Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20080304AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, March 4, 2008 4:30 p.m. -Public Hearing SISTER CITIES, CITY HALL I. ROLL CALL II. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff -AACP update -Long range agenda C. Public III. MINUTES IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. 1450 Crystal Lake Road (Aspen Club), Conceptual SPA and other associated reviews, Resolution No. VI. PUBLIC BUSINESS A. Vote on Chair and Vice-Chair, Resolution No. /,~ VII. BOARD REPORTS VIII. ADJOURN MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Direct FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range PlannerJm~ RE: 1450 Crystal Lake Road -Conceptual SPA, Conceptual PUD, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Commercial Design Review Resolution No.~, Series of 2008 MEETING DATE: March 4, 2008 (cont. from February 5, 2008 and February 19, 2008) APPLICANT /OWNER: Aspen Club and Spa, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, LLC LOCATION: 1450 Crystal Lake Road -Lot 15 of the Callahan Subdivision CURRENT ZONING: RR/PUD (Rural Residential) zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD)Overlay SUMMARY: The Applicant requests conceptual PUD, conceptual SPA, conceptual Timeshare, and conceptual Commercial Design Standard Review in order to develop 19 timeshaze units, 12 affordable housing units, and 133 pazking spaces on Lots 15 and 14A (the existing 35 spaces on Lot 14A will not change as part of this application) of the Callahan Subdivision. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission require that the applicant revise their conceptual plans prior to proceeding to City Council. STAFF NOTE: The Application has been previously provided to the Commission. Please bring this with you to the meeting. REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION• The review of an SPA, PUD, and Timeshare is a four step review process. Step one is conceptual review before the 1 Planning and Zoning Commission (this public hearing), step two is conceptual review before City Council, step three is final review before P&Z, step four is final review before Council. The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission to redevelop the site: • Conceptual PUD approval for the construction of Affordable Housing and Timeshaze Lodge pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445, Planned Unit Development. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). • Conceptual SPA approval for the construction of Affordable Housing and Timeshare Lodge pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Area. (City Council is the final review authority afer considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). • Conceptual Timeshare approval for the construction of Timeshaze Lodge units pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.590, Timeshare Development. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). • Conceptual Commercial Design Review (Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review) for the construction of new timeshaze lodge units. The proposed development is in the Small Lodges Character Area. The conceptual review design guidelines address the street and alley system, parking, public amenity space, building placement and building height, mass and scale. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority for this review, though there is a City Council call-up period.) In addition to SPA, PUD, Timeshare, and Commercial Design Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission will be charged with the following Land Use Approvals at the time of Final SPA, PUD, Timeshare, and Commercial Design Review: Final PUD approval for the construction of Affordable Housing and Timeshare Lodge pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445, Planned Unit Development. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). • Final SPA approval for the construction of Affordable Housing and Timeshare Lodge pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Area. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). Subdivision approval for the creation of multiple affordable housing units and timeshare units pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.480, Subdivision (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission); 2 • Rezoning to include an SPA Overlay pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map (City Council is the final review authority afrer considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission); • Stream Mar ig'n approval for development within 100 feet of the high water line of the Roaring Fork River, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authoritv.) • A Growth Management Review (Chapter 26.470.080.3, New Lodge Development) for the development of lodge pillows. • A Growth Management Review (Chapter 26.470.040.0.7, Affordable Housing) for the development of affordable housing. • Condominiumization (Chapter 26.480.090, Condomdniumization) to demarcate ownership of the timeshare units. (This is an Administrative Review that is completed afrer all other reviews have been granted.) BACKGROUND: The Aspen Club is part of the Callahan Subdivision/PUD, which was approved in 1976. The original approval included sixteen (16) lots. Lot 14A was designated as a pazking facility for the use and benefit of the clubhouse and recreational facility that was proposed on Lot 15 (the current location of the Aspen Club). The parking area on Lot 14A includes thirty-five (35) spaces, and is accessed from Lot 15 via a bridge over the Roaring Fork River and through Lot 14 (see Appendix B in the Application). A number of PUD Amendments have been made to the Callahan Subdivision since the original approval. These included expanding the Club to 72,409 sq. ft., splitting Lot 14 into Lots 14E and 14W (each has asingle-family home now), and adding fifty-six (56) parking spaces on Lot 15. Lot 15 is zoned Rural Residential (RR) because this is the only zone district that permits a recreational facility. The existing Aspen Club lot includes a large grade change between the Club facility and surface parking, and the tennis courts. The tennis courts are located nearly ten (10) feet lower than the surface parking. This memo will refer to "benches", with the "upper bench" indicating the Club building and surface parking lot, and the "lower bench" representing the tennis courts. A similar application was made in 2004, but was withdrawn at City Council. Since that time the Applicant has refined the proposed health/wellness program, and better articulated the operation of the timeshare units. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant is proposing to add nineteen (19) new timeshare units to Lot 15 of the Callahan Subdivision/PUD. Thirteen (13) of these units aze stand alone units in four groups. Six (6) of the units are proposed to be added to the existing Club building. The Applicant also proposes twelve (12) affordable housing units that are not attached to the existing Club building. A total of 133 parking spaces are proposed for the development. The only dimensional requirement the Applicant 3 requests to vary is the east side yard and front yazd setbacks to accommodate the affordable housing units. The dimensional requirements are outlined in the table below: RR Dimensional Proposed Dimensional Underlying Zone District Requirement Requirements Dimensional Re uirements Minimum Lot Size ~ 941 acres, or 215,232 sq. 2 0 acres Minimum Lot Area per N/`~ Multi-Family: N/A dwelling unit Lod e: N/A Minimum Lot Width 370 Feet 200 Feet Minimum Front Yard 7.5 Feet for Affordable 30 Feet Setback Housing Units 3 Feet on east side for Minimum Side Yard Setback Affordable Housing Units; 20 Feet 20 Feet on west side. Minimum Rear Yard Setback 100 Feet 20 Feet Maximum Height 28 Feet 28 Feet Minimum % Open S ace N/A N/A 103,520 sq. fr. total: Multi-family (affordable Single-family: Same as R- housing units): 12,330 sq. 15 zone district Allowable Floor Area ft. Multi-family: N/A Lodge: 56,560 sq. ft. Lodge: N/A Commercial (Club): 34,630 Commercial: N/A sq. ft. Lodge:.5 spaces per key 133 spaces total: (19 spaces) Lodge: 19 spaces Club and Spa: 1 space per Minimum Off-Street Parking Aspen Club and Spa: 97 1000 sq. ft. of net leasable spaces (43 spaces) AH units: 17 spaces AH units: 1 space per unit (12 spaces) ParkinE: Lot 15 currently contains fifty-six (56) parking spaces and Lot 14A currently contains thirty-five (35) parking spaces, for a current parking level of ninety-one (91) spaces. The Applicant proposes reducing the number of surface pazking spaces on Lot 15 from fifty-six (56) to forty (40), adding fifty-three (53) spaces in a sub-grade gazage on Lot I5, and five (5) spaces in front of the affordable housing units that will be signed for short-term parking. The thirty-five (35) existing space on Lot 14A will remain. This brings the total parking to: Lot 15: 98 spaces Lot 14A: 35 spaces Total: 133 spaces (net increase of 42 spaces) 4 Access to the sub-grade pazking gazage will be provided along Ute Ave, and access to the spaces on Lot 14A will be maintained via the path over the River. Nineteen (19) of the spaces are dedicated to the timeshaze units, and twelve (12) of the spaces are dedicated for the affordable housing units - these will all be provided in the sub-grade gazage. Ninety-seven (97) spaces will be dedicated to the Club use (these consist of 22 sub-grade gazage spaces, 40 surface parking spaces, and 35 spaces on Lot 14A). Timeshare Units: The proposal includes nineteen (19) timeshare units, divided into thirteen (13) "townhome" units and six (6) "flats". The flats will be added to the existing Club building, while the townhome units will be stand alone units. The townhome units are divided into four separate two-story structures, consisting of nine (9) three-bedroom units and four (4) four-bedroom units. Lock offs are proposed in these units to permit flexibility (for instance athree-bedroom unit could be locked off to include aone- bedroom unit with a kitchen and atwo-bedroom unit), which results in a total of twenty-six (26) sepazately occupiable divisions or keys (13 units with 13 lock-offs). Three of the two-story structures are located on the "lower bench" of the property, where the tennis courts currently exist. The six (6) flats consist of four (4) three-bedroom units and two (2) two-bedroom units. The lock-offs proposed for these units will enable them to be used as eight (8) one-bedroom hotel- style units (no kitchen) and four (4) two-bedroom suites (with a kitchen). The lock-offs will contain six lock-off bedrooms, for a total of twelve (12) keys. The total number of lodge keys proposed as part of this development is: Townhomes: 26 keys Flats: 12 keys Total: 38 keys The proposed units will be used by owners in two-week fixed blocks of time for 32 weeks of the year (from approximately December 15 through April 15 and from June 1 through September 30). The dates will be fixed, so the same group of people will visit the Club at the same time each year. When the units are not used by owners, the units will be available for nightly rental or for use in one-week increments. The Applicant proposes building these units to LEED for homes standazds. Affordable Housing: The Application includes twelve (12) affordable housing units in a three-story structure. Nine (9) of the units will contain 950 sq. ft. of net livable area and three (3) of the units will contain 850 sq. ft. of net livable azea. The proposal is for a mix of Category 3 and 4 units, and that the units will be rentals controlled by the Aspen Club and Spa in order to ensure Aspen Club employees have the first opportunity to live in the units. 5 APCHA has recommended that the smaller units be Category 2, and that the larger units be designated at Categories 3, and 4. The Applicant proposes building these units to LEED for homes standards. Healthy Living Proposal: The Applicant's over-arching goal with this proposal is to create an integrated healthy-living community that the fractional owners, Club members, and the general public can participate in. The Application "aims to create an integrated facility that defines healthy living for our age, exceeding the likes of the Duke Center for Living, Canyon Ranch and the Cooper Clinic." Different health and wellness programs will be offered throughout the yeaz for timeshare owners and community members to take part in (for instance a cancer survivors program, yoga retreat, etc). The proposal has been accepted into the new LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED- ND) Pilot Program, and the Applicant intends for the project to "provide a landmark sustainable environment for a healthy lifestyle in healthy buildings." By participating in this program, the Applicant hopes to reduce the Club's carbon footprint from today's levels by using geothermal ground source heat pumps, using solar photovoltaic panels to generate a significant portion of the Club's electricity, and reducing existing heating/cooling loads by upgrade HVAC systems, insulation, etc. The Applicant has committed to the following steps in an effort to minimize automobile use in the project: • Implement paid parking as an auto-disincentive; • Increase Shuttle service to the Club and maintain regulaz pick-ups are locations throughout the City; • Purchase alternative fuel cazs for use by the Club's timeshare owners, employees, and guests; • Provide pick-up service at the Airport to discourage car rentals by timeshare owners; • Require all Club employees to carpool, take public transportation, or use the Club's Shuttle service; • Participate in the City's Car Shazing Program; and • Create a bicycle sharing program. The Applicant intends to continue the use of the Club as a day-use health and fitness center, while adding an additional "Aspen Club Living" component that provides more healthy living programming. STAFF COMMENTS: SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA -CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: A Specially Planned Area (SPA) is a process in which a site specific development plan is created which encourages flexibility and innovation in the development of land and promotes objectives outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan by allowing the variation of the underlying zone district's land uses and dimensional requirements for the benefit of the public. The parcel does not currently have an SPA overlay. An overlay is proposed to allow for the timeshare use on the property. 6 While the site is quite large, there are significant slopes, a required Stream Margin buffer, and a sewer easement that creates site constraints. These constraints, however, offer unique development possibilities. For instance, the proximity to the River enables new development to better interact with the riparian area than the existing tennis courts have. The conceptual development plan should consider whether the proposal is compatible with surrounding land uses, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Strong attention to the relationship between the new development and the ripazian azea should be considered. There are no protected view planes in the vicinity, but Staff believes it is important to retain the perception of the riparian corzidor from the center of the site. The Applicant has made changes to the architecture and site plan to address Staff s concern, however Staff does not believe these changes go far enough to ensure the riparian area is made prominent in the design. Staff recommends that the applicant strive to create a project that provides views toward the river from the new Club entrance. Staff does not believe the proposed site plan goes far enough in establishing a relationship with the "upper bench" and the riparian area, and would like to see the site plan better reflect the mission of the Club, and to find a chazacter unique to the neighborhood and the Small Lodge chazacter Area. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT- CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: The Callahan Subdivision already includes a PUD Overlay, so this application would amend the PUD to establish dimensional requirements for the Aspen Club parcel (Lot 15). The only dimensional requirement that is being varied from the underlying zoning is the east side yazd and the front yard setback to accommodate the affordable housing units. Staff believes these dimensional variations are appropriate in the setting given the slope changes between this area and the adjacent parcel and Ute Avenue. No hazards are believed to exist on the parcel, but Staff requests an Avalanche study as part of the final review to ensure the affordable housing units are protected from avalanche danger. This has been included as a condition in the Resolution. Staff is supportive of the programs the Applicant is attempting to bring to the Club and to Aspen. The program will create a unique addition to the Aspen Community. The programming will provide opportunities for locals to participate, in addition to the timeshare users. However, Staff does have concerns about certain aspects of this PUD proposal, specifically that the architecture and site plan does not adequately reflect the Healthy Living Mission of the redevelopment. As mentioned above, Staff has some concerns that the site plan does not provide a connection to the riparian area. Further, Staff has concems that the transportation commitments made by the Applicant are not clear enough to ensure that the project limits automobile use. There is a net increase of forty-two (42) parking spaces, but only thirty-one (31) new units (timeshare and affordable housing). Staff is concerned that the increased parking will encourage automobile use rather than limit it. Staff would like to see a detailed Transportation Plan that addresses the proposed auto-disincentives. This was also a request of the Transportation Department, and has been included as a condition in the Resolution. TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT-CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: The Applicant proposes a timeshare use program for the nineteen (19) lodge units. As mentioned above, these units are divided between six (6) "flat" units and thirteen (13) "townhouse" units. 7 The Applicant proposes 304 separate timeshare interests. There are nineteen (19) timeshare units, and the Applicant proposes each owner have a 1/16`h deeded interest in a specific unit for two (2) fixed weeks. The timeshaze plan includes nineteen (19) "Mid-season weeks" that will used as the plan's "float time." These weeks, and any unused portion of the fixed weeks, will be made available to the public for nightly rentals. The owners of the unit would be able to reserve no more than seven (7) days of the "float time" at any one time. Each timeshare owner is prohibited from occupying a unit for more than thirty (3) consecutive calendar days. Tentatively, the sale price for the two (2) week fixed interest in the townhome units will range from $200,000 to $400,000, and the sale price for the two (2) week fixed interest in the flats will range from $150,000 to $300,000. The Applicant has not determined if the units will be part of an exchange program, but the timeshare instruments submitted with the final application will permit participation in a timeshare exchange program should the condominium association approve it. The timeshare program, called Aspen Club Living by the Applicant, will have afully-staffed, on- site front desk located in the existing Club's main entry. The Applicant anticipates current Aspen Club Staff to staff this function. The program will follow the mandatory operational practices outlined in Land Use Chapter 26.590.060.B, Mandatory Operational Practices. The Applicant proposes more affordable housing mitigation than is required by the code for the proposed timeshare units. Section 26.470.080.3.b of the Land Use Code requires projects with less than one unit per 500 square feet of lot area to provide mitigation equal to 60% of the employees generated. Section 26.470.100.A.1 states that there are .5 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) generated per lodging bedroom. This project's nineteen (19) units include fifty-nine (59) bedrooms, creating a generation of 29.5 FTEs. Therefore, the mitigation requirement is 17.7 FTEs (29.5 FTEs * 60%). The applicant has proposed to provide housing for twenty-seven (27) FTEs onsite in twelve (12) 2-bedroom units. This exceeds the code requirement by 150%. No mitigation is required as part of the Club remodel, as there is no increase in the amount of net leasable area. As mentioned in the SPA and PUD sections of this memo, Staff has concerns with the proposed parking scenario. While the Application provides the code required amount of parking for the timeshare units (19), Staff is concerned with the overall plan for parking and auto-disincentives. Staff also has concerns relating to the site plan and the relationship to the riparian area. These are outlined in more detail below. The Applicant has pledged to meet all of the applicable timeshare requirements. Information on the timeshare development instruments will be submitted as part of the final application. A draft disclosure statement has been provided as part of the Application (see Appendix D, Exhibit 2 in the Application). CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW: The proposed development is in the Small Lodge Character Area which encompasses lodges located in residential neighborhoods. The conceptual review design guidelines address the street and alley system, parking, public amenity space, building placement and building height, mass and scale. 8 While an attempt has been made to ensure individual units are modulated, Staff does not believe the design adequately addresses this standard. A lower density of timeshare units, or smaller units may be required to meet this standard. Although modules are created, Staff has requested that the applicant rethink the character of the architecture to better reflect the mission of the Club. There is an opportunity to blend into the natural landscape through azchitectural detailing, the creation of vistas, or through decreased mass, and Staff encourages the Applicant to further refine the site plan and architecture to do so. As part of the revised site plan (see Exhibit F) that the Applicant has submitted, the timeshare units seen from the proposed Club Entrance looking toward the river have flat roofs in an attempt to create transparency to the riparian area. The units have also been broken up in this area, again in an effort to increase transparency. Staff does believe that this is enough of a gesture towards establishing a relationship with the upper bench and the riparian area. Staff requests that the applicant continue to redesign to find a character that complies with the design objectives of the Small Lodge Character Area. Specifically, Staff has concerns about the following Conceptual Review Design Guidelines: 1. 5.3 Minimize the visual impacts of surface parking. 2. Public Amenity Space 3. 5.5 Within an established residential context, a lodge building should reflect traditional lot widths in more than one of the following ways: • The variation in building height. • The modulation of the building elements. • The variation in fagade heights. • The street fagade composition. • The variation in design and materials to emphasize the building module. 4. 5.7 A building should respect the traditional lot width and scale of the context in the form, modulation and variation of the roofscape. Staff would like to see the proposal redesigned prior to proceeding to Council for conceptual review in order to better comply with the following design objective: " 2. Create a distinctive experience for lodging with a sense of being in a neighborhood. Lodge overlay sites offer a special opportunity to experience the community more closely, and to feel a part of a neighborhood. Therefore, these lodges should appear related to the context in their design, while also conveying the unique character of an exciting accommodations facility." By addressing Guideline 2, quoted above, Staff believes the site plan and architecture will better fit with the overall goal of this redevelopment proposal. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Zoning Officer, Building Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Housing Department, Utilities and the Parks Department have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. Parks has requested that a trail easement be granted on the property adjacent to Ute Avenue to allow the completion of the Ute Ave trail. This has been included as a condition in the Resolution. In addition, Engineering and Utilities/Public Works have both identified on-site drainage and soil conditions as a potential challenge for the proposed site. The Applicant will need to address these concerns as part of the Final Application. As noted later in the staff memo, the affordable housing proposed meets the required housing mitigation. APCHA has recommended that the smaller units be designated as Category 2 units, and the large units be designated Categories 3 and 4. The APCHA Staff will review the proposal again prior to final approval. RECOMMENDATION: At this point and time, Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission require that the applicant revise their conceptual plans prior to proceeding to City Council, specifically Staff recommends the applicant: • Create a site plan that emphasizes the ripazian area by creating a relationship between the "upper bench", the new Club entrance, and the riparian area; • Better articulate the Club's mission though building design that reflects the residential context but is unique in character. This may require a lower density of timeshaze units or smaller units; • Examine ways to minimize the amount of parking and increase auto-disincentives through a detailed Transportation Plan provided at final review. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # Series 2008, recommending conceptual approval of a Conceptual Specially Planned Area (SPA), Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD), Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Commercial Design Review for the Aspen Club project." Attachments: Exhibit A - SPA Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit B - PUD Review Criteria, Staff Findings EXHIBIT C -Commercial Design Review, Staff Findings EXHIBIT D -Timeshare Review Criteria, Staff Findings EXMBIT E - DRC Comments 10 RESOLUTION N0. `~, (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A CONCEPTUAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA), CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), AND CONCEPTUAL TIMESHARE, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUB-GRADE PARKING, NINETEEN TIMESHARE UNITS, REDESIGNED COMMERCIAL SPACE, AND TWELVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1450 CRYSTAL LAKE ROAD (THE ASPEN CLUB) CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY,COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-181-32-019 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Aspen Club and Spa, LLC, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of conceptual commercial design review, and a recommendation of conceptual approval for a Specially Planned Area (SPA), Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Timeshare, to develop nineteen (19) timeshaze units and twelve (12) affordable housing units, and to redesign existing commercial spaces; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission for conceptual approval of an amendment to a Planned Unit Development (PUD), a conceptual approval of a new Specially Planned Area (SPA), conceptual approval of a timeshare, and for conceptual approval of commercial design review; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the requirements of a Specially Planned Area (SPA), a Planned Unit Development (PUD), Conceptual Timeshaze, and the Commercial Design Standards; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 5, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No.~, Series of 2008, by a to (_ -~ vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Destgn Review, and recommending the Aspen City Council approve a Conceptual PUD, Conceptual SPA, Conceptual Timeshaze; and, Resolution NoD~, Series 2008 Page 1 of 9 WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1• Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and recommends approval of Conceptual Specially Planned Area (SPA), Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Conceptual Timeshare. The final SPA/PUD application shall address comments in the following sections: Section 2: Building The Applicant shall meet all adopted building codes and requirements if and when a building permit is submitted. Accessible routes to any public right-of--way and accessible parking spaces will be required. The proposed project will be subject to the Use Tax on building materials. The proposed project will be required to comply with all Efficient Building Programs in place at time of building permit submittal. Section 3: Engineerine The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. The proposal shall comply with the DRC comments from the Engineering Department regarding transportation, drainage, pedestrian improvements, construction management, traffic studies, utilities and sight distances. The Applicant shall be subject to the Stormwater System Development Fee. The final application shall address how the construction management plan will address construction while the Club remains open. Resolution No ~, Series 2008 Page 2 of 9 Section 4: Affordable Housine The Housing Board recommends that the three smaller units be deed-restricted as Category 2 units and that the other nine units be a mix of Category 3 and 4. Since the developer has the option of the units being "for sale" units or rental units and would prefer rental units, the following conditions are required as part of the approval: Rental Units: a. The units will be deed-restricted as Category 2, 3 or 4, to be approved by APCHA and finalized at time of Final approval. b. The deed-restriction will allow for the units to become ownership units at such time the owners would request this change and/or at such time the APCHA deems even ONE of the units out of compliance over a period of one year. If any of the units are found to be out of compliance for one year, or the owner elects to sell the units, the units would be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specified in the deed restriction at the category specified at the time of final approval, based on the sales price stated in the Guidelines in effect at the time of recordation of the deed restriction, appreciated as stated in the deed restriction (3% or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is less), as of the date of the listing of the units. If the units aze being sold due to non-compliance, all of the units will be sold through the lottery system. If the owner elects to sell the units, the owner may choose 1/3rd of the buyers as long as they qualify under the top priority for that specific unit. c. An agreement will be established between the Aspen Club and Spa and APCHA regazding the tenancy of the affordable housing units. At NO time will the tenancy of that unit be tied to any specific employer. If the owner cannot find a qualified a tenant, the owner will contact APCHA and the unit(s) will be filled through APCHA's normal advertising process. d. The units shall be owned by an Association and managed by that Association; however, the applicant must provide to APCHA, at final approval, more detail of maintaining and managing said units. e. Each tenant in the rental units will be required to be requalified by APCHA on a yearly basis. f The governing documents shall be drafted to reflect the potential for the rental units to become ownership units. These governing documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA. g. Should the rental units become ownership units, the APCHA or the City of Aspen can elect to purchase them for rental to qualified households in accordance with the APCHA Housing Guidelines. Resolution No ~, Series 2008 Page 3 of 9 h. As long as the affordable housing units remain as rental units, the APCHA or the applicant shall structure a deed restriction for the units such that an undivided 1/10`h of ]percent interest in the ownership of each unit is deed restricted in perpetuity to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; or until such time the units become ownership units; or the applicant may propose any other means that the Housing Authority determines acceptable. i. Language shall be provided in the Protective Covenants covering the units' assessments upon the units becoming "for sale" units. The assessments shall be based on the value of the free-mazket units compazed to and in proportion to the value of the deed-restricted units. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project and allow for the same voting representation as the free-mazket residential units upon the rental units becoming "for sale" units. No changes to this restriction would be allowed without APCHA's approval. Sales Units: Since the project is associated with afree-market fractional component, the assessments shall be based on the value of the free-mazket units compared to the value of the deed- restricted units. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project. No changes to this restriction would be allowed without APCHA's approval. All of the affordable housing units shall receive a Certificate of Occupancy prior to or at the same time as the newly developed fractional units. The deed-restriction shall be recorded at the time of recordation of the Condo Plat and prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Section 5: Fire Mitieation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907). Section 6: Public Works The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standazds, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standazds. Each of the units within the building shall have individual water meters. The final application shall confirm that the 3-hydrants shown are adequate for the new land use Nothing from the 1976 PUD water rights agreement may change as part of this current project. A detailed utility plan including fire system requirements needs to be completed and submitted for approval. Resolution No ~, Series 2008 Page 4 of 9 Details of how the mechanical room water distribution to the townhouse needs to be Addressed in the final application. This distribution of service may be in conflict with the IRC. A service agreement may be needed for this option type. There is a planned replacement of roughly 1000 l.f. of existing waterline in Ute Avenue scheduled. The Applicant shall address how coordination in construction will occur in the final application. The final application shall also outline the proposed Water Line main loop. The final application shall address snow storage and drainage. Section 7: Sanitation District Requirements • The district will require a conceptual sanitary sewer utility plan for this development before committing to serve the proposed project. The plan must be acceptable and beneficial to the owner, the district and the Silver Lining Ranch. • Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. • ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. The district will require that the applicant verify that the existing building's roof drains do not discharge the sanitary sewer system. • On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. • An Oil and Grease Interceptor (NOT an under the counter) located outside the building will be required for the Aspen Club's Cafe. • Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. o Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. o Elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor • Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements. • Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. • One tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line. • Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. • All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation/foundation or access/infrastructure permit. Resolution No `7 ,Series 2008 T Page 5 of 9 Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line). • Since it is apparent at this level of approval that the district's main sanitary sewer lines will be modified to serve the new proposed development, a line extension request and collection system agreement are required. Both are ACSD Board of Director's action items. • New easements will be required for the sanitary relocation according to standard district form. Additional access and maintenance easements may be required depending on the final sanitary sewer utility plans. • The applicant will need to provide plans showing that the pool drain sizes conform to district regulations. • Applicant will be required to deposit funds with the district for plan review fees, construction observation fees, fees to clean and televise the new main sewer line extension into the project. • The Applicant will have to pay 40% of the estimated tap fees for the anticipated building stubouts prior to building permit. • The glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. • The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. • Soil Nails aze not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line. Section 8: Environmental Health The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regards to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be awaze of when filing a building permit include: a prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise Resolution No ,Series 2008 Page 6 of 9 abatement and pool designs. The Applicant must meet all applicable requirements associated with the new pool. Section 9: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting. Section 10: Transportation The Applicant shall address all of the following in the final PUD/SPA Application: 1. An updated traffic impact study. 2. Parking issues for residents and guests at the Aspen Club. 3. Detailed Transportation Plan outlining auto-disincentive program, Shuttle Service, electric car needs, and parking needs. Section 11: Parks 1. Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for stream margin protection and stability of the hillside above the trail. The detailed plan shall identify; Location of silt fencing and erosion control along the hillside. The City can provide specifications if needed: minimum requirements include a silt fence and straw bales placed in a manner preventing erosion and protect the river from residual run-off. All of these detailed at the 15' set back from top of slope. 2. Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for Construction staging. This plan shall detail how the construction will take place with staging, storage of materials and locations of vehicles so that trees remaining on site will not be impacted and remain protected. 3. Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for Tree Protection. • Tree protection fences must be in place and inspected by the city forester or his/her designee before any construction activities aze to commence. • No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on site. • There should be a location and standazd for this fencing denoted on the plan. Current locations are identified above the 15' set back and along the side yard set backs. 4. An approved tree permit is required before submission of the building permit set. 5. Conceptual landscape is not approved as drawn. A landscape plan will need to be reviewed by the Parks Department. Currently the plan calls for groupings of coniferous trees. These groupings are to close to each other, other species of trees and proposed buildings to allow for proper growth and health. Proper spacing and Resolution No ~, Series 2008 TT Page 7 of 9 a detailed legend for new plantings and plantings around existing will be reviewed by the Parks Department. 6. Plans should detail the material and width of the footpath proposed between the two homes. This footpath shall be installed with hand excavation tools and set around all existing trees in a location and manner that is determined to be the least impact. Concern for site lines should be considered when laying out the trail connection to the aspen club trail. 7. Aspen Club Trail access or use for any construction activities is~rohibited at all times. This includes but is not limited to truck traffic, foot traffic, storage or materials. 8. The natural stands of native landscaping located along Ute Ave should be protected with as little disturbance to the area as possible. The City will work with the developer to outline a possible trail/sidewalk connection along the ROW on Ute Ave. After receiving conceptual approval from City Council the develop team shall meet with the Parks and Engineering departments to design this pedestrian and vehicular access. 9. Parks is not comfortable with the proposed change in trail alignment. The removal of the trees for Unit 5 can be avoided by placing Unit 5 adjacent to Unit 4 on the location of the existing tennis courts. 10. Parks requests that the ownership group locate and include in the future packets the trail easement language for the existing Aspen Club Trail located on the North side of the property. Section 12: Avalanche Hazard Report The Applicant shall be required to submit an updated Avalanche Hazard Report detailing the avalanche danger for the lot. Section 13: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 14: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Resolution No ~~, Series 2008 Page 8 of 9 Section 15: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this day of , 2008. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No G ,Series 2008 T Page 9 of 9 EXHIBIT A Chapter 26.440, SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) Sec. 26.440.050. Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). A. General. In the review of a development application for a conceptual development plan and a final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Staff Finding: The proposed development is compatible with the existing mix of commercial and housing uses in the immediate vicinity. Staff believes the proposed health and wellness program will be a good addition to the existing Club services and to the community in genera]. Staff does have concerns that the site plan and architecture do not reflect these aspects. In order to fully understand the mass and context of the application, Staff has requested a 3D SketchUp model to be digitally constructed for the review. The Planning and Zoning Commission will be able to review this model at the Public Hearing. Staff requests that the applicant continue to redesign to better relate to the riparian area, to reflect the mission of the Club, and to find a character unique to the neighborhood and the Small Lodge Character Area. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding: Sufficient public facilities and roads exist to serve the proposed development. The traffic engineering report provided in the application indicates that the proposed development will not significantly alter the current service levels on Ute Avenue, or at the intersections between the Aspen Club and Cooper Avenue. These intersections will continue to operate at a Level of Service grade B or better. Further, the Applicants plan on upgrading the existing water service line and to relocate a sewer line to accommodate the proposed units. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. Staff Finding: The applicant has located all development outside the Roaring Fork River's mapped 100- year floodplain. No other natural hazards are believed to affect the lot. However, Staff requests an Avalanche study as part of the final review to ensure the affordable housing units are protected from avalanche danger. At a conceptual level, staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit A -SPA Review Criteria Page 1 of 4 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. Sta!lFinding: The proposal replaces existing tennis courts with lodging units, adds units to the existing building, and adds affordable housing units to an under-utilized portion of the site. While there are not specific view planes in the vicinity, Staff believes it is important to retain the perception of the riparian corridor from the center of the site. The Applicant has made changes to the architecture and site plan to address Staff s concern, however Staff does not believe these changes go far enough to ensure the ripazian azea is made prominent in the design. There is an existing path that crosses the Aspen Club property near the river. This path will be maintained in the proposal. Staff recommends that the applicant strive to create a project that provides views toward the river from the new Club entrance. In addition, concerns about site drainage, soils and compliant access from the parking garage must be addressed prior to final review. Staff finds the conceptual application to meet this criterion, but would like to see the site plan and architecture better accommodate views toward the riparian area. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: Staff believes that a number of the goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan are met, but that the Applicant does not go faz enough in meeting some elements of the AACP. The Application meets a number of AACP goals related to affordable housing, economic sustainability, and arts and culture, but Staff has concerns about sections related to community character & design, transportation, and open space & environment. The Applicant is providing 150% of the required Affordable Housing, which is an important step in helping the community meet the Affordable Housing goals outlined in the AACP. Further, the Economic sustainability section of the AACP recognizes that "local ownership of business helps maintain our community's unusual character, tends to return more money to the local economy, and provides additional opportunities for upward mobility of people." The Aspen Club is a locally owned and operated business, and the stated goal of this proposal is to provide a new health and wellness opportunity for residents and visitors, and to use the money raised through the timeshaze sales to subsidize programs for locals. Staff believes that the concept of this application is a good one, and will go a long way towazd furthering the goals outlined Aspen Area Community Plan. The Aspen Club currently works to promote the Arts, Culture, and Education of the Aspen Area by supporting local non-profits through offices and financial support, and by facilitating educational and wellness programs for Club members and community members at lazge. Exhibit A -SPA Review Criteria Page 2 of 4 The AACP discusses the need to "preserve, enhance and restore the natural beauty of the environment of the Aspen Area." Staff does not believe the Applicant goes far enough in enhancing the riparian area on the site, and believes the placement of the buildings creates a barrier between the Club and the River. The AACP asks that development "retain and encourage an eclectic mix of design styles to maintain and enhance the special chazacter of our community." Staff believes the ideas put forward in the Application for a health and wellness facility are good goals, but Staff does not believe the site plan or architecture adequately reflect the mission of the Aspen Club, nor do they "enhance the special character of our community." The site plan creates a barrier to the riparian area, and the architecture could fit in any mountain community. The Aspen Club site is unique, and this Application proposes a unique addition to the Club. Staff believes the architecture should reflect these opportunities. Finally, the Applicant has mentioned in the Application that a car share program, bike fleet, and shuttle service will be provided to help minimize the impact of the automobile in the area, which is a goal of the AACP. Staff believes these elements are important in working toward changing the auto- centric culture that currently exists, but Staff believes that the large amount of parking provided will encourage the use of the automobile. If the Applicant provides a more complete transportation plan part of this application (one that addresses the need for parking, how shuttle service will work, etc.), Staff believes the AACP goals related to transportation may be met. Overall, Staff does not find this guideline to be met. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding: The proposal does not require public funds to provide public facilities for the proposed pazcel. The application states that all costs associated with public infrastructure improvements will be borne by the applicant. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent (20%) meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Subsection 26.445.040.B.2. StafiFinding: The property's northern lot line lies in the Roaring Fork River, and then the property slopes up to meet Ute Ave on the south. There are slopes in excess of 20%, and the Applicant has made the appropriate slope reduction and density reductions. The total square footage on the lot is 201,128, but afrer slope reduction 171,047 square feet of land area is available for floor area calculations. The proposed development equals approximately 103,20 square feet, or an FAR of 0.6:1. Staff finds this criterion to be met. S. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. Staff Finding: Not Applicable. The Applicant will be required to make a Growth Management Application as part of the Final PUD/SPA Application. Under the current proposal, the Exhibit A -SPA Review Criteria Page 3 of 4 application will require twelve (12) affordable housing allotments and seventy-six (76) lodge pillow allotments. B. Variations permitted. The final development plan shall comply with the requirements of the underlying zone district; provided, however, that vaziations from those requirements may be allowed based on the standards of this Section. Variations may be allowed for the following requirements: open space, minimum distance between buildings, maximum height, minimum front yard, minimum rear yard, minimum side yard, minimum lot width, minimum lot area, trash access area, internal floor area ratio, number of off-street pazking spaces and uses and design standards of Chapter 26.410 for streets and related improvements. Any vaziations allowed shall be specified in the SPA agreement and shown on the final development plan. Staff Finding: There are no requests to vazy the dimensional requirements as part of the SPA. These requests are made under the PUD request. Staff finds this criteria to not be applicable. Exhibit A -SPA Review Criteria Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT B Chapter 26.445, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Sec. 26.445.050. Review Criteria conceptual,l'inal, consolidated and minor PUD. A development application for conceptual, final, consolidated, conceptual and final or minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with conceptual reviews and properties eligible for minor PUD review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff believes that a number of the goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan are met, but that the Applicant does not go far enough in meeting some elements of the AACP. The Application meets a number of AACP goals related to affordable housing, economic sustainability, and arts and culture, but Staff has concerns about sections related to community character & design, transportation, and open space & environment. The Applicant is providing 150% of the required Affordable Housing, which is an important step in helping the community meet the Affordable Housing goals outlined in the AACP. Further, the Economic sustainability section of the AACP recognizes that "local ownership of business helps maintain our community's unusual character, tends to return more money to the local economy, and provides additional opportunities for upward mobility of people." The Aspen Club is a locally owned and operated business, and the stated goal of this proposal is to provide a new health and wellness opportunity for residents and visitors, and to use the money raised through the timeshare sales to subsidize programs for locals. Staff believes that the concept of this application is a good one, and will go a long way toward furthering the goals outlined Aspen Area Community Plan. The Aspen Club currently works to promote the Arts, Culture, and Education of the Aspen Area by supporting local non-profits through offices and financial support, and by facilitating educational and wellness programs for Club members and community members at large. The AACP discusses the need to "preserve, enhance and restore the natural beauty of the environment of the Aspen Area." Staff does not believe the Applicant goes faz enough in enhancing the riparian area on the site, and believes the placement of the buildings creates a barrier between the Club and the River. The AACP asks that development "retain and encourage an eclectic mix of design styles to maintain and enhance the special character of our community." Staff believes the ideas put forward in the Application for a health and wellness facility are good goals, but Staff does not believe the site plan or architecture adequately reflect the mission of the Aspen Club, nor do they "enhance the special character of our community." The site plan creates a barrier to the riparian area, and the architecture could fit in any mountain community. The Aspen Club Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page I of 13 site is unique, and this Application proposes a unique addition to the Club. Staff believes the architecture should reflect these opportunities. Finally, the Applicant has mentioned in the Application that a car shaze program, bike fleet, and shuttle service will be provided to help minimize the impact of the automobile in the azea, which is a goal of the AACP. Staff believes these elements aze important in working towazd changing the auto- centric culture that currently exists, but Staff believes that the large amount of pazking provided will encourage the use of the automobile. If the Applicant provides a more complete transportation plan part of this application (one that addresses the need for pazking, how shuttle service will work, etc.), Staff believes the AACP goals related to transportation may be met. Overall, Staff does not find this guideline to be met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed development is consistent with the chazacter of the area. The neighborhood consists of a variety of single-family and multi-family homes, and while the proposal is for new timeshare lodge units it will function in a more residential nature than a typical lodge downtown. The proposed affordable housing is consistent with the adjacent properties, which include a number of affordable projects. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff believes that this development will not adversely affect the future development of the azea. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Not Applicable. The Applicant will be required to make a Growth Management Application as part of the Final PUD/SPA Application. Under the current proposal, the application will require twelve (12) affordable housing allotments and seventy-six (76) lodge pillow allotments. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The PUD development plans establish dimensional requirements for all properties in a PUD. The proposed dimensional requirements are listed below: Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 2 of 13 RR Dimensional Proposed Dimensional Underlying Zone District Requirement Requirements Dimensional Re uirements Minimum Lot Size 4.941 acres, or 215,232 sq. 2 0 acres ft. Minimum Lot Area per N/A Multi-Family: N/A dwelling unit Lodge: N/A Minimum Lot Width 370 Feet 200 Feet Minimum Front Yard 7.5 Feet for Affordable Setback Housin Units 30 Feet 3 Feet on east side for Minimum Side Yard Setback Affordable Housing Units; 20 Feet 20 Feet on west side. Minimum Rear Yazd Setback 100 Feet 20 Feet Maximum Height 28 Feet 28 Feet Minimum % O en Space N/A N/A 103,520 sq. ft. total: Multi-family (affordable Single-family: Same as R- housing units): 12,330 sq. 15 zone district Allowable Floor Area ft. Multi-family: N/A Lodge: 56,560 sq. fr. Lodge: N/A Commercial (Club): 34,630 Commercial: N/A s . fr. Lodge:.5 spaces per key 133 spaces total: (19 spaces) Lodge: 19 spaces Club and Spa: 1 space per Minimum Off-Street Parking Aspen Club and Spa: 97 1000 sq. fr. of net leasable spaces (43 spaces) AH units: ] 7 spaces AH units: 1 space per unit (12 s aces) The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a. The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. See discussion from 1.A above b. Natural or man-made hazards. No known hazards exist on the lot. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit B - PUD Review Criteria Page 3 of ] 3 c. Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and sign (cant vegetation and [andjorms. Most of the development proposed is within azeas of the site that have already been impacted by development. The riparian area is being maintained through the fifteen (15) foot top of slope setback required by the Stream Mazgin portion of the Land Use Code. The site plan was reviewed by the Parks Department, which requires that a stand of trees located near Unit 5 be maintained. This has been included as a condition in the Resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff recognizes that there is an existing paking problem at the Club, especially when special events are held. Staff does not believe that more parking will fully alleviate this issue, and believes that more detailed analysis of transportation alternatives should be required. Staff believes that the Applicant has not gone far enough in promoting alternative means of transportation for locals who use the club, club employees, or for the proposed timeshare units. Staff would like to see the Applicant provide a detailed conceptual transportation plan as part of the Final Application that outlines the need for shuttle operations, the anticipated demand by timeshaze occupants of vehicles, and the specifications of all proposed transportation elements (shuttle, electric vehicles, bikes, etc) and how they will be utilized. While fire access is required in the existing surface parking lot, the current configuration makes the site plan seem "auto-centric". Staff would like to see a more detailed landscaping plan at Final that minimizes the visual impacts of the parking. Further, Staff would like to see a detailed study regazding the ability to put more parking sub-grade, which would free up some space around the club for landscaping improvement, or would enable more flexibility in the site plan. Staff does not find this criteria met at this time, but if the Applicant makes the above mentioned changes, Staff would find this criteria met at a conceptual level. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. No open space is currently proposed on-site. Staff recommends the Applicant look at ways to consolidate internal building access points to help create more opportunities for open space. Further, Staff encourages the Applicant to examine differ site planning techniques to break up the mass and barrier between the ripazian azea and Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 4 of 13 the Club. A lower density of timeshaze units or smaller units may be needed to better meet this standard. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. As was discussed in the review of section 2.B.l.d, above, Staff recognizes that there aze currently parking problems at the current Club. Staff does not believe that the current parking configuration and amount of pazking is warranted, and would like to see the Applicant explore auto-disincentives more in more detail with a conceptual Transportation Plan as part of the Final PUD review and a final Transportation Plan as part of the PUD Agreement. Staff believes that a moderate increase in the Club's existing parking, as well as the parking provided for the Lodge and Affordable Housing units is appropriate. However, Staff does not support the current pazking proposal. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.• a. There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities or other utilities to service the proposed development. b. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development. Adequate public facilities exist and will be upgraded at the owner's expense. This includes the realignment of a sewer line. Staff agrees with the Applicant's traffic report that Ute Avenue can accommodate the proposed parking increases. The traffic and pazking concerns Staff has expressed in the memo and Staff Findings, but is a reflection of Staffs view that providing more parking will encourage more automobile usage rather than the utilization of alternative forms of transportation. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 5 of 13 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site jeatures. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.• a. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution. c. The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. At this time, Staff does not find that and significant natural hazards on the site that would necessitate a density reduction. For the most part, the proposed development is located in areas of the site that currently contains development. Staff does not believe the proposal will involve a pernicious impact on the site's natural watershed. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. a. The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a speciftc area plan to which the property is subject. b. The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in Subparagraphs 4 and S, above, those areas can be avoided or those characteristics mitigated. c. The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses and characteristics. Notes: a. Lot sizes for individual lots within a PUD may be established at a higher or lower rate than specified in the underlying Zone District as long as, on average, the entire PUD conforms to the maximum density provisions of the respective Zone District or as otherwise established as the maximum aUowab[e density pursuant to a fznal PUD Development Plan. b. The approved dimensional requirements for all lots within the PUD are required to be reflected in the final PUD development plans. While the Applicant proposes establishing the FAR for the project, no increase in the maximum density is proposed. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 6 of 13 C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. The Applicant has attempted to protect the area around the Roazing Fork River that is subject to a Stream Margin Review at Final PUD. While these features are preserved, Staff does not believe that the site's most valuable natural feature is being enhanced. As mentioned previously in the Memo and other Staff Findings, Staff believes more work should be done on the site plan in order to enhance the visual impact of the ripazian area. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. No significant open spaces will be lost with this proposal, as the timeshaze units aze proposed where the tennis courts aze currently located. Further, all development is within the height requirements for the zone district. While the timeshaze units have been clustered, Staff feels the current configuration will give the appearance of a "wall" of development. While there are no protected view planes affecting this site, Staff believes the timeshare units should be further broken up to better preserve vistas from the new Club entrance toward the river. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement The timeshare units are not located along Ute Avenue because most of the street frontage is already used to accommodate the existing Club. The proposed affordable housing units are located adjacent to the street, and Staff believes these will contribute to the street chazacter and context. The Applicant has agreed to provide an easement along the Ute Ave portion of the site to accommodate the eventual continuation of the Ute Ave trail. This has been included as a condition in the Resolution. While the landscaping plan outlines paths throughout the site, Staff believes a more simplified plan is more appropriate in this context. This site is uniquely located in an azea that is on the Urban/Rural fringe and adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. As such, there is an opportunity to provide unique structures that reflect the diverse settings. While there are multi-family and single-family homes in the azea, Staff believes the mission of this development (wellness and personal growth) and it's unique location enable the design to be reflective of the surrounding Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 7 of 13 residences while providing a different take on the design that reflects the Club's mission. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. The City of Aspen Fire Mazshal has reviewed the proposal, and has found it to be in compliance with all applicable life safety requirements. The existing surface parking area accommodates fire truck turn azounds, and must be maintained (note that Staffs concerns regarding the surface parking would not impact this required fire access). Further, all structures will be required to include fire sprinkler systems, and fire alarm systems. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. According to the Application, the project will comply with all applicable requirements. This has been included as a condition in the Resolution. While not required, Staff believes providing some handicapped access able timeshaze units would compliment the Club's mission. As mentioned above, the Club will dedicate an easement for the future completion of the Ute Avenue trail. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. According to a letter submitted by the Applicant's engineer, site drainage will be handled with some drainage improvements to maintain historic runoff Further, the Applicant's engineer states that the timeshare units will have a similar footprint to the existing tennis courts, so an expansion of the impervious surface will be minimal. The Applicant will be required to pay the applicable Storm Water Fee assessed by the Engineering Department. If the parking area is re-paved as part of the redevelopment, Staff recommends that the re-paving utilize pervious paving materials. Asite-specific drainage report and design has been requested by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD), and has been included as a condition in the Resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. There is a significant grade difference between the proposed timeshare units near the river and the existing Club. The units that aze located at the same grade as the Club do provide sufficient spacing. Staff would like to see further attention to the spacing to the river-front timeshare units to ensure the units will function as needed for the proposed programs. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Landscape Plan. Exhibit B - PUD Review Criteria Page 8 of 13 The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: The Applicant provided a drafr landscaping plan as part of the original Conceptual application. An updated version will be provided as part of the Final PUD Application. I. The landscape plan exhibits a weU designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. The Applicant has provided a conceptual landscaping plan with a number of new plantings proposed. A final landscape plan will be submitted as part of the Final PUD Application, which will ensure landscaping is consistent with adjacent land. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. The Applicant has stated they will comply with all Park's Department requirements. No development is proposed in the protected riparian area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. The Applicant will provide a final landscape plan in with the Final PUD. This will ensure existing landscaping is preserved or mitigated for if it is to be removed. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Architectural Character. I. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. The site plan creates a ban•ier to the riparian area, and the architecture could be in any mountain community. The Aspen Club site is unique, and this Application proposes a unique addition to the Club through the new health and wellness program. Staff believes the architecture should reflect these opportunities, but does not. The timeshare units proposed on the Club are unique, and Staff believes these will reflect the mission of the new programs, and will fit in well with the existing architecture in the area. Staff does not believe the architecture for the other timeshare units is unique, and does not enhance the existing character of the area. Instead, it replicates designs seen in other parts of the community and throughout the Mountain West. Staff believes the architecture should go Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 9 of 13 further in differentiating itself from the surrounding community. Staff finds this criterion is not met. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. The site plan utilizes the north/south exposure on the lot, and is participating in the new LEED for Neighborhoods program. Staff finds this criterion is met. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. The Applicant has stated that snow removal and storage will meet all applicable requirements. The Applicant must submit a detailed plan for snow removal and storage as part of the final application. This has been made a condition of approval in the Resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Lighting. 1. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. The PUD will comply with all lighting regulations in place. Amore detailed plan will be provided as part of the Final PUD. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual beneftt of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various [and uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 10 of 13 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. There are no common spaces proposed as part of this application. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. The Water, Sanitation, and Electric Departments reviewed this application and determined there is adequate service for this development. This will be addressed in greater detail at Final PUD. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. At this time no adverse impacts are anticipated. This will be addressed in greater detail at Final PUD. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. This criterion will be addressed at Final PUD when a finalized site plan and associated materials aze available for City Departments to review. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff believes that all structures and uses have appropriate access to a public street. The timeshare units, club, and affordable housing units have access from Ute Avenue, while the additional parking on Lot 14A is accessed from Highway 82. There is also Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page I ] of 13 pedestrian access available from the Aspen Club Trail located by the river. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. The Applicant has submitted a Traffic Report that indicates the proposed parking configuration will not adversely impact traffic levels on Ute Avenue or the adjacent Intersections. However, Staff believes the level of parking provided and the unclear plan for alternative transportation will increase the overall impact of the automobile in the area. Staff has requested a detailed Transportation Plan to address these concerns. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. The proposed development will not result in any changes to the existing Trail easements. The Applicant has also agreed to provide an easement along Ute Avenue to continue the Ute Avenue Trail. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. The Applicant has agreed to provide an easement along Ute Avenue to continue the Ute Avenue Trail. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. There are no internal streets proposed as part of this PUD. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. There are no gates or guard posts proposed as part of this PUD. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 12 of 13 The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted ftnal PUD development plan. No phasing is proposed as part of this development. The development will take place approximately over a two (2) year period. Exhibit B -PUD Review Criteria Page 13 of 13 EXHIBIT C Chapter 26.412, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW -Code Review Criteria Sec. 26.412.050. Review criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. Stalf'Finding: Staff has concerns about the proposed site plan. The applicant has made changes based on initial Staff comments, but Staff continues to have concerns about the siting of the timeshare units. Specifically, Staff does not believe the site plan provides views toward the riparian area from the Club entrance. Further, the grade change between the proposed location of the timeshare units (the existing tennis courts) and the surface parking and existing Club presents a challenge to the site plan. The access to the timeshare units is located adjacent to this significant grade change, and Staff is concerned this created a tunnel effect for individuals trying to access the timeshare units. Please see memo, review criteria for SPA, conceptual review design guidelines and objectives for the Small Lodge Character Area. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the fagade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Finding: Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. (Ord. No. 13, 2007, §1) Staff Finding: Please see review criteria for Conceptual Review Design Guidelines and Objectives Exhibit C -Commercial Design Guidelines Page 1 of 6 Sec. 26.412.060. Commercial design standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public amenity space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of--way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Staff Finding: This project is not located in a zone district required to provide Public Amenity Space. Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A utility, trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060, Utility/trash/recycle service areas, unless otherwise established according to said Section. 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. 3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. 5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. (Ord. No. 13, 2007, §1) Staff Finding: The development is not located along an alley. The Applicant has proposed that the trash/utility/recycle area be relocated along Ute Avenue to provide better access. Staff believes Exhibit C -Commercial Design Guidelines Page 2 of 6 this will minimize conflicts between individuals on the Club property and the trucks servicing this area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Chapter 26.412, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW - Conceptual Review Design Guidelines for Small Lodges Design Objectives The policy intent of these districts is to protect small lodge uses on sites which have been historically utilized for this purpose, and encourage the upgrade of these lodge facilities. Compatibility with the neighborhood is a requirement, coupled with a respect for the ways in which the lodge has traditionally operated. However, small lodge developments should not mimic non-lodging buildings in the neighborhood. 1. New development should be compatible with the neighborhood in which it is located. Many lodge sites are located in residential areas, where the single family character should be respected. In these settings, because the overall mass and scale of a lodge is likely to be larger than that of adjacent residences, the treatment of the edges of a lodge site is particularly important. Other lodge sites located in commercial areas will be guided by the design objectives and guidelines for the respective character area. In all cases, it is important to balance compatibility with the functional needs of a lodge development. 2. Create a distinctive experience for lodging with a sense of being in a neighborhood. Lodge overlay sites offer a special opportunity to experience the community more closely, and to feel a part of a neighborhood. Therefore, these lodges should appear related to the context in their design, while also conveying the unique character of an exciting accommodations facility. 3. Enhance the character of the street edge. A lodge overlay site should provide a street edge with visual delight and that invites pedestrian activity in the neighborhood. This can be achieved with lush landscaping, architectural details, and entrances that face the street. 