . 4 8 7644.02 764 4 . 3 3 764 8 . 6 0 764 5 . 4 4 764 3 . 7 5 76 4 3 . 7 2 764 3 . 7 4 763 6 . 6 5 763 6 . 6 5 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72; 2ND LEVEL FFE=7657.97'PROP STANLEY HOTEL 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0")EXIST STANLEY HOTELCARETAKER'S COTTAGE STE A M E R P A R K W A Y FFE=7657.97' (ARCH 114'-3") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") H.R. OFFICE X X REROUTE SEWER MAIN AROUND BUILDING. RECONNECT EXIST SERVICES AS REQUIRED CONNECT TO EXIST WATER MAIN DEMO EXIST 6" DIP THROUGH BUILDING FOOTPRINT REROUTE EXIST ELEC MAINS AND EQUIP AS REQUIRED (TYP) FIRE HYDRANT 25' UTILITY EASEMENT 6" SEWER SVC CONNECTION TO BLDG SEWER SERVICE (RE:PLUMB) 8" PVC8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" P V C CONNECT TO EXIST WATER MAIN 6" DIP DOM SVC CONNECTION FIRE SVC CONNECTION CONNECT TO EXIST WATER MAIN 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 6" PVC 6" P V C 6" PVC 8" PVC DE T A I L E D U T I L I T Y P L A N C2.10 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 2 - U T P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 9 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. ALL DRY UTILITY AND ELECTRIC DESIGNS ARE PROVIDED BY OTHERS AND SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SEE MEP PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND COORDINATE WITH ALL UTILITY OWNERS AS NEEDED. 4. CONTRACTOR TO MARK ALL UTILITY STUBS WITH MARKERS. 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 143 7619 . 8 0 762 2 . 1 8 762 7 . 6 5 7622 . 5 1 762 1 . 1 4 762 0 . 7 3 76 4 4 . 5 6 76 4 1 . 0 1 764 0 . 6 5 76 3 3 . 3 6 7633 . 3 4 7632 . 8 6 7634.52 763 4 . 4 9 763 6 . 7 9 7636.78763 8 . 4 6 764 1 . 9 0 764 2 . 4 2 7641.98 7641.98 7642.09 7642.11 7641.84 76 4 1 . 8 6 764 4 . 8 9 7647.09 EXIST FFE=7644.93; 2ND FFE=7654.93PROP LODGE FFE=7654.93' (ARCH 110'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7641.93' FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") EXIST FFE=7641.93EXIST LODGE FFE=7643.76' (ARCH 98'-10") REROUTE 8" DIP WATER MAIN AROUND BUILDING. RECONNECT EXIST SERVICES AS REQUIRED EXIST 6" GST CONNECT TO EXIST WATER MAIN REMOVE AND REPLACE EXIST HYDRANT RELOCATE EXIST GAS MAIN (BY OTHERS) 6" SEWER SVC CONNECT TO BLDG SEWER SVC (RE:PLUMB) FIRE HYDRANT 4" SEWER SVC CONNECTION TO BLDG SEWER SERVICE (RE:PLUMB) 8" PVC 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (TYP) 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC 8" PVC DE T A I L E D U T I L I T Y P L A N C2.20 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N 33 3 W O N D E R V I E W A V E , E S T E S P A R K , C O SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/26/2025 KAT/DIB MMC/JLT MMC/JLT JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver J: \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - S t a n l e y H o t e l E x p a n s i o n \ D r a w i n g s \ 2 3 0 1 7 2 . C I V - 0 2 - U T P - 0 1 . d w g , 9 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 5 - 2 : 5 6 P M , J L T 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND PROTECTION. 2. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN ROW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. ALL DRY UTILITY AND ELECTRIC DESIGNS ARE PROVIDED BY OTHERS AND SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SEE MEP PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND COORDINATE WITH ALL UTILITY OWNERS AS NEEDED. 4. CONTRACTOR TO MARK ALL UTILITY STUBS WITH MARKERS. 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 144 XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXX X X X X X ))( /  ˆˇ˝  $5&+˘  ))( /˘  ˆˇ˝  $5&+ ˇ ))( /  ˆˇ˙˝  $5&+  ))( /  ˆˇ˝  $5&+˙˘  ))( 6(59,&(  ˆˇ˝  $5&+˙  ))( %$6(0(17  ˆ˘˝˝  $5&+ˆ  67$1/(< ),/0&(17(5 K K 3 3 A A ))( 0$,1  ˆˇ˙˙ ))( %$6(0(17  ˆˇ˝˘ &21&(57+$// ))( ˆˇ˝ &$55,$*(+286( > '(02(':,7+),/0 &(17(53$&.$*( 2 9 ( 5 $ / /  + 2 5 , = 2 1 7 $ /  & 2 1 7 5 2 /  3 / $ 1 & 5 ( 9 , 6 , 2 1  ' ( 6 & 5 , 3 7 , 2 1 ' : 1 ' ( 6 ' ' $ 7 ( 1 2  '(6,*1('%<˛ '5$:1%<˛ &+(&.('%<˛ -2%˛ '$7(˛ j -9$,1& 6 7 $ 1 / ( <  + 2 7 ( /  ( ; 3 $ 1 6 , 2 1 6+((712 ˆ&,9 ˝˘ ',%$03 -/7 -/7$03 :sU/vX íïíõ^›„µ˚^ı„˚˚ı ÁÁÁXiÀiÀX}u }µoˆ˚„UKôìïìîïìïXðððXíõñí Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver & & &  6&$/(,1)((7 ˘˘ & 67/(9(/))( ˆˇˆ˚1'/(9(/))( ˆˇ˘ˆ˝ˆ 352367$1/(<+27(/ 67/(9(/))( ˆˇˆ  $5&+  (;,6767$1/(<+27(/ &$5(7$.(5 6&277$*( 67( $ 0 ( 5  3 $ 5 . : $ < (;,67))( ˆˇ˝˚1') ) ( ˆ ˇ ˘   ˝  3523/2'*( 6 7 ( $ 0 ( 5  3 $ 5 . : $ < (;,67))( ˆˇ˝ (;,67/2'*( +52)),&( 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 145 7644.46 76 4 4 . 5 6 76 4 1 . 0 1 764 0 . 6 5 76 3 3 . 3 6 7633 . 3 4 7632 . 8 6 7634.52 763 4 . 4 9 763 6 . 7 9 7636.78763 8 . 4 6 764 1 . 9 0 764 2 . 4 2 7641.98 7641.98 7642.09 7642.11 7641.84 76 4 1 . 8 6 764 4 . 8 9 7647.09 764 7 . 2 6 764 4 . 0 5 764 3 . 7 7764 4 . 4 8 7644.02 764 4 . 3 3 764 8 . 6 0 764 5 . 4 4 7643 . 7 5 76 4 3 . 7 2 764 3 . 7 4 763 6 . 6 5 763 6 . 6 5 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72; 2ND LEVEL FFE=7657.97'PROP STANLEY HOTEL 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0")EXIST STANLEY HOTELCARETAKER'S COTTAGE EXIST FFE=7644.93; 2ND FFE=7654.93PROP LODGE STE A M E R P A R K W A Y FFE=7657.97' (ARCH 114'-3") FFE=7654.93' (ARCH 110'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0")FFE=7641.93' FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") EXIST FFE=7641.93EXIST LODGE FFE=7643.76' (ARCH 98'-10") H.R. OFFICE X X STAIRS (TYP) WALL (RE:STRUCT) CURB/GUTTER (TYP) PARKING SPACE (TYP) SIDEWALK (RE: LSCAPE, TYP) APPROX LIMITS OF SAWCUT & ASPHALT PATCH ACCESSIBLE PARKING (TYP) COURTYARD (RE: LSCAPE, TYP) COURTYARD (RE: LSCAPE, TYP) EXIST ACCESS & PARKING ESMT EXIST ACCESS & PARKING ESMT SCORING (RE:LSCAPE)CONC PAVING (TYP) 3' CONC DRAINAGE PAN 6' CONC DRAINAGE PAN DE T A I L E D H O R I Z O N T A L C O N T R O L P L A N C3.1 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/10/2025 DIB/AMP JLT JLT/AMP JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 1. ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO FACE OF CURB, FACE OF BUILDING AND EDGE OF WALK UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR/REPLACE ALL DAMAGE TO EXISTING FLATWORK OR SITE FEATURES NOT INTENDED FOR DEMOLITION. 3. REFER TO GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. ASPHALT PAVING HEAVY-DUTY ASPHALT PAVING MILL AND OVERLAY LIMITS OF SAWCUT CONCRETE PAVING HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVING 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 146 7603. 8 3 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X CURB/GUTTER (TYP) PARKING SPACE (TYP) ACCESSIBLE PARKING (TYP) SIDEWALK (RE:LSCAPE, TYP) CURB RAMP (TYP) EXIST CONSERVATION ESMT 8' CROSS PAN CONC PAVING (TYP) DE T A I L E D H O R I Z O N T A L C O N T R O L P L A N C3.2 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/10/2025 DIB/AMP JLT JLT/AMP JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 1. ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO FACE OF CURB, FACE OF BUILDING AND EDGE OF WALK UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR/REPLACE ALL DAMAGE TO EXISTING FLATWORK OR SITE FEATURES NOT INTENDED FOR DEMOLITION. 3. REFER TO GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. ASPHALT PAVING HEAVY-DUTY ASPHALT PAVING MILL AND OVERLAY LIMITS OF SAWCUT CONCRETE PAVING HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVING 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 147 STEAME R P A R K W A Y X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X RELOCATED GUARD SHACK (RE:ARCH)DETENTION/WQ BASIN SIDEWALK (RE:LSCAPE, TYP) CURB RAMP (TYP) 8' CROSS PAN CONC PAVING (TYP) CURB/GUTTER (TYP) DRAINAGE SWALE (TYP) DE T A I L E D H O R I Z O N T A L C O N T R O L P L A N C3.3 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/10/2025 DIB/AMP JLT JLT/AMP JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 1. ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO FACE OF CURB, FACE OF BUILDING AND EDGE OF WALK UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR/REPLACE ALL DAMAGE TO EXISTING FLATWORK OR SITE FEATURES NOT INTENDED FOR DEMOLITION. 3. REFER TO GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. ASPHALT PAVING HEAVY-DUTY ASPHALT PAVING MILL AND OVERLAY LIMITS OF SAWCUT CONCRETE PAVING HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVING 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 148 XXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CRUSHED REFINES PATH (RE:LSCAPE) CONC WALK (RE:LSCAPE) CONC PAVING (TYP) STEAMER P A R K W A Y DRAINAGE SWALE (TYP) DE T A I L E D H O R I Z O N T A L C O N T R O L P L A N C3.4 RE V I S I O N D E S C R I P T I O N D' W N DE S ' D DA T E NO . DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: JOB #: DATE: © JVA, INC. ST A N L E Y H O T E L E X P A N S I O N SHEET NO. 230172.CIV 09/10/2025 DIB/AMP JLT JLT/AMP JVA, Inc.1319 Spruce Street www.jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80302 303.444.1951 Boulder ● Fort Collins ● Winter Park Glenwood Springs ● Denver 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 20 40 1. ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO FACE OF CURB, FACE OF BUILDING AND EDGE OF WALK UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR/REPLACE ALL DAMAGE TO EXISTING FLATWORK OR SITE FEATURES NOT INTENDED FOR DEMOLITION. 3. REFER TO GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CURB & GUTTER, CHASES, AND DRAINAGE PANS. ASPHALT PAVING HEAVY-DUTY ASPHALT PAVING MILL AND OVERLAY LIMITS OF SAWCUT CONCRETE PAVING HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVING 09/26/25 NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N - F O R T R C R E V I E W O N L Y 149 LIMIT OF WOR K LIM I T O F W O R K LIMIT OF WORK LIM I T O F W O R K b d c d c c c b b a d c c c c d c c c d d b b c d d b 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72; 2ND LEVEL FFE=7657.97' PROP STANLEY HOTEL 1ST LEVEL FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") EXIST STANLEY HOTELCARETAKER'S COTTAGE EXIST FFE=7644.93; 2ND FFE=7654.93 PROP LODGE FFE=7657.97' (ARCH 114'-3") FFE=7654.93' (ARCH 110'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7641.93' FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7643.72' (ARCH 100'-0") FFE=7644.93' (ARCH 100'-0") EXIST FFE=7641.93 EXIST LODGE FFE=7643.76' (ARCH 98'-10") LIMIT OF WOR K LIM I T O F W O R K LIMIT OF WORK LIM I T O F W O R K b d c d c c c b b a d c c c c d c c c d d b b c d d b UP DN DN UP UP DN DN DN DN DN DN DN DN DW DW DN DN SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES AS 1 AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY B&B CD 18 CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII DOUGLAS HAWTHORN 2" CAL MP 1 MALUS X 'PRAIRIFIRE'PRAIRIFIRE CRABAPPLE 2" CAL MS 9 MALUS X 'SPRING SNOW'SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 2" CAL PTS 27 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 1.5" CAL PTL 11 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2.5" CAL PTM 25 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2" CAL PT 7 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 3" CAL EVERGREEN TREES PFL 2 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 10` PFS 4 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 6` PFM 5 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 8` PNL 4 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 10` PNS 25 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 6` PNM 21 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 8` PPL 12 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 10` PPS 25 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 6` PPM 22 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 8` PSS 6 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 6` PSM 2 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 8` SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SHRUB AREAS UL 1,656 SHRUB AREAS 5 GAL. SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE GROUND COVERS BM 11,197 SF BIORETENTION SEED MIX BIORETENTION SEED MIX SEED NI 183,079 SF NATIVE SEED NATIVE SEED SEED NSW 3,641 SF NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS N/A XD 4,721 SF ROCK MULCH ROCK MULCH N/A NORTH 0' 10' 20'40'80' Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE 7/ 3 0 / 2 0 2 4 1 1 : 1 6 : 5 5 A M TH E S T A N L E Y H O T E L / L O D G E E X P A N S I O N DB 09.26.2025 23537 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e , E s t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 TRC CH REVISION DATE www.thinkconfluence.com 3001 BRIGHTON BLVD, SUITE 2892 DENVER, CO 80216 PH: (303) 433-7100 L-401 PLANTING PLAN KEY MAP 1. ROOTBALLS TO BE FREE OF WEEDS. 