4. Minimize the visual impacts of cars. Where on-site parking is permitted, it should be screened from public view. Street & Alley System 5.1 The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space and for maximum public access. • They should not be enclosed or closed for public access, and should remain open to the sky. • This applies to a lodge property that may include lots on both sides of an alley. Staff Finding: Exhibit C -Commercial Design Guidelines Page 3 of 6 There are no alleys adjacent to this lot. Public access from Ute Avenue is maintained as port of this project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Parking 5.2 Minimize the visual impacts of parking. • Parking shall be placed underground wherever possible. • Where surface parking is permitted, it shall be located to the interior of the property. • Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and landscaped to soften design of parking areas and provide solar shade. Staff Finding: The applicant has provided a portion of the proposed parking underground, retains the existing surface lot on the Club parcel and on Lot 14A across the river. The surface parking lot includes some landscaping to buffer the visual impact, however, Staff believes there is too much surface parking provided on the Club lot, and would like to see more landscaping features, and more study done to examine the possibility of placing more parking sub-grade. Staff finds this guideline to be met. 5.3 Minimize the visual impacts of surface parking. • On small lots where limited surface parking in front of the building might be considered, it should be designed and screened to minimize the visual impacts. Staff Finding: As stated above, the Applicant has included landscaping features to minimize the visual impact of the surface parking. Staff would like to see further study regarding the possibility of providing more of the parking sub-grade, or eliminating some all together. Staff finds this guideline is not met. Public Amenity Space Public Amenity Space on sites located outside of a commercial character area should reflect the development pattern established by residential open space along the block. Staff Finding: While the Rural Residential (RR) zone district does not require the provision of public amenity space, the design guidelines do. The Club is located in a residential area with relatively low density development. The proposal maintains open space near the riparian area, and includes new facilities for Club members to enjoy the outdoors through improvements to the pool area. However, Staff believes the current surface parking configuration could be re-worked to provide adequate fire access while increasing the amount of public amenity space on site. Staff would like to see further study regarding the possibility of providing more of the pazking sub-grade, or eliminating some all together. Staff finds this guideline is not met. Building Placement 5.4 Front, side and rear setbacks should generally be consistent with the range of the existing neighborhood. Exhibit C -Commercial Design Guidelines Page 4 of 6 • These should include landscaping. Staff Finding: All of the proposed setbacks, with the exception of the eastern lot line, meet the underlying zone district setback requirements. The Affordable Housing units would include a seven and a half (7.5) foot setback in order to accommodate the proposed number of Affordable Housing units. Because this area of the site includes a significant grade change, Staff believes this proposed setback is appropriate. Staff finds this guideline to be met. 5.5 Within an established residential context, a lodge building should reflect traditional lot widths in more than one of the following ways: • The variation in building height. • The modulation of the building elements. • The variation in fa ade heights. • The street fa ade composition. • The variation in design and materials to emphasize the building module. Staff Finding: This project is located in an area with diverse lot widths and a variety of single-family, multi- family, and commercial structures. The underlying zone district limits the height to twenty eight (28) feet, and the Applicant has built the new structures to this height. While different roof forms (relatively flat and pitched) are proposed in the design, Staff does not believe enough has been done to create building modules. Staff believes the two sets of timeshare units located neaz the river create a wall of development that is perceived as one mass. The Applicant has responded to Staff's concerns by breaking up the units more than was originally proposed, but Staff does not believe enough has been done to create building modules. A lower density of timeshare units, or smaller units may be required to meet this standard. Staff finds this guideline is not met. Building Height, Mass & Scale 5.6 Building height should generally fall within the range established by the setting of adjacent buildings and the nearby street blocks. • If two stories are predominant a third story portion may be permitted if located in the center or as an accent on a corner. • Higher sections of the building should be located away from lower adjacent buildings. • A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. Staff Finding: The proposed building heights meet the underlying zone district requirements and fit into the neighboring context in terms of height. The proposal includes two story buildings, and maintains the required nine (9) foot floor to ceiling height required. Staff finds this guideline to be met. 5.7 A building should respect the traditional lot width and scale of the context in the form, modulation and variation of the roofscape. Exhibit C -Commercial Design Guidelines Page 5 of 6 • On sites exceeding 60 feet in width, modulated and varied across the site. • The width of the building or of an traditional facade widths in the area. the building height and form should be individual building module should reflect Staff Finding: The lot width is 430 feet, and includes significant slopes between the existing Club building and the tennis courts (where a majority of the timeshare units are proposed). All of the timeshare units are built within the twenty-eight (28) foot height limit with little variation. While an attempt has been made to ensure individual units are modulated, Staff does not believe the design adequately addresses this standard. A lower density of timeshare units, or smaller units may be required to meet this standard. Although modules are created, Staff has requested that the applicant rethink the character of the azchitecture to better reflect the mission of the Club. There is an opportunity to blend into the natural landscape through architectural detailing, the creation of vistas, or through decreased mass, and Staff encourages the Applicant to further refine the site plan and azchitecture to do so. Staff requests that the applicant continue to redesign to find a chaaacter that complies with the design objectives of the Small Lodge Character Area. Staff finds this guideline is not met. 5.8 Building height adjacent to a historic single story residential building should fit within a bulk plane which: • Has a maximum wall height of 15 ft. at the required side yard setback line, and • Continues at a 45 degree angle from this wall plate height until it reaches the maximum permitted building height. Staff Finding: The project is not located adjacent to a single-story historic structure. Staff finds this guideline to be met. 5.9 Building height adjacent to a residential zone district should fit within a bulk plane which: • Has a maximum wall height of 25 ft. at the required side yard setback line, and • Continues at a 45 degree angle from this wall plate height until it reaches the maximum permitted building height Staff Finding: The proposed building heights meet the underlying zone district requirements and fit into the neighboring context in terms of height. The proposal includes two story buildings, and meets the bulk plane requirements. Staff finds this guideline to be met. Exhibit C -Commercial Design Guidelines Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT D Chapter 26.590, TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT Sec. 26.590.070. Review standards for timeshare lodge development. An applicant for timeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of the following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision applications. A. Fiscal impact analysis and mitigation. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing lodge to a timeshare -odge development shall be required to demonstrate that the proposed conversion will not have a negative tax consequence for the City. In order to demonstrate the tax consequences of the proposed conversion, the applicant shall prepare a detailed fiscal impact study as part of the final PUD application. The fiscal impact study shall contain at least the following comparisons between the existing lodge operation and the proposed timeshare lodge development: 1. A summary of the sales taxes paid to the City for rental of lodge rooms during the prior five years of its operation. If the lodge has stopped renting rooms prior to the time of submission of the application, then the summary shall reflect the final five (5) years the lodge was in operation. The summary of past taxes paid shall be compared to a projection of the sales taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five (5) years of its operation. As part of this projection, the applicant shall specify the number of nights the applicant anticipates each timeshare lodge unit will be available for daily rental to visitors (that is, the annual number of nights when the unit will not be occupied by the owner or the owner's guests), the expected visitor occupancy rate for these units, the expected average daily cost to rent the unit and the resulting amount of sales tax that will be paid to the City. 2. An estimation of the real estate transfer taxes that would be paid to the City if the existing lodge were to be sold. If an actual sale of the property has occurred within the last twelve (12) months, then the real estate taxes paid for that sale shall be used. This estimation shall be compared to a projection of the real estate transfer taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first flue (5) years of its operation. This projection shall include a statement of the expected sales prices for the timeshare estates and the applicable tax rate that will be applied to each sale. 3. A summary of the City-portion of the property taxes paid for the lodge for the prior flue (5) years of its operation and a projection of the property taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five (5) years of its operation. This projection shall include a statement of the Exhibit D -Timeshare Review Criteria Page 1 of 7 expected value that will be assigned to the property by the Tax Assessor and the applicable tax rate. The fiscal impact study may also contain such other information that the applicant believes is relevant to understanding the tax consequences of the proposed development. For example, the applicant may provide information demonstrating there will be "secondary" or "indirect" tax benefits to the City from the occupancy of the timeshare units, in terms of increased retail sales and other economic activity in the community as compared to the existing lodge development. The applicant shall be expected to prove definitively why the timeshare units would cause such economic advantages that would not be achieved by a traditional lodge development. Any such additional information provided shall compare the taxes paid during the prior five (5) years of the lodge's operation to the first five (5) years of the proposed timeshare lodge's operation. If the fiscal impact study demonstrates there will be an annual tax loss to the City from the conversion of an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge in any of the specific tax categories (property tax, sales tax, lodging tax, RETT tax), then the applicant shall be required to propose a mitigation program that resolves the problem, to the satisfaction of the City Council. Analysis of the fiscal impact study shall compare existing tax revenues for a lodging property with anticipated tax revenues. The accepted mitigation program shall be documented in the PUD agreement for the project that is entered into between the applicant and the City Council. Staff Findings: The proposal does not include any conversion of an existing lodge into a timeshare loge development. Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. B. Upgrading of existing projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The extent of the upgrading that is to be accomplished shall be determined as part of the PUD review, considering the condition of the existing facilities, with the intent being to make the development compatible in character with surrounding properties and to extend the useful life of the building. 1. To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures shall be brought into compliance with the City's adopted Fire, Health and Building Codes. 2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare lodge development shall be closed until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the upgrading. Staff Findings: The Applicant proposes an entirely new project, which does not include any conversion of an existing lodge into a timeshare loge development. The new development will be Exhibit D -Timeshare Review Criteria Page 2 of 7 required to meet all City health, fire, and building codes. Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. C. Preservation of existing lodging inventory. An express purpose of these regulations is to preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any proposal to convert an existing lodge or other property that provides short-term accommodations to a timeshare lodge should, at a minimum, replace the existing number of units on the property in the planned timeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number of units, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms on the property or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the purposes of these regulations, even though the planned timeshare lodge will not replace either the existing number of units or bedrooms. Staff Findings: The Applicant proposes an entirely new project, which does not include any conversion of an existing lodge into a timeshare loge development. The new development will bring additional lodge rooms to the City's Lodging stock. Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. D. Affordable housing requirements. 1. Whenever a timeshare lodge development is required to provide affordable housing, mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the standards of the City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable housing requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development and shall also take into account any retail, restaurant, conference or other functions proposed in the lodge. Staff Findings: While this section requires affordable housing mitigation to be based on the number of lock-off rooms, updates to the land use code require mitigation be based on bedrooms. The Land Use Code considers there to be two (2) pillows in each bedroom. Section 26.470.080.3.b of the Land Use Code requires projects with less than one unit per 500 square feet of lot area to provide mitigation equal to 60% of the employees generated. Section 26.470.100.A.1 states that there are .5 FTEs generated per lodging bedroom. This project's nineteen (19) units include fifry-nine (59) bedrooms, so creates a generation of 29.5 FTEs. Therefore, the mitigation requirement is 17.7 FTEs (29.5 FTEs * 60%). The applicant has proposed to provide housing for twenty-seven (27) FTEs onsite in twelve (12) 2-bedroom units. This exceeds the code requirement by 150%. No mitigation is required as part of the Club remodel, as there is no increase in the amount of net leasable area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit D -Timeshare Review Criteria Page 3 of 7 2. The conversion of any multi-family dwelling unit that meets the definition of residential multi-family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi-Family Replacement Program, even when there is no demolition of the existing multi-family dwelling unit. There are currently no multi-family dwelling units on the property. Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. E. Parking requirements. 1. The parking requirement for timeshare lodge development shall be calculated by applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses. The parking requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development. StaflFindines: Pursuant to section 26.515.030 of the Land Use Code, 0.5 parking spaces are required for each key in a lodge development. There are a maximum of thirty-eight (38) keys, resulting in a parking requirement of nineteen (19) pazking spaces for the timeshare units (38 * 0.5 = 19). The Applicant has provided nineteen (19) spaces in the sub-grade parking garage for the timeshaze units. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer an alternative to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen. Staff FindinQS: The Applicant has indicated that anauto-disincentive program will be implemented as part of the development. This would include increased shuttle service, participation in the City car share program, and a bike fleet. While these are important pieces of a comprehensive auto-disincentive program, Staff does not believe this program has been outlined in enough specificity. Staff would like to see the Applicant explore auto- disincentives in more detail with a conceptual Transportation Plan as part of the Final PUD review and a final Transportation Plan as part of the PUD Agreement. Staff believes that a moderate increase in the Club's existing parking, as well as the parking provided for the Lodge and Affordable Housing units is appropriate. However, Staff does not support the current pazking proposal. Staff find this criterion is not met at this time. 3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in a parking space on-site when the owner is not using that estate. Staff FindinQS: The timeshare owners will be prohibited from storing their cars in the garage when they are not staying in their unit. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit D -Timeshare Review Criteria Page 4 of 7 F. Appropriateness of marketing and sales practices. The marketing and sale of timeshare estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S., as may be amended from time to time. The applicant and licensed marketing entity shall present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare development. 1. The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall not be permitted: a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare units on any street, mall or other public property or facility; and b. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to mislead potential purchasers. 2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation or to visit a timeshare development is permitted, provided the gift reflects the local Aspen economy. For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in Aspen, restaurants in Aspen and local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets, rafting trips, etc.) are permitted. Gifts that have no relationship to the local Aspen economy are not permitted. The following gifts are also not permitted: a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given; b. Any gift package for which notice is not given to the prospective purchaser that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales presentation as a condition of receiving the gifts; and c. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the requirement to attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than the information on the gift being offered. Staff FindinES: The Applicant has committed to incorporating all the above requirements in the final timeshare instruments that will be submitted with the final application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Adequacy of maintenance and management plan. The applicant shall provide documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will be appropriately managed and maintained in a manner that will be both stable and continuous. This shall include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided and shall also address the following requirements: 1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and approve any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the timeshare development, to provide assurance and protection to timeshare owners that management/assessment fees will be applied and used appropriately. Exhibit D -Timeshare Review Criteria Page 5 of 7 2. The applicant shall also demonstrate that there will be a reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be properly maintained throughout its lifetime. Staff FindinQS: The Applicant has committed to incorporating all the above requirements in the final timeshare instruments that will be submitted with the final application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. H. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed timeshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.; including the requirements concerning the five (5) day period for rescission of a sales contract and the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow. Staff Findines: The Applicant has committed to incorporating all the above requirements in the final timeshare instruments that will be submitted with the final application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. I. Approval by condominium owners. If the development that is proposed to be timeshared is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the condominium declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred percent (100%) of the owners of the condominium units have approved the timeshare development, including any improvements to the common elements that the applicant may propose, that all mortgagees of the condominium have approved the proposed timeshare development and that all condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the same sales and marketing program. Sta!(FindinQS: The project currently does not have condominium owners. Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. J. Prohibited practices and uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained in this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any of the following practices: 1. The creation, operation or sale of a right-to-use interest or any other timeshare concept which is not speci£~cally allowed and approved pursuant to the requirements of this Section. Right-to-use timeshare concepts (e.g., lease-holds and vacation clubs) are considered inappropriate in Aspen and are not permitted. 2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare approval, timeshare development instruments or disclosure statement. Exhibit D-Timeshare Review Criteria Page 6 of 7 3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for timesharing or misrepresenting the substance of any such application to another who may be a prospective purchaser of a timeshare interest. 4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a timeshare estate or interest therein in violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval granted pursuant hereto or cause or aid and abet another to violate any requirement of this Chapter or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter. (Ord. No. 21-2002 § 1 (part), 2002; Ord. No. 13-2005, § 5) Staff Findings: The Applicant has committed that they will not knowingly engage in any of the above mentioned activities. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit D -Timeshare Review Criteria Page 7 of 7 ~hihif ~ MEMORANDUM To: Development Review Committee From: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner Date: December 18, 2007 Re: Aspen Club and Spa Conceptual PUD Review The Development Review Committee (DRC) has been asked to review the proposed Aspen Club and Spa Conceptual PUD at the December 5, 2007 meeting. The DRC has compiled the following comments: Attendees: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner; Trisha Nelson, Engineering; Phil Overeynder, Public Works; John Hines, Public Works; Erich Grueter, Transportation; Tom Bracewell, ACSD; Todd Grange, City Zoning; Denis Murray, City Building; Ed VanWalraven, AFPD; Brian Flynn, City Parks; Cindy Christensen, Housing; Michael Fox, Aspen Club; Sunny Vann, Vann Assoc.; Richard de Campo, Poss Architecture. Transportation (Erich Greeter): Transportation requests the following information and has the following comments: 1. An updated traffic impact study. Parking issues for residents and guests at the Aspen Club (I don't think that the existing parking lot can handle the users, at peak times, as it is). Are there spots reserved for owners, are there spot reserved for users? Are 101 parking spots enough for the guests and owners? 20 "units" that leaves 80 spots for day use and employees does this address the "high season use"? Something in writing that says exactly what kind of transportation they are providing to their guests and users. IE: the vans that they are running, are these "on call" or are they scheduled? Do they take a specified route? Or are they "door to door" (specialty services) 4. We would like to see these addressed in further plans. Fire (Ed Van Walraven): The Aspen Fire Protection District requests the following information and has the following comments: 1. Approved fire sprinkler systems shall be provided through out the entire project, this includes all structures. 2. Approved fire alarm systems shall be provided through out the entire project, this includes all structures. 3. Adequate fire department apparatus access shall be provided and approved by the Fire Marshal's office. Zoning (Todd Grange): City Zoning requests the following information and has the following comments: 1. Underlying zoning is Rural Residential (RR) 2. Setback -Red Flags- no development may occur above or below 30 inches in the setbacks. It appears the underground parking and affordable housing are located in the setbacks below 30 inches. If this is the case, the PUD must expressly approve these. 3. Height is limited to 28 feet. Will need roof plan over topo with Building Permit 4. Include a Fees Matrix: Cash - In -lieu if applicable, School land (need Lot size, a current appraised land value, new net leasable and bedrooms), TDM fee, and Parks fee. 5. FAR - Please clarify existing FAR and what will be allowed. 6. Include Survey/Plat with lot size. 7. Submit with Building Permit all Resolutions, Ordinances, and Subdivision/PUD Agreement. 8. Include all fences, retaining walls or berms in plans. Engineering Department (Trisha Nelson): requests the following information and has the following comments. These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting. Transportation 1. Driveways -Specify all driveway locations and widths. Standards depend on zoning district. 2. Parking Lots -Specify turning radius, markings, and handicap locations. 3. Streets - If the longitudinal edge of a street patch falls within the existing wheel tracks, the patch shall extend to the full width of the lane. A minimum patch dimension shall be two feet. A signing and pavement marking plan must be submitted as part of the design documents. 4. Traffic - A traffic study shall be conducted as needed to determine impacts of new development. Drainage 1. General -Project packet must include a discussion of anticipated and proposed drainage patterns, detention storage and outlet concepts. 2. Floodplain -Where applicable, 100-yr floodplain and floodway boundaries shall be defined. 3. Storm Sewer System -Project drainage requirements may include construction of new storm sewer line, minimum 15" diameter CMP to connect to existing storm sewer system. A Stormwater System Development Fee shall be assessed against all properties at the time of development or redevelopment of the property. The fee shall be assessed against the total impervious area of the development, not simply the increased impervious area, minus the amount of any stormwater system development fee actually previously paid by the landowner or the predecessor of the landowner for connection to the stonnwater system. 4. Drywells -Minimum 10' deep and 10' from property line and foundation. Percolation tests must show that the soil will drain the 5-yr runoff volume in 36 hours. Seasonal high groundwater level must be 2' below the bottom of the dry well. Pedestrian Imnrovements 1. General - In accordance with the City's Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Master Plan, property owners are required to install and maintain sidewalk, curb and gutter along the street frontage adjacent to their properties. Properties within certain areas of the City are not required to install sidewalk, curb and gutter. These locations are shown on the "Sidewalk Free Zones" and the "No Curb and Gutter Zones" maps dated February 22, 2002. These maps are kept in the City Engineering Department. 2. Sidewalks -Project depicts ALL sidewalk locations and widths. Sidewalk width is based on the land use. Residential: 5' High density and multi-family areas: 6' Commercial areas 8'. 3. Warning Pads -detectable warning pads shall be installed at all curb ramps. Curb ramps shall be directional and not diagonal. 4. Pedestrian Study - A neighborhood safety/pedestrian study shall be completed as deemed necessary by City Engineer. Construction Management 1. General - A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. The plan must include a planned sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts to the public. The plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, truck traffic, noise, dust, and erosion sediment pollution. Miscellaneous 1. Utilities -All above ground structures shall be located outside the public rights- of-way. 2. Sight Distances -Project shall comply with proper sight distances at intersections/driveways. Additional Project Specific Comments 1. Level of service has not changed, but the Engineering Department would like to see the Safety Plan that was completed for the neighborhood. 2. It sounds like on-site drainage is adequate but it needs further investigation as project moves ahead. 3. Erosion/Sediment control is going to be very important for the property. A State Stormwater permit with SWMP will be required as part of the construction management plan. 4. Sidewalk plan with proper access very important and should be pursued further. 