2. SIZES ON PLANT LIST SHALL BE CONSIDERED MINIMUM SIZES. 3. TOPSOIL SHALL BE TESTED FOR PARTICLE SIZE, pH, AND NUTRIENT LEVELS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO BRING THE SOIL TO ACCEPTABLE HORTICULTURAL QUALITY. SOIL ANALYSIS TO BE SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVAL GIVEN PRIOR TO PLACING TOPSOIL. 4. PROVIDE POSITIVE GRADES AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND TOWARD LAWN DRAINS AND CATCH BASINS. SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT A MINIMUM OF 2%. 5. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY TEMPORARY FENCING WHERE NEEDED. NO EQUIPMENT SHALL BE DRIVEN OR PARKED WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF TREES BEING SAVED. 6. FINISH GRADES IN PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE SET TO INCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF TOPSOIL IN MEETING SPOT ELEVATIONS ON CONTOURS SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS. SLOPES SHALL BE SMOOTH AND WORKED SOIL SHALL NOT BE LEFT IN CLUMPED FORM. TOPSOIL DEPTHS SHALL BE 6" IN SEEDED AREAS, AND 18" IN SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITY LOCATIONS BEFORE DIGGING. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN 5'-0" OF THE CENTERLINE OF UTILITIES. 8. TO MINIMIZE EROSION, ALL DISTURBED SLOPES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE LANDSCAPED OR REVEGETATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. SLOPES OF 2:1 OR GREATER SHALL BE NETTED AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN SEEDED OR OTHERWISE TREATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. 9. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. L A N D S C A P E N O T E S P L A N T L E G E N D EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE LEGEND 150 SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES AS 1 AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY B&B CD 18 CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII DOUGLAS HAWTHORN 2" CAL MP 1 MALUS X 'PRAIRIFIRE'PRAIRIFIRE CRABAPPLE 2" CAL MS 9 MALUS X 'SPRING SNOW'SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 2" CAL PTS 27 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 1.5" CAL PTL 11 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2.5" CAL PTM 25 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2" CAL PT 7 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 3" CAL EVERGREEN TREES PFL 2 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 10` PFS 4 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 6` PFM 5 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 8` PNL 4 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 10` PNS 25 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 6` PNM 21 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 8` PPL 12 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 10` PPS 25 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 6` PPM 22 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 8` PSS 6 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 6` PSM 2 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 8` SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SHRUB AREAS UL 1,656 SHRUB AREAS 5 GAL. SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE GROUND COVERS BM 11,197 SF BIORETENTION SEED MIX BIORETENTION SEED MIX SEED NI 183,079 SF NATIVE SEED NATIVE SEED SEED NSW 3,641 SF NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS N/A XD 4,721 SF ROCK MULCH ROCK MULCH N/A LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT O F W O R K LI M I T O F W O R K 90 90 90 00 05 10 15 20 LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT O F W O R K LI M I T O F W O R K 15 05 00 96 95 95 92 98 98 9797 00 NORTH 0' 5' 10'20'40' Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE 7/ 3 0 / 2 0 2 4 1 1 : 1 6 : 5 5 A M TH E S T A N L E Y H O T E L / L O D G E E X P A N S I O N DB 09.26.2025 23537 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e , E s t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 TRC CH REVISION DATE www.thinkconfluence.com 3001 BRIGHTON BLVD, SUITE 2892 DENVER, CO 80216 PH: (303) 433-7100 L-402 PLANTING PLAN NORTH 0' 10' 20'40'80' 1. ROOTBALLS TO BE FREE OF WEEDS. 2. SIZES ON PLANT LIST SHALL BE CONSIDERED MINIMUM SIZES. 3. TOPSOIL SHALL BE TESTED FOR PARTICLE SIZE, pH, AND NUTRIENT LEVELS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO BRING THE SOIL TO ACCEPTABLE HORTICULTURAL QUALITY. SOIL ANALYSIS TO BE SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVAL GIVEN PRIOR TO PLACING TOPSOIL. 4. PROVIDE POSITIVE GRADES AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND TOWARD LAWN DRAINS AND CATCH BASINS. SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT A MINIMUM OF 2%. 5. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY TEMPORARY FENCING WHERE NEEDED. NO EQUIPMENT SHALL BE DRIVEN OR PARKED WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF TREES BEING SAVED. 6. FINISH GRADES IN PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE SET TO INCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF TOPSOIL IN MEETING SPOT ELEVATIONS ON CONTOURS SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS. SLOPES SHALL BE SMOOTH AND WORKED SOIL SHALL NOT BE LEFT IN CLUMPED FORM. TOPSOIL DEPTHS SHALL BE 6" IN SEEDED AREAS, AND 18" IN SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITY LOCATIONS BEFORE DIGGING. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN 5'-0" OF THE CENTERLINE OF UTILITIES. 8. TO MINIMIZE EROSION, ALL DISTURBED SLOPES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE LANDSCAPED OR REVEGETATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. SLOPES OF 2:1 OR GREATER SHALL BE NETTED AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN SEEDED OR OTHERWISE TREATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. 9. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. L A N D S C A P E N O T E S P L A N T L E G E N D EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE LEGEND KEY MAP 151 SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES AS 1 AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY B&B CD 18 CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII DOUGLAS HAWTHORN 2" CAL MP 1 MALUS X 'PRAIRIFIRE'PRAIRIFIRE CRABAPPLE 2" CAL MS 9 MALUS X 'SPRING SNOW'SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 2" CAL PTS 27 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 1.5" CAL PTL 11 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2.5" CAL PTM 25 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2" CAL PT 7 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 3" CAL EVERGREEN TREES PFL 2 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 10` PFS 4 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 6` PFM 5 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 8` PNL 4 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 10` PNS 25 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 6` PNM 21 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 8` PPL 12 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 10` PPS 25 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 6` PPM 22 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 8` PSS 6 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 6` PSM 2 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 8` SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SHRUB AREAS UL 1,656 SHRUB AREAS 5 GAL. SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE GROUND COVERS BM 11,197 SF BIORETENTION SEED MIX BIORETENTION SEED MIX SEED NI 183,079 SF NATIVE SEED NATIVE SEED SEED NSW 3,641 SF NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS N/A XD 4,721 SF ROCK MULCH ROCK MULCH N/A LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT O F W O R K LI M I T O F W O R K LIMIT OF W O R K STEAME R P A R K W A Y 10 05 95 00 90 90 90 90 90 87 LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT O F W O R K LI M I T O F W O R K LIMIT OF W O R K 10 15 05 00 96 +13. 3 6 +13. 8 6 +16.25 3.68%>15 90 85 85 89 95 95 92 NORTH 0' 10' 20'40'80' Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE 7/ 3 0 / 2 0 2 4 1 1 : 1 6 : 5 5 A M TH E S T A N L E Y H O T E L / L O D G E E X P A N S I O N DB 09.26.2025 23537 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e , E s t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 TRC CH REVISION DATE www.thinkconfluence.com 3001 BRIGHTON BLVD, SUITE 2892 DENVER, CO 80216 PH: (303) 433-7100 L-403 PLANTING PLAN 1. ROOTBALLS TO BE FREE OF WEEDS. 2. SIZES ON PLANT LIST SHALL BE CONSIDERED MINIMUM SIZES. 3. TOPSOIL SHALL BE TESTED FOR PARTICLE SIZE, pH, AND NUTRIENT LEVELS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO BRING THE SOIL TO ACCEPTABLE HORTICULTURAL QUALITY. SOIL ANALYSIS TO BE SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVAL GIVEN PRIOR TO PLACING TOPSOIL. 4. PROVIDE POSITIVE GRADES AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND TOWARD LAWN DRAINS AND CATCH BASINS. SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT A MINIMUM OF 2%. 5. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY TEMPORARY FENCING WHERE NEEDED. NO EQUIPMENT SHALL BE DRIVEN OR PARKED WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF TREES BEING SAVED. 6. FINISH GRADES IN PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE SET TO INCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF TOPSOIL IN MEETING SPOT ELEVATIONS ON CONTOURS SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS. SLOPES SHALL BE SMOOTH AND WORKED SOIL SHALL NOT BE LEFT IN CLUMPED FORM. TOPSOIL DEPTHS SHALL BE 6" IN SEEDED AREAS, AND 18" IN SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITY LOCATIONS BEFORE DIGGING. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN 5'-0" OF THE CENTERLINE OF UTILITIES. 8. TO MINIMIZE EROSION, ALL DISTURBED SLOPES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE LANDSCAPED OR REVEGETATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. SLOPES OF 2:1 OR GREATER SHALL BE NETTED AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN SEEDED OR OTHERWISE TREATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. 9. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. L A N D S C A P E N O T E S P L A N T L E G E N D EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE LEGEND KEY MAP 152 LIMIT O F W O R K LIMIT O F W O R K LIMIT OF W O R K STEAME R P A R K W A Y 85 LIMIT O F W O R K LIMIT O F W O R K LIMIT OF W O R K SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE DECIDUOUS TREES AS 1 AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY B&B CD 18 CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII DOUGLAS HAWTHORN 2" CAL MP 1 MALUS X 'PRAIRIFIRE'PRAIRIFIRE CRABAPPLE 2" CAL MS 9 MALUS X 'SPRING SNOW'SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 2" CAL PTS 27 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 1.5" CAL PTL 11 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2.5" CAL PTM 25 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 2" CAL PT 7 POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 3" CAL EVERGREEN TREES PFL 2 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 10` PFS 4 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 6` PFM 5 PINUS FLEXILIS 'VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID' VANDERWOLF'S PYRAMID LIMBER PINE 8` PNL 4 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 10` PNS 25 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 6` PNM 21 PINUS NIGRA AUSTRIAN PINE 8` PPL 12 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 10` PPS 25 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 6` PPM 22 PINUS PONDEROSA PONDEROSA PINE 8` PSS 6 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 6` PSM 2 PINUS SYLVESTRIS SCOTCH PINE 8` SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SHRUB AREAS UL 1,656 SHRUB AREAS 5 GAL. SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE GROUND COVERS BM 11,197 SF BIORETENTION SEED MIX BIORETENTION SEED MIX SEED NI 183,079 SF NATIVE SEED NATIVE SEED SEED NSW 3,641 SF NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS NATIVE SEED W/ WILDFLOWERS N/A XD 4,721 SF ROCK MULCH ROCK MULCH N/A NORTH 0' 10' 20'40'80' Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE 7/ 3 0 / 2 0 2 4 1 1 : 1 6 : 5 5 A M TH E S T A N L E Y H O T E L / L O D G E E X P A N S I O N DB 09.26.2025 23537 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e , E s t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 TRC CH REVISION DATE www.thinkconfluence.com 3001 BRIGHTON BLVD, SUITE 2892 DENVER, CO 80216 PH: (303) 433-7100 L-404 PLANTING PLAN KEY MAP 1. ROOTBALLS TO BE FREE OF WEEDS. 2. SIZES ON PLANT LIST SHALL BE CONSIDERED MINIMUM SIZES. 3. TOPSOIL SHALL BE TESTED FOR PARTICLE SIZE, pH, AND NUTRIENT LEVELS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO BRING THE SOIL TO ACCEPTABLE HORTICULTURAL QUALITY. SOIL ANALYSIS TO BE SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVAL GIVEN PRIOR TO PLACING TOPSOIL. 4. PROVIDE POSITIVE GRADES AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND TOWARD LAWN DRAINS AND CATCH BASINS. SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT A MINIMUM OF 2%. 5. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY TEMPORARY FENCING WHERE NEEDED. NO EQUIPMENT SHALL BE DRIVEN OR PARKED WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF TREES BEING SAVED. 6. FINISH GRADES IN PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE SET TO INCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF TOPSOIL IN MEETING SPOT ELEVATIONS ON CONTOURS SHOWN ON SUBMITTED PLANS. SLOPES SHALL BE SMOOTH AND WORKED SOIL SHALL NOT BE LEFT IN CLUMPED FORM. TOPSOIL DEPTHS SHALL BE 6" IN SEEDED AREAS, AND 18" IN SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITY LOCATIONS BEFORE DIGGING. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN 5'-0" OF THE CENTERLINE OF UTILITIES. 8. TO MINIMIZE EROSION, ALL DISTURBED SLOPES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE LANDSCAPED OR REVEGETATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. SLOPES OF 2:1 OR GREATER SHALL BE NETTED AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN SEEDED OR OTHERWISE TREATED TO ENSURE STABILITY. 9. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. L A N D S C A P E N O T E S P L A N T L E G E N D EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE LEGEND 153 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 38.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 7.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 6.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.9 25.0 0.7 0.1 0.3 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.7 1.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 11.5 4.7 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.2 5.7 25.6 0.5 0.2 0.2 2.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.9 4.6 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.4 14.1 5.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 5.1 3.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 3.2 6.6 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.7 15.5 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 1.2 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.1 9.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 1.2 16.9 2.1 3.5 13.7 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.5 20.3 5.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 1.9 0.9 2.0 4.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.0 7.0 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 18.1 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.2 8.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.0 4.3 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.4 12.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 15.5 3.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.7 2.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 2.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.3 3.3 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.1 5.4 17.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 16.9 1.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 1.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 15.6 10.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.5 3.6 3.7 2.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 2.9 2.7 3.7 3.2 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.8 F.E.C. ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZP1 ZP1 ZR1.1 ZR1.2 ZR1.1 ZR1.1 ZR1.2 ZR1.1 ZW1.1 ZW3 ZW3 ZW1.1ZW3 ZW3 ZW1.1 ZW2 ZW2 ZW2 ZW2 ZW2ZW2 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.1 ZB1.2 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.2 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZB1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW1.1 ZW3 engineering consultants Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 9/ 2 3 / 2 0 2 5 1 2 : 5 2 : 5 2 P M ELS-100 NORTH LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLAN ST A N L E Y H O T E L A N D M A N O R H O U S E E X P A N S I O N Author 7/30/25 24101.00 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e Es t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 PROGRESS Checker REVISION DATE SCALE:3/64" = 1'-0"1 LIGHTING SITE PLAN D 09/23/2025 THIS SET OF DOCUMENTS IS IDENTICAL TO THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED DOCUMENTS PRODUCED ON THIS SAME DATE. THIS VERSION IS BEING SUBMITTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE AHJ. THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED VERSION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE ENGINEER UPON REQUEST. 154 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 2.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 11.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.2 4.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 5.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 5.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 3.2 6.3 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.1 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 1.8 4.8 0.4 0.0 0.2 7.7 8.7 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 1.2 0.3 0.0 0.2 2.1 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.5 2.8 0.1 0.1 1.9 3.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 8.1 7.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.7 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 3.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.1 5.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 5.5 12.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 15.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 11.5 4.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.0 2.2 0.4 1.3 1.2 0.1 0.1 3.8 18.2 0.7 0.1 2.1 2.8 3.6 0.1 0.8 2.0 3.9 0.1 0.2 6.9 7.8 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.5 1.5 11.5 0.1 0.0 0.3 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 1.0 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 5.7 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 17.9 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.8 32.9 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.3 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 29.2 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 11.6 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.4 0.5 0.1 1.0 1.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.3 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 9.5 10.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.0 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 20.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.5 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.7 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 ZB1.2 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.1 ZB1.2 ZB1.1 engineering consultants Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 9/ 2 3 / 2 0 2 5 1 2 : 5 2 : 5 3 P M ELS-101 SOUTH LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLAN ST A N L E Y H O T E L A N D M A N O R H O U S E E X P A N S I O N Author 7/30/25 24101.00 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e Es t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 PROGRESS Checker REVISION DATE SCALE:3/64" = 1'-0"1 LIGHTING SITE PLAN - SOUTH D 09/23/2025 THIS SET OF DOCUMENTS IS IDENTICAL TO THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED DOCUMENTS PRODUCED ON THIS SAME DATE. THIS VERSION IS BEING SUBMITTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE AHJ. THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED VERSION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE ENGINEER UPON REQUEST. 155 SITE LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE TYPE DESCRIPTION MOUNTING LAMP / LIGHT SOURCE INPUT WATTS DIMMING VOLTAGE MANUFACTURER CATALOG NUMBER SPECIFIC NOTESLAMP QTY TYPE LUMENS CRI CCT CUTOFF ZB1.1 42" IP66 RATED, BOLLARD TYPE 3 DISTRIBUTION, FINISH WHITE BOLLARD 1 LED INTEGRAL 1830 70 3000K FULL 43 0-10V 120 ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING PROB-Y3-3030-(FINISH)-DSC-(MOUNTING) ZB1.2 42" IP66 RATED, BOLLARD TYPE 5 DISTRIBUTION, FINISH WHITE BOLLARD 1 LED INTEGRAL 1735 70 3000K FULL 43 0-10V 120 ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING PROB-Y5-3030-(FINISH)-DSC-(MOUNTING) ZP1 EXTERIOR LARGE HANGING LANTERN, FINISH TBD PENDANT 4 LED PHILIPS CANDELABRA 549568 1200 90 2700K N/A 5W EA LAMP F/R 120 HINKLEY WINDSOR 1892BK 1 ZR1.1 2.5" EXTERIOR RATED DOWNLIGHT, 25 DEGREE BEAM, WHITE FINISH RECESSED 1 LED INTEGRAL 1050 90 2700K FULL 11 0-10V 120 LUMENTURE DL60-27H-25-W-W-RW-U-250-C ZR1.2 2.5" EXTERIOR RATED DOWNLIGHT, 60 DEGREE BEAM, WHITE FINISH RECESSED 1 LED INTEGRAL 1050 90 2700K FULL 11 0-10V 120 LUMENTURE DL60-27H-60-W-W-RW-U-250-C ZW1.1 EXTERIOR MEDIUM WALL MOUNT LANTERN, BLACK FINISH WALL MOUNT 3 LED PHILIPS CANDELABRA 549568 900 90 2700K 5W EA LAMP F/R 120 HINKLEY WINDSOR 1898BK 1 ZW1.2 EXTERIOR LARGE WALL MOUNT LANTERN, BLACK FINISH WALL MOUNT 3 LED PHILIPS CANDELABRA 549568 900 90 2700 5W EA LAMP F/R 120 HINKLEY WINDSOR 1984BK 1 ZW2 RECESSED IN WALL STEP LIGHT, FINISH TBD. WALL MOUNT 1 LED INTEGRAL 68 90 2700K FULL 3.5 R 120 WAC WL-LED101 - (FINISH) ZW3 EXTERIOR WALL MOUNTED SCONCE, TYPE 3 DISTRIBUTION. FINISH TBD WALL MOUNT 1 LED INTEGRAL 1830 90 2700K FULL 25 0-10V 120 ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING PROS-Y3-25-27K9-WMA59U-(FINISH) GENERAL NOTES: BOF = BOTTOM OF FIXTURE, RFD = RECESSED FIXTURE DEPTH, OFD = OVERALL FIXTURE DEPTH, OFH = OVERALL FIXTURE HEIGHT, TOP = TOP OF POLE, AFF = ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR F=FORWARD PHASE, R=REVERSE PHASE, 0-10=1-10V, 3=3 WIRE, DALI = DALI, DMX=DMX512, STEP=STEP DIMMING, ND=NON DIM, NA=NON APPLICABLE A.THE LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE CAN NOT BE USED INDEPENDENTLY OF THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO OBTAIN LUMINAIRE COSTS. THE INDIVIDUAL ESTABLISHING LUMINAIRE COSTS SHALL NOT QUOTE PRICING WITHOUT FIRST SEEING APPLICABLE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS AND ELECTRICAL DIVISION SPECIFICATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR IS REPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING NECESSARY DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO THE INDIVIDUAL QUOTING LUMINAIRE PRICING. B. ALL FINISHES TO BE REVIEWED AND VERIFIED BY INTERIOR DESIGNER AND/OR ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASE. C. PROVIDE ALL PARTS, PIECES, AND COMPONENTS NECESSARY FOR A COMPLETE AND FUNCTIONAL SYSTEM. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRM ALL MOUNTING ACCESSORIES PRIOR TO ORDER. D. CONFIRM DIMMING PROTOCOL WITH FINAL CONTROLS SPECIFICATIONS AND SHOP DRAWINGS. ALL FRONT OF HOUSE LIGHT FIXTURES TO BE PROVIDED WITH 1% DIMMING RANGE. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PRIOR TO ORDER. E. DECORATIVE WATTAGE AND DIMMING TYPE TO BE CONFIRMED WITH FINAL INTERIOR DESIGN DECORATIVE LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS PRIOR TO RELEASE OF ORDER, AND WIRING TO BE PULLED ACCORDINGLY. F. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ALL ACCESS PANELS, DRIVER LOCATIONS, AND TRANSFORMER LOCATIONS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. G. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRM FIXTURE COMPATIBLITY WITH CEILING TYPE AND CEILING THICKNESS PRIOR TO FINAL FIXTURE ORDER. H. FOR ALL LINEAR FIXTURES, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT FIXTURE LENGTHS PER FIELD MEASUREMENTS OR MILLWORK SHOP DRAWINGS, AS APPLICABLE. I. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY FEED AND LENGTH OF LEAD WIRES REQUIRED AND REVISE AS NECESSARY. J. PROVIDE EXIT SIGN MOUNTING, FACES AND CHEVRONS PER PLANS. K. FOR ALL DECORATIVE LIGHTING, REFER TO INTERIOR DESIGN DOCUMENTATION FOR FIXTURE MOUNTING HEIGHT. L. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE HEAVY DUTY JUNCTION BOXES, RATED FOR 50 LBS OR GREATER, FOR ALL DECORATIVE PENDANTS. M. SEE PLANS FOR AIMING INTENT FOR ADJUSTABLE LIGHTS AND WALLWASHERS. PRELIMINARILY AIM LIGHTS AS INDICATED VIA DIRECTIONAL ARROW ON LIGHTING PLANS. I.E. AT ARTWORK AND OR TABLES IN FIELD, PRIOR TO FINAL AIM AND FOCUS. SPECIFIC NOTES: (1)DECORATIVE FIXTURES ARE NOT VISABLE ABOVE THE BUILDING LINE ROOF PER ESTES PARK EXTERIOR LIGHTING CODE. (2) engineering consultants PLAN NORTH Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/ 2 3 / 2 0 2 5 1 2 : 5 2 : 5 3 P M ELS-102 LIGHTING SCHEDULES ST A N L E Y H O T E L A N D M A N O R H O U S E E X P A N S I O N Author 7/30/25 24101.00 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e Es t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 PROGRESS Checker REVISION DATE TYPE ZB1.1 AND ZB1.2 TYPE ZP1 TYPE ZR1.1 AND ZR1.2 TYPE ZW1.1 D 09/23/2025 THIS SET OF DOCUMENTS IS IDENTICAL TO THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED DOCUMENTS PRODUCED ON THIS SAME DATE. THIS VERSION IS BEING SUBMITTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE AHJ. THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED VERSION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE ENGINEER UPON REQUEST. 156 engineering consultants PLAN NORTH Date Drawn By Checked By: Project Number Sheet Name Copyright: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED OR OTHERWISE USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF MOA ARCHITECTURE 9/ 2 3 / 2 0 2 5 1 2 : 5 2 : 5 3 P M ELS-103 LIGHTING CUT SHEETS ST A N L E Y H O T E L A N D M A N O R H O U S E E X P A N S I O N Author 7/30/25 24101.00 33 3 E W o n d e r v i e w A v e Es t e s P a r k , C O 8 0 5 1 7 PROGRESS Checker REVISION DATE TYPE ZW1.2 TYPE ZW2 TYPE ZW3 D 09/23/2025 THIS SET OF DOCUMENTS IS IDENTICAL TO THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED DOCUMENTS PRODUCED ON THIS SAME DATE. THIS VERSION IS BEING SUBMITTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE AHJ. THE OFFICIAL DIGITALLY SEALED VERSION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE ENGINEER UPON REQUEST. 157 PUBLIC WORKS Page 1 | Stanley Hotel Expansion – Preliminary Package PUBLIC WORKS 333 E Wonderview Ave – Stanley Historic District Preliminary Package – Hotel Expansion & Master Plan Public Works Comments October 23, 2025 SUMMARY The following documents are included as part of the Preliminary Package documents prepared by MOA Architecture (unless otherwise noted) for the proposed Stanley Historic District Hotel Expansion:  B. TRC Project Review Request and Project Narrative – 26 pages (9/29/25)  D. Project Site & Architectural Concepts – 33 pages (9/29/25)  E. Parking Operations Plan – 21 pages (9/29/25)  F. Traffic Impact Study by Fox Tuttle Transportation Group (9/23/25)  G. ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey by Trail Ridge Consulting Engineers – 5 sheets (3/1/24)  H. Stanley Hotel existing conditions survey by Farnsworth Group – 4 sheets (9/15/25)  I. Civil Site Plan by JVA Consulting Engineers – Sheets C1.0-C3.4 (9/26/25)  J. Preliminary Drainage Report by JVA Consulting Engineers (9/26/25) Public Works Review Criteria:  Estes Park Development Code (EPDC), including but not limited to: o Chapter 7 – General development Standards o Appendix D. Street Design and Construction Standards  Estes Park Municipal Code (EPMC) Chapter 17.44 – Stanley Historic District Procedures and Standards for Development  Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS, 2021)  Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards (2005; updated 2023)  Mile High Flood District (MHFD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (Volumes 1-3)  Stanley Historic District Master Plan – Development Standards and Design Guidelines (January 1994) Public Works finds that the Preliminary Package is satisfactory for consideration by the Technical Review Committee (TRC). Technical corrections and revisions listed herein for the TIS and Civil Site Plans by JVA shall be reflected in the Final Package to be submitted for TRC approval. ANALYSIS B. and D. – Site Plan Concepts  On 10/21/25, the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) recommended approval of the following for the Hotel and Manor House Expansion: o Building site, parking and landscape site area north of the existing hotel; and o Campus entry relocation and parking site area south of the Concert Hall and proposed Film Center. 158 PUBLIC WORKS Page 2 | Stanley Hotel Expansion – Preliminary Package PUBLIC WORKS  Plan for reestablishing a new entry drive in the historic location is favorable for aligning and extending the existing street access from E Wonderview Ave with a new street leading into the site.  Plan for pedestrian sidewalks within Lot 1 is favorable for promoting pedestrian circulation. The Master Plan Design Guidelines (B. 6.) requires a master pedestrian circulation plan for each parcel. E. Parking Operations  New entry drive relocation includes a Parking Control Building and a bypass lane. The new street allows for about 200 feet of queuing length for drivers waiting to pay for parking. The existing access and parking control structure across from the Aspire Hotel will be removed  A proposed parking lot is accessed from the new entrance. A gated exit from this lot to Steamer Pkwy is aligned with existing access for the Aspire Hotel.  A new parking lot is proposed for the Aspire Hotel on Lot 4.  “Alternative Means of Site Access” (page 18) indicates the following will be addressed in the TIS: o Expected number of patrons forecast to walk or bike to the Stanley Hotel; and o Expected number of patrons forecast to take private transportation to the Stanley Hotel. F. Traffic Impact Study  Review comments by Kellar Engineering (KE), Public Works traffic engineering consultant, are attached. o Queuing analysis for NB drivers waiting to pay for parking at the new entrance shall be provided. o Site plan showing relocated access and new LT lanes is included on Sheet C1.4 by JVA; however, revisions pertaining to pavement markings have been requested.  CDOT comments reference future mitigation at the signal-controlled intersection of US 34 (Big Thompson Ave) and Steamer Dr. Public Works acknowledges the threshold (background + project) although there are no current plans in the works to add a second LT lane for EB traffic on Big Thompson Ave at Streamer Dr.  TIS shall specifically acknowledge and address the requirements in Parking Operations for “Alternative Means of Site Access.”  TIS shall be revised per KE comments and resubmitted as part of the Final Package submittal. I. Civil Site Plan Technical corrections for Final Package submittal:  Sheet C3.0 is affected by a technical issue and is partly illegible—please resolve.  Utility Legend and Grading & Drainage Legend would be helpful.  The ARC recommended Condition 1 at its meeting on 10/21/25. This condition references the Master Plan Design Guidelines (A. 4.) under Drainage: Culverts and flow dissipaters shall include river rock and cobbles while avoiding the use of angular rip-rap and exposed concrete. Details for these stormwater system elements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan.  The ARC recommended Condition 3 at its meeting on 10/21/25. This condition references the Master Plan Design Guidelines (A. 7.). Slopes steeper than 3-to-1 shall be stabilized using natural materials and revegetated. Engineered site grading shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 159 PUBLIC WORKS Page 3 | Stanley Hotel Expansion – Preliminary Package PUBLIC WORKS  Master Plan Design Guidelines (A. 7.) reference the need for silt fencing, an erosion control measure. Erosion control BMPs are adequately addressed in the Preliminary Drainage Plan in accordance with the most recent guidance by the MHFD. The Construction Plan shall include an erosion control plan.  Master Plan Design Guidelines (B. 5.) reference site design around intersections. All site intersections within the Stanley Historic District shall meet this standard or the standards in Appendix D. IV for intersection and driveway visibility.  Concrete curb and gutter to match existing adjacent construction shall be installed along the north frontage of Lot 1 wherever there are gaps on Steamer Pkwy. The preference is for 24” gutter with 6” curb.  Extend concrete trail (approximately 175 feet) to close the gap on the north frontage of Lot 4 along Steamer Pkwy.  At the NE corner of the new entrance, the pedestrian trail shall continue south and include a ramp for peds crossing Steamer Pkwy. In future, Public Works will complete the Wonderview Ave Trail Extension on Town property south of Steamer Pkwy and add a crosswalk.  Sheet C1.4 includes the new entrance alignment at Steamer Pkwy. Add the following details at the intersection: o Inlaid thermoplastic turn arrows are required on the existing NB approach at Steamer Pkwy, as shown on the plans, upon completion of the new entry into the site. o Through lane and RT stop bar pavement markings shall be installed for all-way stop intersection. o On the existing south leg, the NB LT lane shall be marked ONLY Left per MUTCD standards. o MUTCD standards apply for all pavement markings, including words and arrows. J. Preliminary Drainage Report  This preliminary report is well done and is acceptable. Reference to previous drainage reports is appreciated. A revised Preliminary Drainage Report is optional for the Final Package submittal for TRC.  The Final Drainage Report is due with submittal of the Construction Plan.  Technical corrections for Final Drainage Report: o Page numbering would be helpful. o Resolve formatting typos on some pages: 7, 8, 15, etc. o It is worth noting that the Town of Estes Park is not a regulated Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). o The current effective FEMA mapping references on pages 10 and 23 are incorrect. The correct FIRM is 08069C1094G (Revised Preliminary 12/20/21). o The need for a SWMP and a CDPHE permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity is acknowledged. o The previous drainage reports need not be attached to the Final Drainage Report since they are included in the Preliminary Drainage Report, Appendix C. 160