5. A meeting with Engineering and Parks shall be completed to talk about the trail system. Parks Department (Brian Flynn): The Parks Department requests the following information and has the following comments: Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for stream margin protection and stability of the hillside above the trail. The detailed plan shall identify; Location of silt fencing and erosion control along the hillside. The City can provide specifications if needed: minimum requirements include a silt fence and straw bales placed in a manner preventing erosion and protect the river from residual run-off. All of these detailed at the 15' set back from top of slope. 2. Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for Construction staging. This plan shall detail how the construction will take place with staging, storage of materials and locations of vehicles so that trees remaining on site will not be impacted and remain protected. 3. Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for Tree Protection. • Tree protection fences must be in place and inspected by the city forester or his/her designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backTill, storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on site. There should be a location and standard for this fencing denoted on the plan. Current locations are identified above the 15' set back and along the side yard set backs. 4. An approved tree permit is required before submission of the building permit set. Contact the Parks Department for permit, 920-5120. 5. Conceptual landscape is not approved as drawn. A landscape plan will need to be reviewed by the Parks Department. Currently the plan calls for groupings of coniferous trees. These groupings are to close to each other, other species of trees and proposed buildings to allow for proper growth and health. Proper spacing and a detailed legend for new plantings and plantings around existing will be reviewed by the Parks Department. 6. Plans should detail the material and width of the footpath proposed between the two homes. This footpath shall be installed with hand excavation tools and set around all existing trees in a location and manner that is determined to be the least impact. Concern for site lines should be considered when laying out the trail connection to the aspen club trail. Aspen Club Trail access or use for any construction activities is nrohibited at all times. This includes but is not limited to truck traffic, foot traffic, storage or materials, etc.... 8. The natural stands of native landscaping located along Ute Ave should be protected with as little disturbance to the area as possible. The City will work with the developer to outline a possible trail/sidewalk connection along the ROW on Ute Ave. After receiving conceptual approval from City Council the develop team shall meet with the Parks and Engineering departments to design this pedestrian and vehicular access. 9. Parks is not comfortable with the proposed change in trail alignment. The removal of the trees for Unit 5 can be avoided by placing Unit 5 adjacent to Unit 4 on the location of the existing tennis courts. 10. Parks requests that the ownership group locate and include in the future packets the trail easement language for the existing Aspen Club Trail located on the North side of the property. Utilities/Public Works Comments (John Hines, Phil Overeynder): The Public Works Department requests the following information and has the following comments: All previous comments apply from original review. a. Make sure that nothing from the 1976 PUD water rights agreement is changes as part of this current project. b. A detailed utility plan including fire system requirements needs to be completed and submitted for approval. c. Details of how the mechanical room water distribution to the townhouse needs to be thought out. This distribution of service may be in conflict with the IRC. A service agreement may be needed for this option type. d. It needs to be confirmed that the 3-hydrants shown aze adequate for the new land use. e. There is a planned replacement of roughly 1000 I.f. of existing waterline in Ute Avenue scheduled. This topic should get further attention as the project progresses to ensure construction coordination. 2. The Water Department agrees with the plan conceptually but would have to see a construction design before giving approval of the Water Line main loop. 3. The Water Dept. will require individual meters on all AHU's. 4. Snow storage and drainage are of a concern and would like to review the drainage plan for approval. Building Department (Denis Munay): The Building Department requests the following information and has the following comments: 1. The Construction Management Plan must include clear exits, parking, access, etc while the Club continues to operate while also under construction. 2. The IRC shall be used for the fractional and affordable units. 3. Ensure all units meet the accessibility and exiting requirements. 4. This project will need to comply with all applicable efficient building standards. ACSD (Tom Bracewell): The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District requests the following information and has the following comments: 1. The district will require a conceptual sanitary sewer utility plan for this development before committing to serve the proposed project. The plan must be acceptable and beneficial to the owner, the district, and the Silver Lining Ranch. 2. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. 3. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) aze not connected to the sanitary sewer system. The district will require that the applicant verify that the existing building's roof drains do not dischazge the sanitary sewer system. 4. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. 5. An Oil and Grease Interceptor (NOT an under the counter All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation foundation or access/infrastructure permit. Peg in our office can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district. trap) located outside the building will be required for the Aspen Club's Cafe. 6. Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. 7. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. 8. Elevator shafts drairls must flow thrn o/s interceptor 9. Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements. 10. Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. 11. One tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line. 12. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hazd landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. 13. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation foundation or access/infrastructure permit. Peg in our office can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district. 14. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. 15. Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line). 16. Since it is apparent at this level of approval that the district's main sanitary sewer lines will be modified to serve the new proposed development, a line extension request and collection system agreement are required. Both are ACSD Board of Director's action items. 17. New easements will be required for the sanitary relocation according to standard district form. Additional access and maintenance easements may be required depending on the final sanitary sewer utility plans. 18. The applicant will need to provide plans showing that the pool drain sizes conform to district regulations. 19. Applicant will be required to deposit funds with the district for plan review fees, construction observation fees, fees to clean and televise the new main sewer line extension into the project. 20. The Applicant will have to pay 40% of the estimated tap fees for the anticipated building stubouts prior to building permit. 21. The glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. 22. The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. 23. Soil Nails are not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line. GARY &~ SUSAN RAPPAPQRT 1115 UTE AVENUE ASPEN, CC~Lt~RADO 8161 i PHONE (970j 925-4155 FAX (970) 92Q-1950 March 4, 2008 Dylan Johns, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Re: 1450 Crystal Lake Drive -conceptual PUD review Dear P&Z members, On February 13, 2008 we submitted a letter objecting to the ACL project unless the city can assure mitigation of the traffic problem that presently exists on Ute Avenue. As additional support to that letter we have done considerable study of present and past attempts to deal with it and submit the following additional information. 1. We have taken videos of the traffic on Ute Avenue on three days in February and counted the vehicles at what we thought were the peak hours. Present traffic exceeds that in the proposal book submitted by Sunny Vann even for the post completion projections. A spreadsheet comparing present and future estimates is attached. (If we'd counted vehicles for the whole day we might be able to bracket an hour with even higher counts than we obtained, but our counts are bad enough!) 2. On page 13 of the ACL proposal's traffic study it says: "On a few days after a heavy snowfall, road capacity [on Ute] will be further reduced. However those conditions are infrequent enough that they should not be used for design and evaluation." To which we'd reply "HAH!" Has any one used Ute Avenue this winter? 3. In considering Ordinance No. 20 of 1996 in which the Aspen club was granted the modification of the PUD Agreement to permit the entrance to the Club off Ute Avenue, the City showed much concern about the possible increased traffic problem. The final Ordinance contained at Section 2 Para. 4 a clause that said: "All representations contained in Alan Richman's July 15~h, 1996 memo to Council addressing the Transportation Plan for the Club are considered conditions of approval for the PUD amendment." In both sections of Alan Richman's memo dealing with shuttles items #2 say: "Route. Along Highway 82 and Crystal Lake road, but may deviate to Ute Avenue for therapy patients." To the best of our knowledge no vans from either the Aspen Club or the lodges in town use the prescribed route and the City has been doing nothing to enforce its own 'safeguards.' We don't believe all van occupants need therapy! 4. In the same memo and elsewhere in the referenced Ordinance it is prescribed that the "7. Report. The Club will submit a report to the City within one year after the completion of the construction addressing the effectiveness of the Transportation Management Plan, for review by the City Council..... If Council finds the transportation programs to be unsuccessful, the applicant will propose other options for managing traffic at the Aspen Club, fhe approval of which shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council." Has any one seen the follow up report? Has the City Council deemed there to be no problem? If not, it seems to us that the above is basis for continuing authority for the City to compel the Club to make changes to its policies to mitigate the traffic problem on Ute Avenue (with or without approval to the ACL project.) The last two of the above points illustrate how the City has permitted the traffic problem on Ute to happen. The attempts at gaining leverage over the applicant were not tough enough, and there's been no real attempt at enforcement of what leverage the City has. We love the Aspen Club but we love our cats and our grandchildren and the quietude of a neighborhood zoned Rural Residential even more. The ACL application requests rezoning to provide 'time share -lodging' in our rural residential neighborhood and that amounts to extending the CBD right down our street. All of traffic mitigating actions listed in Mr. Vann's introduction to the Application are in the 'hope department.' And unless the applicant and the City find a way to redirect access back to Crystal Lake Road, we do not see how the traffic problem is going to get anything but worse. We've suggested to Michael Fox that the project include a covered moving walkway from the Crystal Lake Road access point to the Aspen Club. We're sure he saw this as extravagant and impractical, but SOMETHING drastic needs to be done, and this project is already very extravagant, so please either find some real solution or deny the project. Thank you very much. _~ Gary and Susan Rappaport PS. On the subject of sustainable building, the plan asserts that they have about one acre of roof. IF they could cover an acre with solar panels it would generate about 3/. of one megawatt, not the 400 megawatts asserted by Michael Fox at the February 5, 2008 P&Z meeting. This coupled with the lack of any evidence of a bent towards 'green' technology in the way the club is presently operated leads us to question many of the assertions made in the plan! date: ~~~~r~~107 ~~:~'~:0~ pm '~kark Bake: ~r'???~~Ll~] f 7 7 :I~LI any E r-id D akG: 9r' ~~~r'2~0~ 0~:0-7 pm T irne I r7ter~ral: L'~l rniri~ake~ speed Ir-~ker~~al: ~ mph Pecked speed Limik: f5 mpf-~ ,~,k~erage Speed: ~?:~ rnph Highesk Speed: ~0 mph SUkh Pen~er7kile: 2:3 mph u5kh Perc.er~kile: ~~ mph t~umber,~ho~:~e Speed Limik: 4~ Tekal r~Jumt~er of ~~~:hiclly: 1:~~ I.~il~~~ ~~!~1:_~r?iujr ~1~:~~~~ I I ~ - - - - ~ - - - ^ - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - ' I - - - - i ' ' I I ' I I I I I ~ ~ I I. ----- -- ~ I I - - - - - - - -- ~ -- I I ~ ~ ~ I' I i I ~ I __ ~_________~__-______~_____ .J ~ ~ I ~ ~ I _ I ~.,. ' ---'------'---~ I I ~ ~ I ~ t _; I I I i I I ~ I I I I I t ~ i t - - - - - - - " ' ' - 'i- I I I I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ I ! . - ~ ~Q- ----- --------- ----- - - _ _ i I I - ---- I I I I I I ~~ - - 1 - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - ' - ' _ - - - 7 - 7 ~ - - - - I ~ ~ I e ~ til~ I I s ----'-- __-_-1---------'~___.. i - - I I ~ , I I ~ ''ii ^ `t~ - i ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i - - - - - - - - - ~ - I I t t I I ~ ~y ~ I I ~ I I ~7 J ~ - r= t I I I ~ ~ i - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - ~, - - - - ----1- UUp I ~ ~ t I ~~- i ----~----' I I ~ ~ ~~--yy L~ - ~ ~ - - - - r - - - - - - - - - r - - - - I I I I I L V _ c. I - - - ~ - ' - - - - - - - 1 ' - - - I o I ~ I _ I ' i ~k7~e~~:1 ~ ~~~ ~ Il ~ -~ z~,/.~e J/ZZ MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: Appointment of vacant position DATE: March 4, 2008 With Dylan's departure from the Commission, a chairing position needs to be filled. RESOLUTION NO. ~~ Series of 2008 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission is required to elect a chairperson and vice- chairperson as outlined in Section 26.212.030, Membership-Appointment, removal, terms and vacancies of the land use code; and WHEREAS, the term of each position is for one (1) year; and WHEREAS, the commission voted to elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson at their first meeting of the year on January 8, 2008; and WHEREAS, Dylan Johns was elected chairperson and LJ Erspamer was elected vice- chairperson; and WHEREAS, both positions shall expire on January 7, 2009; and WHEREAS, Dylan Johns was required to resign from the Commission in February of 2008 due to he no longer resides within the city of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the commission voted to elect a new chairperson and vice-chairperson at their march 4, 2008, meeting; and WHEREAS, was elected chairperson and was elected vice- chairperson; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of Aspen, Colorado, by this resolution that be appointed as chairperson and be appointed as vice-chairperson. DATED: March 4, 2008 ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk