HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20100302AGENDA
ASPF,N PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUF,SllAY, March 2, 2010
4:30 p.m. regular meeting- Sister Cities Room
CITY HALL
I. ROLL CALL
II. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
13. Planning Staff
C. Public
III. MINUTES
IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Aspen Valley Hospital: Phase II, 401 Castle Creek -Final PUD
and associated land use reviews
Vl. OTHF,R BUSINESS
VII. BOARD REPORTS
VII1. AllJOURN
Next Resolution Number: 8
**For internal Staff' use only. Not for publication. Dates subject to Change**
Y&Z AGF,NDAS
Week of February 22, 2010
3/2 P&Z Ca~4:30
AVH: PHASE II, Final PUD, PH- JP
3/9 P&Z Cxi74:30 Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session- JG
3/11 P&Z Cx~8:30am Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session on Transportation - JG
3/16 P&Z (c'il4:30
AVH: PHASE II, Final PUD, PH- JP
3/23 P&Z Ca~4:30 Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session- JG
3/30 PB~Z (a)4:30 Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session- JG
4/6 P&Z (a~4:30
AVH: PHASE II, Final PUD, PH- JP
Misc. Code Amendments, PH - CB/DA (continued from 2/16)
4/13 P&Z (a~4:30 Special Meeting
Joint PAZ AACP work session- JG
4/20 P&Z (x)4:30
4/27 P&Z (x4:30 Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session- JG
5/6 PB~Z (c~8:30am Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session on AABC - JG
5/11 P&Z (x)4:30 Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session- JG
5/25 P&Z (7x.4:30 Special Meeting
Joint P&Z AACP work session- JG
Future AACP Special Meetings: P&Z
June 8
June 17 (8:30am)
June 22
June 29
July 8 (8:30am)
July 13, July 27
P1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Directo>~
RE: Aspen Valley Hospital -Master Facilities Plan (401 Castle Creek Road) -Final
Planned Unit Development, Phase II -Resolution No. ,Series 2010 -Public
Hearin
MEETING
DATE: Mazch 3, 2010
APPLICANT /OWNER:
Aspen Valley Hospital, David Ressler
CEO
REPRESENTATIVE:
Leslie Lamont, Lamont Planning
Services.
LOCATION:
Pazcel C, Aspen Valley Hospital District
Subdivision, commonly known as 401
Castle Creek Road.
CURRENT ZONING & USE
Located in the Public (PUB) zone
district. Lot C contains 19.1 acres or
approximately 832,085 sq. ft. of lot azea.
PROPOSED LAND USE:.
The Applicant is requesting Final PUD
approval and associated land use
approvals for Phase II of the master
facilities plan for redevelopment and
expansion of the hospital campus.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the
Commission request the
Planning and Zoning
applicant provide
additional detail on the parking and affordable
housing components of Phase II and continue the
heazing to March 16`s.
SUMMARY:
The Applicant requests of the Planning and
Zoning Commission approval of certain Growth
Management reviews, Conditional Use review
and provide a recommendation of approval for a
Growth Management review, Subdivision,
Official Zone District Map Amendment and Final
Di TTl
Page 1 of 11
P2
LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES:
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning
Commission to undertake Phase II of the redevelopment and expansion of the hospital site:
• Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing with the development of affordable
housing pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 (4) (The Planning and Zoning
Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or
deny the proposal).
• Growth Management Review for Expansion or New Commercial Development with the
development of a new medical office space pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26.470.080 (1) (The Plannine and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who
may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal).
• Conditional Use Review for the development of affordable housing on the site pursuant
to Land Use Code Section 26.425.040 (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final
review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal).
Additionally, the following land use requests will be reviewed and acted upon by the City
Council:
• Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility with the development of the
hospital pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470 090 (4). (City Council is the final
review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning
Commission).
• Subdivision for the construction of multiple dwelling units pursuant to Land Use Code
Section 26.480 (City Council is the final review authority after considering a
recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission).
• Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the development of a site specific
development plan pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445 (City Council is the final
review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning
Commission).
• Amendment to the Zone District Map -for the designation of a PUD overlay on the
parcel, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.020, requires the Planning and Zoning
Commission, at a public hearing, to determine if the application meets the standazds for
an amendment to the Zone District Map. The City Council is the final decision-making
body.
Final PUD review before the Planning and Zoning Commission is the third step in a four step
review process. Conceptual PUD review for the entire proposal, steps one and two, was granted
via Resolution No. 3 (series of 2009) by City Council. Once heard by the Commission, the City
Council will conduct a final review of the application and recommendations of the Commission
at a public hearing. As noted in the application, the Applicant is proposing redevelopment in four
(4) phases to maintain existing operations throughout the redevelopment and will be requesting
Page 2 of 11
P3
Final PUD approval for each phase prior to the start of the subject phase, rather than final
approval of the entire project.
Due to the scale of this project, the review of the proposed Final PUD Plan for Phase II has been
scheduled over two meetings. At each meeting certain aspects of the project will be reviewed so
that the Commission may comprehensively evaluate the project. The following schedule and
topics are proposed:
March 2, 2010: Project Background, Phase II Overview, Conditions of Conceptual
PUD approval and incorporation into Phase II, Review Criteria
March 16, 2010: Response to issues raised by the Commission, Conditions of approval,
Vote
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The Applicant, Aspen Valley Hospital District, LLC has requested Final PUD approval for Phase
II of the Aspen Valley Hospital Master Facilities Plan to redevelop and expand the existing
hospital campus. The hospital received Conceptual PUD approval of the Master Facilities Plan
via Resolution No. 3 (Series of 2009) for the 19 acre property in April of 2009.
The focus of the proposal is on Parcel C of the campus, where the hospital, senior center/assisted
living (Whitcomb Terrace), ambulance barn, heli-pad and the hospital CEO's residence is
located. Parcel A of the campus includes the Schultz building and Mountain Oaks employee
housing. Parcel C contains approximately 19.1 acres or 832,085 square feet.
Page 3 of 11
P4
The Applicant has received Conceptual PUD approval to redevelop the parcel taking into
account a twenty yeaz program life cycle with an anticipated 2016 build-out timeline. The
following tables compare existing and proposed development for the site and the buildings on the
campus. The project is divided into four phases, so that hospital operations can continue
throughout construction. Each phase of development allows the hospital to continue day to day
operations.
Table 1. Overall Existing and Proposed Conditions through Phase IV
Existin Conditions Pro osed Conditions
Pazcel Area 832,085 s . fr. 820,315 s . fr.
Buildin Foot Tint 90,849 s . ft. 171,164 s . fr.**
Im ervious Area 190,700 s . fr. 189,854 s . ft.
O en S ace 550,536 sq. fr. 506,925 sq. ft.
Surface azkin 175 149*
Notes: * The proposed surface area does not include parking structure spaces which is now
proposed to be 221 spaces. The surface parking takes into account the affordable housing and
Whitcomb Terrace parking.
** The affordable housin has not been added.
Phase II
The Applicant is requesting approval for Phase II of the master facilities plan in which specific
improvements aze proposed on the site. Phase II includes a two story addition to the existing
hospital, development of the on-site affordable housing, a three level pazking garage, partial
construction of the loop service road as well as access improvements to the site, drainage and
utility improvements, trail realignment, and RFTA bus stop improvements. Following are the
gross square footage calculations for Phase II improvements for the hospital site. Specific
programming improvements are also itemized below:
Table 2: Phase II, Existing and Proposed Gross Square Feet of Development
Renovated New Total
Basement 168 11,788 11,956
Level One 22,728 18,630 41,358
Level Two 0 18,919 18,918
Medical Office 0 12,000 12,000
Affordable
Housin 0 20,500 20,500
Total 22,896 81,837 104,732
Basement programming - a second loading and receiving area as well as food service receiving.
First floor programming - 27 patent care rooms, nucleaz medicine, relocated food service
(including dining area), reception area, central plant additions, gifr shop, 4 intensive care unit
rooms, cardiopulmonary, and same day surgery.
Second floor programming -cardiac rehabilitation and physical therapy, specialty clinics,
oncology, administration offices, and medical offices.
Page 4 of 11
P5
Phase II also includes -construction of 22 affordable housing units, a preliminary consideration
for the expansion of Whitcomb Terrace, a three level parking garage (capacity 221 spaces),
partial construction of the loop service road, water line expansion, access improvements to the
site, meadow/drainage improvements, realignment of the Nordic trail, partial reconfiguration of
the visitor parking lot and RFTA bus stop improvements.
CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTION NO 3 (SERIES OF 2009):
Following are conditions of approval w~thm the Conceptual PUD approval that involve
requested revision and consideration. How the Applicant is incorporating the request into Phase
II is outlined after the condition.
Overall Building Size Uses Architecture and Site Des~n.
Staff Comment: The overall building size, uses, architecture and site design are similar to those
conceptually approved. To minimize the visual impact of the parking garage it is sunk into the
topography and the precast concrete that is exposed is wrapped with a wood composite screen to
Page 5 of 11
P6
soften its visual impact.. The garage will be further screened from Castle Creek Road by the
affordable housing. The original affordable housing conceptually showed the units facing a
parking lot. To move away from an auto centric design, the 22 affordable housing units now face
an open green area with vehicular access proposed along the perimeter of the housing.
Green Technolo ies.
Staff Comment: The Applicant is intending to seek LEED certification and has hired Resource
Engineering Group to work with city departments on ways to incorporate "green" technologies
into the project. Work is ongoing.
Employee Generation and miti atg ion.
Staff Comment: As outlined in the application, existing affordable housing (Beaumont, Mountain
Oaks, and CEO residence) provide housing for 57 employees. The twenty-two new on-site
affordable housing units house thirty four (34.5) employees with a mix of studio and one
bedroom units. Additional detail on the mitigation requirements is included later in the memo
under Growth Management Reviews.
Nordic Trail Location.
Staff Comment: The Applicant has been working with the Parks Department, as well as close
neighbors to minimize any rerouting of the existing Nordic Trail.
Drainage and Snow Storage.
Staff Comment: Since Conceptual PUD approval, the Applicant has been working with the Parks
and Engineering Departments to design a snow and drainage retention system that meets city
standards and minimizes any conflicts between snow moving vehicles and trail users. Work is
ongoing.
RFTA Bus Stop Refinements.
Staff Comment: Phase 11 will include improvements to the RFTA bus stop. The Applicant has
been working with representatives from RFTA, the Transportation department, and Engineering
department to develop an improvement plan that addresses bus and pedestrian needs/safety.
Recently, the groups met and agreed on certain improvements for the bus stop outlined under
Planned Unil Development.
Trail Improvements.
Staff Comment: The Applicant has been working with the Parks Department on minimizing
pedestrian/auto conflict on the Castle Creek trail. Some rerouting has been proposed to
minimize crossing conflicts.
Castle Creek Road Trail Crossing Improvements.
Staff Comment: The Applicant is proposing speed tables on either side of the crossing with a
slight change in alignment of the crossing. Enhanced lighting and signage will be installed. With
the realignment of the street crossing, some realignment of the trail from Castle Creek to the bus
stop is necessary.
Highway 82/Roundabout and Cemetery Lane Intersections.
Staff Comment: Staff and the Applicant are currently discussing resolution of this requirement
and intend to have a proposal for council to consider during their review of the project.
Page 6 of 11
P7
Currently, there are no capital improvements proposed for either the Cemetery Lane intersection
or the roundabout, so a requirement will be included in the approving ordinance with regard to
a future financial contribution.
Castle Creek Road Elevation
Staff Comment: With additional study and refinement, the Applicant has designed the site so that
the raising the elevation of Castle Creek is no longer necessary.
Transportation Demand Management program
Staff Comment: the Applicant has provided an initial Transportation Demand Management plan
but more detail is necessary according to Transportation Department comments. Work is
ongoing.
Subdivision Plattin¢ and PUD Documents
Staff Comment: During the plat recordation process for Phase 11, the plats will remove the 100
,foot easement along Castle Creek. Appropriately sized snow storage/drainage and trail
easements will be recorded. Also, the placeholder for the affordable housing will be removed
and replaced with an accurate footprint. of the proposed affordable housing. In the same vein, a
conceptual placeholder for the Whitcomb Terrace expansion will be recorded on the plat.
Finally, a discrepancy in the boundary survey will be resolved to the benefit of adjacent
neighbors in the Meadowood subdivision.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT:
Development within the Public zone district requires approval of a conceptual and final PUD
through the PUD process. The Applicant is requesting final PUD approval for Phase Il of the
hospital's master facilities plan. Phase II is proposed with certain specific improvements and
reflects additional refinement in the site planning and programming of the lot. As noted
previously in the memo, Phase II includes: expansion and remodel of the hospital function,
development of medical office space, development of affordable housing as well as site
improvements such the a parking garage, trail improvements, bus stop improvements, drainage
improvements and partial construction of the loop service road.
PUD Review covers a broad spectrum of criteria that aze used in considering the application
including consistency with the AACP, consistency with the character of existing land uses in the
surrounding area, site design, landscape design, architectural character, etcetera.
Staff Comment: Overall the massing, expansion and site improvements of the hospital facility
proposed for Phase II are similar to the Conceptual PUD approval. The hospital facility's
architecture and design fits with the neighborhood characteristics and overall, the site plan
focuses the redevelopment on the southerly portion of the parcel. The following comments, as
they relate site planning and potential additional refinement are provided.
RFTA bus stop: The Applicant has proposed certain improvements to the bus stop to improve
circulation for both the busses and pedestrians. Additional direction for these improvements has
been agreed upon by the Applicant and a number of referral agencies. These refinements
include:
Change the angle of the taper coming into the bus stop to accommodate the 18 "-24 "
overhang so that buses are not encroaching on the sidewalk.
Page 7 of 11
P8
• Have the traffic engineer review the reduced length of the deceleration lane along Castle
Creek at the entry to AVH to make sure that this is acceptable from a vehicle safety
perspective.
• Soften the radius from Castle Creek into the hospital to reduce vehicular conflict at this
intersection -consider removing additional trees to ensure that site lines are adequate
and safe.
• Add a shoulder on the south side of the AVH road between Doolittle Drive and Castle
Creek -hold all planting in this area back to provide for site distances.
• Evaluate impacts to the existing detention basin between Doolittle Drive and Castle
Creek and redesign as required to accommodate drainage/snow storage in this area.
Staff also recommends the Applicant consider installation of an additional shelter, if room is
available, as the bus stop is heavily used.
On-site affordable housing units: The Applicant is proposing twenty-two affordable housing
units. These buildings are clustered around an open green with a service drive around the
housing to accommodate parking (14 spaces) and access to the garages. The cluster of buildings
appear as two story or three story elements as viewed from Castle Creek Road or from the
interior of the lot and the heights range from 24 to 36 feet depending on the location of the
measurement. Staff recommends that the Applicant work on further refning the affordable
housing component to develop greater articulation in the form of the structure, consider
additional ways to handle the mass, and consider some of the trade-offs of the courtyard design
such as the buildings not addressing the street (Castle Creek Road).
Parking zaraQe: Conceptual PUD approval provided parking for 339 spaces, this included a mix
of garage and surface parking; however it did not consider any future expansion of Whitcomb
Terrace or the. affordable housing units. The current proposal includes a parking garage
capacity of 221 spaces. This is less than originally proposed but with additional on-site parking
for the housing component the overall number of parking spaces on the site has increased
increased to an expected total of 370 at Phase IV. The parking garage takes advantage of the
natural sloping topography and is mostly sunken into the site. Screening of the concrete by a
lattice material and landscaping is proposed. A 3-D model will be provided at the hearing to
give a better perspective of the visual impacts of the parking garage.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS:
The Applicant is requesting three (3) separate growth management approvals to obtain sufficient
development allotments to construct Phase II of the proposed project. It should be noted that
when affordable housing units are provided on-site, the individual mitigation requirements are
not required to be added together for a combined sum, as long as the largest amount of required
mitigation of any one growth management request is met. The requests and the project's
compliance with the applicable review standards are discussed below:
1) Growth Management Approval for Expansion or New Commercial Development. The
Applicant has requested approval for development of medical office space as required by
Section 26.470.080 (1), Expansion or New Commercial Development. The review
requires that the development proposal have sufficient growth management allotments, be
consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, mitigate for employees generated, and
Page 8 of 11
P9
represent minimal additional demand on public infrastructure. Allotments for the overall
27,000 sq. ft of net leasable aze available.
Sixty (60) percent of the employees generated by the additional commercial development
aze required to be mitigated by the provision of affordable housing or cash-in-lieu.
Resolution No. 3 (Series of 2009), approving the Conceptual PUD permits the
Applicant to use the Mixed Use zone district employee generation rate for calculating
employees generated by the medical office space. Within the Mixed-Use zone district,
3.7 full time Equivalents (FTEs) aze generated per 1,000 square feet of net leasable
area. The basement and upper floor employee generation rate is reduced by twenty-five
(25) percent or 2.775 FTEs per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area.
Phase II will contain an expected total of 12,000 sq. ft. of net leasable azea, with all of it
on an upper floor. The new net leasable area generates 33.3 FTEs [(12,000 sq. ft./1,000
sq. ft.) x 2.775]. When mitigated for at sixty (60) percent, as required by the code, the
number equals 19.98 FTEs.
2) Growth Mana ement A royal for the Develo ment of Essential Public Facilities. The
Applicant has requested approval for development of an Essential Public Facility as
required by Section 26.470.090 (4), Essential Public Facilities. City Council approves this
review based upon a recommendation of both the Planning and Zoning Commission and
the Community Development Director.
As proposed, the hospital component of the project in Phase II represents 47,860 gross
sq. ft of new Essential Public Facility (not including the parking garage). As noted in
the Application, Phase I of the hospital redevelopment did not generate any employees. It
is estimated that with Phase II, 19.7 new employees will be generated.
3) Growth Management Approval for the Development of Affordable Housing. The
Applicant has requested approval for development of affordable houstng as requrred by
Section 26.470.040.0.7. The review requires that the development proposal have
sufficient growth management allotments, be consistent with the Aspen Area Community
Plan, comply with the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines (housing
guidelines), and meet certain design and ownership requirements.
As mentioned previously, the Applicant is proposing to provide 22 on-site studio and
one-bedroom units to be located on the hospital campus. Eight studio units are proposed
to house 10 employees, while fourteen one-bedroom units will house 24.5 employees for
a total of 34.5 employees housed on the site. Additionally, Resolution No. 3 (Series of
2009) notes that the hospital district may use 57 credits for employee mitigation in the
form of previously purchased/developed affordable housing units (Beaumont, Mountain
Oaks and the CEO residence). With both the housing being developed on-site and the
credit available to the district, the total employees housed equals 91.5 employees. As the
largest amount of required mitigation of either the new commercial development or
'The Applicant is requesting allotments for 27,000 sq. ft. of net leasable commercial area from the 2010 growth
management year; however, as a phased project, the commercial allotments will be mitigated in phases: 12,000 sq.
ft. in Phase II and 15,000 sq. ft. in Phase lll.
Page 9 of 11
P10
essential public facility is required to be met if on-site housing is provided, the greater
employees to be mitigated for is 19.98 employees.
Also required by the Land Use Code in the design of the affordable housing units is that
each unit be designed so that fifry percent or more of each unit's net livable floor area is
at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. As noted by the Applicant, one
hundred (100%) percent of the finished floor for all of the units is at or above grade.
Staff Comment: In reviewing the Growth Management portion of the application, Staff believes
that the proposal does meet the applicable standards established in Land Use Code Sections
26.470.080 (1), 26.470.090 (4), and 26.470.040 (C)(7).
The Applicant is proposing to provide on-site a mix of twenty-two studio and one-bedroom
affordable housing units. In Section 26.470.050 A.2., Employees Housed, the mix of units
accommodates 34.5 employees and exceeds the mitigation requirements of 19.98 employees.
CONDITIONAL USE:
The Applicant is requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the Conditional Use
request to develop the site with affordable housing. Under the Public (PUB) zone district, the
development of affordable housing is a conditional use.
Staff Comment• In reviewing the request, staff believes that the provision of on-site affordable
housing is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood characteristics. Uses adjacent to the
hospital campus are residential in character and include other affordable housing developments
such as Mountain Oaks and Castle Ridge. The housing in the area is a mix of single family and
multi family development.
SUBDIVISION:
The Applicant is requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that City Counci]
approve the request for subdivision. Subdivision review is triggered with the development of
multiple dwelling units, in this case the proposed affordable housing units.
Staff Comment In reviewing the request, staff believes the Applicant meets the review criteria
(Exhibit D) for Subdivision and recommends approval.
AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP:
Development with the Public zone district is required to be memorialized through the adoption of
a final PUD. To designate the parcel with a PUD overlay, an amendment to the Official Zone
District Map is required.
Staff Comment: In reviewing the request, staff believes the Map Amendment request meets the
review standards outlined in Exhibit E and meets the requirements of the Public zone district by
memorializing a Final PUD plan for the expansion and redevelopment of the hospital district.
REFFERAL AGENCY COMMENTS:
A number of refen•al agencies have provided comments on the application: Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District, Aspen Fire Protection District, city engineering, city environmental health,
Page 10 of 11
P11
city parks, city transportation, city utilities, The Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority and the Pitkin
County Commissioners. Appropriate comments from the departments have been included in the
resolution.
RECOMMENDATION: During the heazing, staff recommends discussion include:
clarification on the parking garage's materials/ screening as well as overall parking needs of the
facility and discussion on the current design of the affordable housing.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to continue the heazing on the AVH Master facilities plan for
Phase II to Mazch 16, 2010."
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A -Application (provided previously to the Commission)
EXHIBIT B -Growth Management Review Criteria
ExHiBITC-Conditional Use Review Criteria
EXHIBIT D-Subdivision Review Criteria
EXHIBIT E -Amendment to the Official Zone District Map Review Criteria
EXHIBIT F -Planned Unit Development Review Criteria
EXHIBIT G -Referral Agency Comments
EXHIBIT H -Addenda to the. application dated February 16, 2010
Page 11 of 11
P12
RESOLUTION N0. _
(SERIES OF 2010)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
APPROVING GOWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS, CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW
AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A GROWTH MANGEMENT REVIEW,
SUBDIVISION, AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP AND
FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PHASE II OF THE ASPEN VALLEY
HOSPITAL DISTRICT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN, LOCATED ON PARCEL C,
ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT SUBDIVISION, COMMONLY DESCRIBED
AS 401 CASTLE CREEK ROAD, CTTY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
ParcellD:2735-121-29-809
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the
Aspen Valley Hospital District (Applicant), represented by Leslie Lamont of Lamont Planning
Services, requesting approval of a Final Development Plan and associated land use reviews for a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Phase II the Aspen Valley Hospital District Facilities
Master Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Conceptual PUD approval (via Resolution No. 3, Series of 2009)
conceptually approved a redeveloped and expanded multi-story hospital building and parking
gazage, affordable housing and site improvements on Parcel C of the Aspen Valley Hospital
Subdivision, to be developed in four phases; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from
the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Fire Protection District, Pitkin
County Commissioners, Environmental Health Department, Pazks Department, Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority, the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority, the Transportation
Department, and the City Utilities Department as a result of the Development Review Committee
meeting; and,
WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department
reviewed the proposed Final ,PUD and associated land use reviews for Phase II and
recommended approval with conditions; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Final PUD approval and
associated reviews may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after
considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community
Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, prior to City Council approval, Final PUD and associated land use reviews
by the Planning and Zoning Commission requires a public hearing and this application was
reviewed at multiple public hearings where the recommendations of the Community
Development Director and comments from the public were heazd; and,
WHEREAS, during a regulaz meeting on Februazy 16, 2010, the Planning and Zoning
Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and continued the
public hearing tp Mazch 2, 2010 for further discussion. At the Mazch 2, 2010 public hearing, the
Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project
and continued the heazing until Mazch 16, 2010 for further discussion. At the Mazch 16, 2010
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page ] of 8
P13
public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to
consider the project and approved certain growth management quota system reviews, a
conditional use review and recommended City Council approve the Final Planned Unit
Development application and associated reviews for Phase II by a---- to ----- L-~ vote, with the
findings and conditions listed hereinafter; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Approvals
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Growth Management Review for Expansion
or New Commercial Development, Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing,
Conditional Use Review, and recommends approval by City Council of Growth Management
Review for an Essential Public Facility, Subdivision, Final Planned Unit Development, and
Amendment to the Zone District Map for Phase II of the Aspen Valley Hospital Master Facilities
Plan.
Specifically, these approvals and recommendations of approval permit the Applicant to develop
Phase II of a four phase master facilities plan inclusive of 12,000 sq. ft. of net leasable
commercial and office space for the development of medical offices, twenty-two affordable
housing units, an expansion of the hospital facility by 47,860 gross square feet (excluding the
pazlting gazage) and site improvements as shown in the floor plans of Exhibit A of this
resolution.
Section 2• Growth Management Annual Allotments
The Applicant requests 27,000 sq. ft. of net leasable commercial and office space from the 2010
annual allotment allowance for commercial development. This allotment represents the total net
leasable squaze feet necessary to construct the entire master facilities plan over the course of the
proposed four phases of development. For Phase II, only 12,000 sq. ft. of net leasable
commercial and office space is proposed leaving a balance of 15,000 sq. ft. to be used in
subsequent phases in subsequent yeazs. Required affordable housing mitigation shall be based on
the amount of net leasable commercial and office space proposed in each phase of development.
Section 3: Plat and Agreement
The Applicant shall record a subdivision/PUD plat and agreement that meets the requirements of
Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of approval if City Council provides
fmal approval of the growth management review for an Essential Public Facility, Subdivision and
Final PUD request.
Section 4• Building Permit Application
The building permit application shall include the following:
a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page 2 of 8
P14
b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set.
c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District.
d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil
Engineer, which meets adopted city standards.
e. An excavation stabilization plan, construction management plan (CMP), and drainage and
soils reports pursuant to the Building Department's requirements.
]) As part of the construction management plan for Phase II improvements, provisions shall
be made to ensure that parking for Aspen Valley Hospital visitors, staff and construction
workers will be accommodated in a location other than in the Health and Human Services lot.
2) As the Hospital, Health & Human Services Center and Senior Center are all co-located on
one campus, and there will be the addition of at least affordable housing and structured
parking in Phase II, the Hospital is required to work collaboratively to improve traffic flow,
pedestrian access and signage to the greatest extent possible to provide auser-friendly
experience for citizens using all of the facilities.
f A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health
Department.
g. A detailed excavation plan for review and approval by the City Engineer.
h. Accessibility and ADA requirements shall be addressed to satisfactorily meet adopted
building codes.
Section 5: Dimensional Requirements
The redevelopment of the property in Phase II as presented shall meet the dimensional standards
as outlined in Exhibit B of this resolution.
Section 6: Engineerine
Adequate handling of snow storage and drainage capacity along Castle Creek Road is required.
Final design direction with regard to additional infrastructure (storm sewer, curb and gutter) shall
be agreed upon by the Applicant and City Engineer prior to review by City Council. The CEO
house impervious area is required to be detained. To ensure the proposed drainage plan can
theoretically handle the site's drainage hydrographs at critical design points need to be submitted
to the City Engineer prior to review by City Council. Pedestrian/bicycle access though the site
must be maintained during construction via the existing paved trail or through city approved
alternatives.
Final 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.
Additional detailed comments are included in the Development Review Committee minutes of
February 8, 2010 and shall be incorporated into the construction documents associated with
Phase II.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No., Series 2010
Page 3 of 8
P15
Section 7: Affordable HOLLS1nE
a. The affordable housing provided in Phase II of the project shall be eight (8) studios and
fourteen (14) one-bedroom dwelling units meeting the size and rental rates of Category 3 and 4
affordable housing units of the APCHA guidelines.
b. Rental units azea allowed with the following conditions:
1) The deed restriction shall state that the hospital has a priority to rent the units for hospital
employees; however, if a unit is unoccupied for forty-five (45) days, the hospital shall rent
the unit to another qualified employee of Pitkin County.
2) All tenants shall be approved through APCHA prior to occupancy.
3) The owner shall convey an undivided 1/10`s of 1% ownership interest in the deed restricted
units to APCHA. The APCHA ownership interest shall be in perpetuity or until such time
as the units are converted to ownership units.
4) If the owner elects to sell the units, the hospital shall condominiumize the units by forming
a condominium association for the deed restricted units only. All documents associated
with creating an HOA shall be approved by APCHA
5) A deed restriction shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. All
units require a lease for a minimum of six months.
Section 8: Fire Mitieation
NFPA 13 needs to be applied to the residential component of the project. Final configuration of
the fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems needs to approved prior to installation. Adequate turning
radii needs to be provided at the main entrance of the hospital and the grade level parking. Fire
hydrant locations must be approved prior to installation.
Section 9• Utilities Department Requirements
The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standazds, with Title 25, and
with the applicable standazds of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of
the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Additionally,
the department requests the follwong:
a. The Water Department requests a meeting with the developer prior to preliminary Plan
approval to discuss water service and design.
b. Please include a master, or Overall Utility plan.
c. Ensure that there are proper sepazation distances between water, sewer, and stonnwater
systems.
d. It appeazs at station 8+00 that there is a retaining wall within the Utility R.O.W. standazds do
not allow structures within Utility Easements and R.O.Ws
e. Check all Utilities at Doolittle and Castle Creek.
£ Please check all service line sizing and provide proof of size requirements (specifically
Whitcomb Terrace).
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page 4 of 8
P16
g. Be sure to use three valve complexes where appropriate.
h. Lines at the parking gazage seem to be incorrectly labeled.
i. There does not appear to be any Ground Source Heat Pump included at this stage in Design.
Section 10: Sanitation District Requirements
a. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and
specifications, which aze on file at the District office. 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.
b. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD.
c. Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) are required for all food processing establishment;
Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit.
d. Oil and Sand sepazators aze required for pazking gazages and vehicle maintenance
establishments. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. Elevator shafts drains must
flow thrn o/s interceptor.
e. Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitazy sewer line according
to specific ACSD requirements. Below grade development may require installation of a
pumping system. One tap is allowed for each building. Shazed 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 hazd landscaping may
impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district.
g. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit.
h. 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
azeas must have approved containment facilities.
i. 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.
j. Applicant's civil engineer will be required to submit existing and proposed flow calculations.
k. Easements for the main sanitary sewer line as well as access easements, dedicated to the
district, will be required.
1. Applicant will be required to deposit funds with the district for construction costs,
engineering fees, construction observation fees, and fees to clean and televise the new main
sewer line extension into the project.
m. The sewer service line from the ambulance barn shall be connected to the proposed new
sanitary sewer service line in the access road loop.
n. Both the sewer service line from the hospital and the ambulance barn shall be excavated and
capped off adjacent to Meadowood Road in the Meadowood subdivision, and the
corresponding easements shall be properly and legally abandoned.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page 5 of 8
P17
o. The applicant shall provide the district with proper representation that will show all means
and methods to preclude any and all pathological, radioactive, heavy metals, and any other
hazardous material on the list of EPA prohibited toxic dischazges.
Section 11: Environmental Health
Thus this development will increase vehicular trips resulting in a negative effect on the air
quality if mitigation measures are not implemented. To provide such mitigation, the Applicant
may pay the City of Aspen's Air Quality Impact Fee. The Applicant should design the pazking
garage to ensure ventilation is adequate to prevent carbon monoxide from reaching high levels
and exhaust ventilation should not be placed near any windows or doors. Adequate recycling
space needs to be provided as well as wildlife proof trash containers.
Section 12: 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 13: Parks
A. An approved tree"permit will be required before any demolition or access infrastructure work
takes place. Please contact the City Forester at 920-5120. Mitigation for removals will be
paid cash in lieu or on site. The overall mitigation for removals during this phase of
improvements already has a carry over from the construction of the Obstetrics Unit.
B. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or
groupings of trees on site. The vegetation fence shall be installed at the edge of the
construction impacted as depicted on page P101, Master Site Phasing Diagram. This fence
must be 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 backfill, 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.
C. General Landscaping notes:
1) New landscape along the paved trail should be no closure than 2-feet when the species
reaches maturity. A 2-foot fall zone should be maintained along both sides of the paved
trail.
2) The drip lines of the new landscaping along the proposed Nordic alignment should no
encroach over the edge of the trail easement. Mature landscaping should not grow into
the trail easement requiring maintenance or interfere with the grooming equipment.
3) New landscaping at the trail intersections for the Terrace and the Hospital entrance, pages
L-105 and L-106, needs to be reconsidered. The landscape details are nice but will
become a site line and maintenance issue which we strongly recommend against.
4) On page, L-106 the area located between the right hand tum into the hospital and the
current trail currently has an abundance of native vegetation which will be lost during
construction. It doesn't show anything new being replanted in this location. Parks
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page 6 of 8
P18
suggest that the lost infrastructure be used to replace the native character of this right
hand turn area.
D. Parks requests a final opportunity to field locate the Nordic trail in an effort to decrease some
of the proposed slopes. Once a final alignment for the Nordic trail is determined and
approved by the Pazks Department the alignment and use shall be memorialized with a trail
easement granted by the Hospital to the City of Aspen for use as a trail easement. This
should be identified (called out) on the site plans and in a signed easement document.
Support of the proposed Master Plan Facility is contingent on acquiring an easement.
E. Staff requests to review in more detail the proposed culvert crossing for the summer trail and
the proposed Grasscrete access the paved trail for snow reomval. Warning signs will need to
be installed at the snow dump entry, "driveway crossing"
F. The current proposed Nordic alignment should align with the connection to the existing trail
located across Castle Creek Road. The connections and turns have to be able to allow for the
operation of a snow cat based on the machines specifications and capabilities to properly
groom.
G. It is critical that that the construction of the detention ponds and the trail alignments aze
completed prior to the start of the winter seasons. Parks will not allow any construction
activities of any kind to take place within the Nordic alignments, or azound the Nordic
alignments. Construction impacts to these azeas will greatly reduce the skiers experience and
more importantly viability of the snowpack.
H. A trail detour plan needs to be developed during the construction project in order to allow for
the continued public access along the south side of Castle Creek Road.
I. If there is any storm runoff terminating on or in the Mazolt property into the storm basin
located near the roundabout, there should a discussion on formatting an agreement for
maintenance and to make improvements to the out fall located on City property in order to
correctly convey the water to the pond.
Section 14: Transaortation
An initial transportation demand management (tdm) plan has been submitted with the Final PUD
application for Phase II of the AVH master facilities plan. The tdm plan, as presented, needs
additional detail to be comprehensively evaluated. The Applicant shall work with Transportation
department representatives to develop a detailed tdm plan, based upon the comments provided in
the DRC minutes dated 2/3/2010, prior to review of the Final PUD application by City Council.
Section 15:
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public heazing or documentation presented before
the Planning and Zoning Commission, aze 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.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page 7 of 8
P19
Section 16:
This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 17:
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
sepazate, 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 16~' day of
Mazch, 2010.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jim True, Special Counsel
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
Exhibit A AVH Master Facility Plan, Phase II
Exhibit B -Dimensional Standards, Phase II
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
Stan Gibbs, Chair
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No._, Series 2010
Page 8 of 8
P 2 0 ~x~.~ 1 ~ `Z
~~~;~
(~e~v1Ls 2~~~~
Phase II Dimensions Matrix & Empbyee Housing Mitigation
Matrix
A. Section 26.445.050 Review Standards Final PUD -Establishment of
Dimensional Requirements
There are no prescribed dimensions for allowed uses within the Public zone district. All dimensional
requirements shall be established with the adoption of a final PUD development plan. The proposed
dimensions for Phase 11 are: (the below dimensions ref/ed a reduction in the size of Parcel C of 13,702
square feet due to the west boundary discrepancy)
1. Existing Site Conditions
Description Area
(s. F.) (Acres)
Total property -Parcel "C'* 818,383 18.8
Impervious surface -building foot prints, parking areas 149,630 3.43s
Impervious surface -paved roods including curb and gutter, drainage pans 163,760 3.760
Impervious surface -sidewalks 24,s75 O.s64
Impervious surface-bikepoth 13,656 0.313
Pervious surface -landscape, stormwater detention facility, Nordic trail, un-
disturbed open space 466,762 10.7
Total open space pervious+ sidewalks + bike path s04,993 11.59
*minus the 13,702 square feet that will be granted to adjacent property owners
2. Slope Analysis
Slope % Land Area Sq. Ft. Reduction Net Area
0-20% 8sYo 700,856.s 0 700,8s6.s
20%-30% 7.6% 63,546.5 50% 31,773.2
30'yo> 6.5% 53,980.0 100% 0
Total 818,383 or 18.8 acres 732,629.7 or16.8 acres
Note: based upon a review of the slope analysis map for Parcel C, most of the 30% or greater slopes are
not natural and appear to have been formed as part of the development of the site.
Appendix H -Dimensions Matrix & Employee Housing Mitigation Matrix Page 1
P21
3. Existing & Proposed Floor Area for Phase 11:
Existing Floor Area Additional Floor Area Total @ Build Out
Ambulance Barn 3,830, 3,830
Whitcomb Terrace/Senior 17,206 8,000 25,206
Center
CEO Residence 3,500 3,500
Hospital' 75,721 49,549 125,270
On-site Employee Housing 20,500 20,500
Total Floor Area Square 100,257 78,049 178,306
Footage as Defined by the
Aspen Land Use Code2
Floor Area Ratio w/out .13:1 •24:1
parking garage3
Parking Garage 44,160 44,160
Total Floor Area Square 100,257 122,209 222,166
Footage as Defined by the
Aspen Land Use Code
Floor Area Ratio .3:1
w/parking garage
1 Includes Phase I square footage - 5,721 sq. ft.
Z A subgrade story with no exposed exterior surface wall area is excluded from floor area calculations.
s Lot Area = 732,630 sq. ft.
Appendix H -Dimensions Matrix & Employee Housing Mitigation Matrix Page i
P22
4. Additional Project Dimensions:
Minimum Lot Size: ~ 18.8 acres or 818,383 square feet
Minimum Lot. Width: The approved site plan will establish a site
specific location of the buildings.
Minimum Front Yard: The approved site plan will establish a site
specific location ofthe buildings.
Minimum Side Yard: The approved site plan will establish a site
specific location of the buildings.
Minimum Rear Yard: The approved site plan will establish a site
specific location of the buildings.
Maximum Site Coverage: 42% or 8 acres or 351,616 square feet -which
includes all buildings, pavement, stairs,
walkways, bike paths and the parking garage
(impervious surfaces)
Maximum Height of Hospital Addition & Garage:
Two story element: 31 feet to the top of the parapet
Three story height of new service yard: 54 feet -this is greater than conceptual bemuse
the grades for the loading dock has been pushed
down to avoid raising Castle Creek Road elevation by
roughly 5' as originally proposed
Parking structure at north end (max. exposure): 30 feet 6 inches
Parking structure stair tower of north end: 36 feet
Height of the on-site employee housing:
From the courtyard: 23 feet 6 inches
From the driveway side: 33 feet 6 inches
Appendix H -Dimensions Matrix & Employee Housing Mitigation Matrix Page 3
P23
Height of Whitcomb addition:
From entrance grade: 24 feet
From lower level driveway: 36 feet
Minimum distance between buildings on the lot: between the AH and Whitcomb addition - 60'
between the Hospital and Whitcomb
Terrace/Pitkin County Senior Center - 70'-8"
Minimum % open space for the building site: 61% of the site will remain open which includes
all pervious surfaces, detention basins,
sidewalks and bike path
Trash access area: the first service yard area back of the property -
4;192 square feet
the second service yard area adjacent to the
parking garage - 5,286 square feet
Minimum off-street parking spaces: 436 - includes garage {221), surface (171),
employee & senior housing (44)
Appendix H -Dimensions Matrix & Employee Housing Mitigation Matrix Page 4
P24
B. Employee Housing Mitigation Matrix
Employee Generation Phase I` Phase II Employee Housing
Creditss
Medical Office Space 0 23.4
Hospital Facility 0 19.7
Total 0 43.1
Employee Credits 57
Employees Mitigated
On-site Employee
Hsg.fi
8 studio units = 1.25 30 .
employees
housed/unit
14one-bedroom units 24.5
= 1.75 employees
housed/unit
# of Employees 345
Housed w/new
housing
Credits Required 8.6
Total Employees 43.1
Housed for Phase II
Remaining Employee 48.4
Credits
Pending Audit
s Based upon Resolution #3
s Pursuant to Section 26.470.100 A.2 of the Aspen LUC
Appendix H -Dimensions Matrix & Employee Housing Mitigation Matrix Page 5
P25
EXHIBIT B
Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System
26.470.070 (4), Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in
accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved,
approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the
following criteria:
a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be
required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to
hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors.
Staff Finding: The Applicant notes that each studio will be approximately 505 sq. ft.
while the one bedroom units will be 701 sq. ft. At Category 3 and 4, the units will meet
the minimum size requirements required by APCHA Guidelines.
b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly
built units or buy-down units. Off-site units shall be provided within the City limits.
Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant
to Paragraph 26.470.090.2. If the mitigation requirement is less than one (1) full unit, a
cash-in-lieu payment may be accepted by the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a
recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. If the mitigation
requirement is one (1) or more units, acash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council
approval, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3. Required affordable housing may be
provided through a mix of these methods.
Staff Finding: The Applicant is proposing 22 on-site studio and one-bedroom units to be
located on the hospital campus. Eight studio units are proposed housing 10 employees,
while fourteen one-bedroom units will house 24.5 employees for a total of 34.5 employees
housed on the site. Additionally, Resolution No. 3 (Series of 2009) notes that the hospital
district may use 57 credits for employee mitigation in the form of previously
purchasedldeveloped affordable housing units (Beaumont, Mountain Oaks and the CEO
residence). With both the housing being developed on-site and the credit available to the
district, the total employees housed equals 91.5 employees.
c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifry percent
(50%) or more of the unit's net livable azea is at or above natural or finished grade,
whichever is higher.
Staff Finding: The applicant has noted that this standard is met in the design of the units.
d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified
purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The
owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned
P26
qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The
deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to
own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing
Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended.
The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by
an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages
affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with
the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge.
Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin
County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agericy shall not be subject to
this mandatory "for sale" provision.
Staff Finding.• The Applicant is requesting that the new unit be permitted to be rental unit.
As a taxing district, the hospital is not subject to the `for sale "provision.
26.470.080 (1), Expansion or new commercial development. The expansion of an existing
commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building or the development of a new
commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building shall be approved, approved
with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on general
requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050.
Staff Finding: In Phase II, the applicant is requesting to develop 12,000 sq. ft. of net leasable
commercial office space in the form of medical offices. As part of Resolution No 3 (Series 2009),
the Applicant is permitted to use the Mixed Use zone district employee generation rate. As such
3.7 employees are generated for every 1;000 sq. ft. of net leasable area (NLA); however, the
employee generation rate is reduced by 25% or 2.775 when located on a second story. Section
26.470.050 requires that "60% of the employees generated by the additional commercial or
lodge development" be mitigated. Following is the employee generation calculation:
12, 000 sq. ft. / 1, 000 sq. ft =12
12 X 2.775 = 33.3 employees generated
33.3 *.6 =19.98 employees required to be mitigated
The on-site affordable housing, with its mix of studio and one-bedroom units will house 34.5
employees. This in excess of the requirement generated with the development of 12,000 sq. ft. of
medical office space.
26.470.090 (4), Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon
a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with
conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria:
P27
a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure
to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an
essential public facility project.
b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council
may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is
deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in
consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used
as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs,
pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations.
Staff Finding: In Phase II, the applicant is requesting 47,860 in gross square footage to develop
and expand the hospital function of the parcel. The director has found the hospital function of
the property to be considered an Essential Public Facility and Council has determined that the
employee generation rate for the hospital be based on actual audits.
P28
Exhibit C
Sec. 26.425.040. Standards applicable to all conditional uses.
When considering a development application for a conditional use, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards aze met, as applicable.
A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the
Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the Zone District in which it is proposed to be
located and complies with all other applicable requirements of this Title; and
Staff Finding.• The affordable housing component implements parts of the AACP and located in a
neighborhood that contains a mix of residential and institutional uses. Specifically, the
neighborhood contains both single family and multi family residential dwelling types, as well as
other affordable housing developments.
B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity
of the pazcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses or enhances the mixture of
complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development; and
Staff Finding: The neighborhood contains both single family and multi family residential
dwelling types, as well as other affordable housing developments.
C. The location, size, design and operating chazacteristics of the proposed conditional use
minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehiculaz
circulation, pazking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties;
and
Staff Finding. The proposed development of affordable housing is clustered on the more
developed portion of the site and is designed to tray and minimize adverse effects. Vehicular
circulation is proposed around the perimeter of the housing and off-street parking is generally
proposed to tuck under the existing units, limiting impacts to other user groups on the site.
D. There aze adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not
limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency
medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems and schools; and
Staff Finding. Referral departments have reviewed the proposal and believe adequate services
are available for the development.
E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for
increased employees generated by the conditional use;
Staff Finding: Not applicable. The conditional use request is for the development of affordable
housing.
P29
Exhibit D
Sec. 26.480.OSO.Review standards.
A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and
requirements:
A. General requirements.
I. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan
2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in
the area.
3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of
surrounding areas.
4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this
Title.
Staff Finding: The proposed redevelopment and expansion of the hospital is consistent
with the character of the neighborhood that includes a mix of housing types as well as
social services, is consistent with policies of the AACP, will not impact future
development of surrounding areas and will meet required adopted standards.
B. Suitability of land for subdivision.
1. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for
development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide,
avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazazd or other condition
that will be harmful to the health, safety or welfare of the residents in the proposed
subdivision.
2. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial
patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities
and unnecessazy public costs.
Staff Finding. The proposed redevelopment and expansion of the hospital is located on
land suitable for development and the redevelopment is proposed on an area of the site
that already contains development minimizing the impact of development of the meadow
area on the northerly end of the parcel.
C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the
proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if
the following conditions have been met:
1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision
design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive
Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas and/or the goals of the community.
P30
2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide
justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by
professional engineers as necessary.
Staff Finding.' The proposed redevelopment and expansion of the hospital site are
proposed to meet adopted subdivision design standards.
D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall
be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter
26.520, Replacement housing program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units
shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter
26.470, Growth Management Quota System.
Staff Finding: The proposed redevelopment and expansion of the hospital site provides for on-
site affordable housing and is in compliance with Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota
System.
E. School land dedication. Compliance with the School land dedication standards set forth at
Chapter 26.620.
Staff Finding: The proposed redevelopment and expansion of the hospital site provides
affordable housing and a placeholder for the future development of senior housing. The
application notes that the school land dedication fee-in-lieu shall be paid for the affordable
housing units but requests that the future development ofsenior housing not be subject to the fee-
in-lieu. The applicant will need to be granted an exemption, in the future, from the school
district.
F. Growth management approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications
for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth
management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval
may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-
PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is
required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal
instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, §2; Ord. No. 12, 2007, §§29, 30)
Staff finding: The proposed redevelopment has requested growth management allotments as
required.
P31
Exhibit E
Sec. 26.310.040. Standards of review.
In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official Zone District
Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title.
Staff Finding: The amendment is not in conflict with any portion of the Land Use Code and
simply memorializes the site specific development plan proposed by the hospital and required by
the Public zone district by designating it with a PUD overlay.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding.• The redevelopment and expansion of the hospital campus implements goals and
policies of the AACP.
By providing affordable housing, it contributes towards a critical mass of permanent
local residents with the Aspen Community Boundary -Managing Growth, Goal B, pg 18.
• The redevelopment of the campus contains development within the urban growth
boundary to contain and limit sprawl- Managing Growth, Goal D, pg 19.
• The site has multi modal transportation options through the trail system and bus service,
promoting transit and pedestrian friendly lifestyles -Managing Growth, Goal E, pg 19.
The Applicant is proposing a Transportation Demand Management plan to reduce the
impacts of automobiles and promote alternative modes of transportation -
Transportation, Goals E and G, pg 23.
• By making improvements to the trail and bus stop the Applicant is able to "Maintain and
improve the appeal of bicycling and walking... by adding sidewalk connections, replacing
sidewalks, and requiring sidewalks as part of development approvals, where
appropriate... " (Goal C, pg 22)
• By using a palette of materials and range of building forms the design "Makes every public
project a model of good development, on all levels, from quality design to positive
contributions to the community fabric. " (Goal B, pg 43)
• The provision of affordable housing on the site helps "Create an affordable housing
environment that is appropriately scaled and distributed throughout existing and new
neighborhoods... " (Intent, pg 25)
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land
uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood chazacteristics.
Staff Finding: The proposed amendment memorializes the proposed expansion and
redevelopment of the hospital campus including affordable housing units and the essential public
facility. Both uses are compatible with surrounding land uses that include other residential and
essential public facility uses.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.
P32
Staff Finding: The proposed PUD overlay will not affect traffic generation; however, the
expansion of the existing hospital facility and addition of affordable housing will increase traffic
generation. The applicant is responsible for a proportionate share of the impacts (as outlined in
the Conceptual PUD approval) and is proposing other measures to mitigate traffic impacts.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public
facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage
facilities, water supply, pazks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding: Demands on public facilities can be met, for example water supply and sewage
serviced, and additional mitigation measures are proposed to limit the impacts the
redevelopment will cause.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding.• The application proposes to structure the expansion and redevelopment on the
southerly portion of the property, where development currently exists. The northerly portion is
proposed to remain in essentially a natural state.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community
chazacter in the City.
Staff Finding.• The hospital use of the property and proposed affordable housing is consistent
with the existing use of the property and surrounding uses that include residential an d public
services.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject pacel or the surrounding
neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.
Staff Finding: The proposed PUD overlay is consistent with the existing uses of the parcel
(hospital) and adds residential housing which surrounds much of the hospital campus.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it
is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title.
Staff Finding: The proposed redevelopment of the campus is not in conflict with the public
interest and meets the purpose and intent of the land use code.
P33
EXHIBIT F
Chapter 26.445, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
Sec. 26.445.050. Review Criteria conceptual, final, consolidated and minor PUD.
A development application for conceptual, final, consolidated, conceptual and fmal or
minor PUD shall comply with the following standazds and requirements. Due to the
limited issues associated with conceptual reviews and properties eligible for minor PUD
review, certain standazds 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 Finding: The redevelopment and expansion of the hospital campus implements
goals and policies of the AACP.
• By providing affordable housing, it contributes towards a critical mass of
permanent local residents with the Aspen Community Boundary -Managing
Growth, Goal B, pg 18.
• The redevelopment of the campus contains development within the urban growth
boundary to contain and limit sprawl- Managing Growth, Goal D, pg 19.
• The site has multi modal transportation options through the trail system and bus
service, promoting transit and pedestrian friendly lifestyles -Managing Growth,
Goal E, pg 19.
• The Applicant is proposing a Transportation Demand Management plan to
reduce the impacts of automobiles and promote alternative modes of
transportation -Transportation, Goals E and G, pg 23.
• By making improvements to the trail and bus stop the Applicant is able to
"Maintain and improve the appeal of bicycling and walking... by adding sidewalk
connections, replacing sidewalks, and requiring sidewalks as part of development
approvals, where appropriate... " (Goal C, pg 22)
• By using a palette of materials and range of building forms the design "Makes every
public project a model of good development, on all levels, from quality design to
positive contributions to the community fabric. " (Goal B, pg 43)
• The provision of affordable housing on the site helps "Create an affordable
housing environment that is appropriately scaled and distributed throughout
existing and new neighborhoods... " (Intent, pg 25)
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the chazacter of existing land
uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding: The proposed development is on a large tract of land that acts as a
campus setting for the hospital, senior housing, ambulance barn, and health and
human services building. The property is close to open space and some dense
P34
residential neighborhoods. The development is an expansion of an existing use with
the addition of affordable housing. The site is adjacent to other residential and
affordable housing developments a well as institutional uses. Staff finds this criterion
to be met.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of
the surrounding azea.
Staff Finding.• Staff believes that this development will not adversely affect the future
development of the area.
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt
from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed
development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD
development plan review.
Staff Finding: The Applicant has made a Growth Management Application as part of
the Final PUD application of Phase II. Under the current proposal, the application
will be reviewed as an essential public facility (for the hospital operation) which has
no cap on the square footage granted in a calendar year, require growth management
approval for the development of new commercial space/medical clinics (net leasable)
where the 27,000 sq. ft. requested (for tall phases of development) is available from
the 2010 growth management year and the development of affordable housing is not
capped.
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.
1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property aze 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 azea.
Staff Finding.• The dimensional requirements allow for the expansion of the
hospital while minimizing the footprint of the hospital and maintaining open
space. At a final review level, the proposed building expansion and its
location on the site, as well as the affordable housing location, is compatible
with the character of the area.
b. Natural or man-made hazazds.
P35
Staff Finding: No known natural hazards exist on the lot. The relocation of the
hell pad will reduce a potential man-made hazard.
c. Existing natural chazacteristics of the property and surrounding area such
as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and
landforms.
Staff Finding: Most of the development proposed is within areas of the site
that have already been impacted by development. The applicant is proposing
to maintain a large percentage of open space and natural vegetation on the
site.
d. Existing and proposed man-made chazacteristics of the property and the
surrounding azea such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation,
pazking, and historical resources.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing a service loop road with certain
improvements to separate circulation by use. Improvements with regard to
vehicular circulation are appropriate as well as pedestrian improvements.
2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of
open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the chazacter of the
proposed PUD and of the surrounding azea.
Staff Finding: The Applicant is proposing to concentrate the redevelopment to an
area that is already developed with both the hospital and Whitcomb Terrace,
minimizing the impact of the new development and maintaining a large amount of
undeveloped land on the site. As noted earlier, a large portion of the site is
undeveloped and the proposal will maintain that feeling of openness.
3. The appropriate number of off-street pazking spaces shall be established based on
the following considerations:
a. The probable number of cazs 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 pazking 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.
P36
Staff Finding: The current on-site parking totals 201 spaces. The Applicant provided
a summary of the parking needs analysis in the Conceptual PUD application. The
analysis considered alternative modes of transportation that can be used to get to the
hospital and reduced the estimated number of off-street parking spaces needed for the
redevelopment by approximately 20% from the originally estimated need of 350-400
for Whitcomb Terrace, the hospital and the medical office space. The conceptual
PUD application approved 339 spaces without considering the impacts of an
expansion of Whitcomb terrace or new affordable housing. units. Twenty four
additional parking spaces are proposed currently for a total of 363 spaces. Staff f nds
the minor expansion in parking a reasonable accommodation to the additional
development on the site approved by council.
4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists
insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a
PUD may be reduced if:
a. There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and
road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding.• Sufficient infrastructure exists to service the development although
some upgrading is required.
The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists
natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density
of a PUD may be reduced if:
a. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers.
b. The effects of the proposed development aze detrimental to the natural
watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water
pollution.
c. The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in
the surrounding area and the City.
d. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway or trail
in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes
harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site.
Staff Finding.• The applicant is proposing to mitigate for stormwater impacts as well
as incorporate Transportation Demand Management techniques mitigate potential
impacts.
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.
P37
a. The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as
expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific azea
plan to which the properly is subject.
b. The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and
there exists no negative physical chazacteristics of the site, as identified in
Subpazagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided or those
chazacteristics mitigated.
c. The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern
compatible with and complimentary to, the sunrounding existing and
expected development pattern, land uses and chazacteristics.
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
allowable density pursuant to a final 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.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing housing on-site as approved by council and
not requesting an increase in density.
C. Site Design.
The purpose of this standazd 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 aze unique, provide visual
interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town
are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner.
Staff Finding: A large portion of the site is undeveloped and in a natural state. The
redevelopment is proposed to maintain that feel and limit the developed area of the
19 acre site. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces
and vistas.
Staff Finding: As mentioned previously, a large portion of the site is undeveloped and
in a natural state. The redevelopment is proposed so as to maintain that feel and limit
the developed area of the 19 acre site. Staff ftnds this criterion to be met.
3. Structures aze 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.
P38
Staff Finding.• The proposed building is generally oriented towards the public street
but is set back from the street which contributes to the more open feel of Castle Creek
Road. Existing vegetation currently screens the hospital. The proposed affordable
housing does not face the street and additional consideration should be given to the
interaction of the housing with Castle Creek Road.
4. Buildings and access ways aze appropriately arranged to allow emergency and
service vehicle access.
Staff Finding.• The City of Aspen Fire Marshal has reviewed the proposal, and has
noted that final details on the service loop road will be necessary in the future. The
Fire department has also discussed necessary turning radius for the ground level
parking.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Staff Finding.• According to the Application, the project will comply with all
applicable requirements.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and
reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties.
Staff Finding: According to a letter submitted by the Applicant's engineer, site
drainage will be handled with retention ponds in the more natural, undeveloped area
of the site. Additional work and information is currently being handled with the City
Engineer.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings aze appropriately
designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use.
Staff Finding.• The Application has developed the master plan to accommodate the
multiple functions at the site: helicopter access, ambulance and service access, as
well as patient access. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D. Landscape Plan.
The purpose of this standazd is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the
visual character of the city, with surrounding pazcels, and with existing and proposed
features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the
following:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces,
preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity. and
variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen azea climate.
P39
Staff Finding.• The Applicant has provided landscaping on the site plan in the
application and has developed the landscaping to correspond with the two
development zones of the project: developed and natural. A number of new plantings
are proposed with a more intensive/traditional landscaping near the hospital and
natural grasses, serviceberry and gambel oak in the natural areas.
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness
and interest in the landscape, aze preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner.
Staff Finding: The undeveloped area of the site provides a natural open setting.
Enhancements in this area preserve these features.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape
features is appropriate.
Staff Finding: 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.
Parks has reviewed the plan and has some minor comments.
E. Architectural chazacter.
1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual chazacter of the City, appropriately
relate to existing and proposed azchitecture of the property, represent a chazacter
suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing
of nearby historical and cultural resources.
Staff Finding: A variety of materials are being proposed for the redevelopment of the
hospital: glass, masonry, and stone. As an institutional type of use, the conceptual design
reflects the use of the building with a palette of materials that fit well on the site. With
regard to the affordable housing, a simple palette of materials is proposed. Staff
recommends that the Applicant consider additional massing and articulation options to
vary the massing of the affordable housing, based on the elevations submitted in the
application.
2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking
advantage of the property's solaz access, shade and vegetation and by use of non-
or less-intensive mechanical systems.
Staff Finding: The Applicant has noted that the building is expected to be designed to
achieve LEED certification and that it is anticipated that the building is designed and
constructed in an environmentally sustainable way. Staff ftnds this criterion to be met.
3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and
appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
Staff Finding: Snow storage is anticipated to be handled by removal and relocation in the
drainage basin.
P40
F. Lighting.
1. The purpose of this standazd 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 standazds
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.
Staff Finding.• The Applicant will comply with all lighting regulations in place.
G. Common Pazk, Open Space, or Recreation Area.
If the proposed development includes a common pazk, open space, or recreation area for
the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be
met:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common pazk, open space, or
recreation area enhances the chazacter of the proposed development, considering
existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property,
provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual
benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation azeas is
deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of yeazs) to each lot or dwelling unit
owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similaz manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the
permanent caze and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shazed
facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or
industrial development.
Staff Finding: There is no specific common open space for the benefit of the
development; however, two trails on the site are for the benef:t of the public and will
be provided appropriate easements.
H. Utilities and Public facilities.
The purpose of this standazd 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.
P41
Staff Finding: The Water, Sanitation, and Electric Departments reviewed this
application and determined there is adequate service for this development.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by
the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer.
Staff Finding: At this time no adverse impacts on'the public infrastructure are
anticipated.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the
additional improvement.
Staff Finding: The Applicant has been working with a number of city departments to
ensure that adequate utilities/facilities are provided on-site.
I. Access and Circulation. (Only standazds I&2 apply to Minor PUD applications)
The purpose of this standazd 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:
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 Finding: Staff believes that all structures and uses will have appropriate access
to a public street.
2. The proposed development, vehiculaz access points, and pazking 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.
Staff Finding: Staff believes the adding a service access road, improvements the
access drives for both the hospital and Whitcomb Terrrace will improve circulation
on the site.
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 aze provided through dedicated public trail
easements and aze proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance.
Staff Finding: The Applicant will provide specific easements for both the Nordic trail
and the Castle Creek trail.
P42
4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific
plans regazding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation
are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner.
Staff Finding.• The Parks department has reviewed the application and found that the
proposed improvements are adequate.
Streets in the PUD which aze proposed or recommended to be retained under
private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure
appropriate public and emergency access.
Staff Finding: There are no internal streets proposed as part of this PUD.
6. Security gates, guazd posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots
within the PUD, aze minimized to the extent practical.
Staff Finding: There are no gates or guard posts proposed as part of this PUD.
J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications)
The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an
unnecessary burden on the public or sun•ounding 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 fmal PUD development plan.
Staff Finding: As required by the Conceptual PUD each phase of development is
required to be memorialized and mitigated for prior to development of the subject phase.
P43
Exhibit G
AVH, Phase II
Development Review Committee Comments (Referral Agencies)
Asnen Consolidated Sanitation District: Tom Bracewelldl/20/2010
Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications,
which aze on file at the District office.
ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that cleaz water connections (roof,
foundation, perimeter, patio drains) aze not connected to the sanitary sewer system.
On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD.
Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) are required for all food processing establishment.
Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit.
Oil and Sand sepazators aze required for parking gazages and vehicle maintenance
establishments.
Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells.
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. The old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the
main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements, before any and all soil
stabilization measures are attempted and prior to ACSD releasing any and all permits.
Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system.
One tap is allowed for each building. Shazed service line agreements may be required where
more than one unit is served by a single service line.
Permanent improvements aze 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.
All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office can
develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district.
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.
P44
The main sanitary sewer lines that aze proposed to serve this new development will require a line
extension request and collection system agreement. Both aze ACSD Board of Director's action
items.
Easements for the main sanitary sewer line as well as access easements, dedicated to the district,
will be required.
Applicant will be required to deposit funds with the district for construction costs, engineering
fees, construction observation fees, and fees to clean and televise the new main sewer line
extension into the project.
Applicant's civil engineer will be required to submit existing and proposed flow calculations.
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 dischazge of glycol to
any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage azeas must have
approved containment facilities.
Soil Nails and/or micropiling are not allowed in the public ROW or in utility easements above
ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line.
The sewer service line from the ambulance barn shall be connected to the proposed new sanitary
sewer service line in the access road loop.
Both the sewer service line from the hospital and the ambulance barn shall be excavated and
capped off adjacent to Meadowood Road in the Meadowood subdivision, and the corresponding
easements shall be properly and legally abandoned.
The applicant shall provide the district with proper representation that will show all means
and methods to preclude any and all pathological, radioactive, heavy metals, and any other
hazardous material on the list of EPA prohibited toxic discharges.
Aspen Fire Protection District: Ed Van Walraven (2/3/2010)
These aze the concerns we had that were mentioned at the DRC.
Our first question is regarding adequate turning radii on the project specifically turning into the
main entrance/pazking lot to the hospital.
Also, the final configuration of the fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems between residential
buildings must be approved prior to installafion.
Finally hydrant locations must be confirmed prior to installation.
P45
City of Asnen deuartments
Engineering Department: Tricia Aragon (2/8/2010)
Unable to detemune whether or not the drainage facility design meets the City's Standazds.
Below is a list of concerns related to the Drainage Plan and report:
The proposed design removes the 100 foot pedestrian, bicycle and road easement. By removing
this easement there is a concern related to the snow storage, maintenance and drainage capaicity
for Castle Creek. The applicant needs to show the drainage facilities needed on the west side of
Castle Creek. The proposed design also shows additional curb and gutter and stormsystem for
Castle Creek. By removing the existing Swale along Castle Creek stormwater will no longer be
filtered through a Swale there by increasing the amount of contaminates in stormwater.
Additionally by adding additional infrastructure along Castle creek (ie stormsewer and curb and
gutter) the costs for the city to maintain Castle Creek will increase. Therefore the drainage along
Castle Creek must be conveyed through a Swale.
The impervious azea~from the CEO housing will not be detained. Since this property is part of
the PUD for the hospital expansion, it will need detention for water quality too.
The drainage plan and report is missing the following calculations:
• Hydrographs at critical design points
• Flow capacity of all drainage facilities for example the design includes infiltration at the
detention pond but does not show how it will be designed.
• Culvert sizing with capacities
• Storm sewer capacity including downstream drainage structures (including HGL and
EGL)
• Gutter capacity including the capacity of the bus pullout azea.
• Storm inlet capacity
• Open channel design
• Outlet designs and capacities and protection techniques including details
• Discussion of maintenance aspects of the design including the conditions and limitations
of use
Discussion of offsite drainage facilities needed for the conveyance of minor and major
flows to the major drainage way. Of particulaz concern is the capacity of the Culvert and
drainage conveyance on the west side of Castle creek to the City's irrigation system. The
applicant may not be able to take credit for existing impervious azea if these facilities do
not have the appropriate capacity.
• Details of all drainage structures and their relationship to other utilities
• Cross sectional views of all open channels, spillways, detention azeas, including water
surface elevations for major and minor storms
• Routing and accumulation of flows at various critical points
P46
• Routing of off site drainage flow through the development. The design shows off site
flows routed through the detention azea, the detention azea needs to be sized for these
flows.
HDPE pipe will not be permitted under Doolittle.
The bus pull out area will impact the detention area just east of the pull out area. The detention
pond east of the bus pull out area must maintain the amount of drainage it was originally
designed for. Additionally, it must be modified for any additional impervious azea. A Pre and
post drainage analysis must be performed on this detention azea.
Drainage from the proposed retaining wall along the bike path must be conveyed on the west
side of the trail. Due to the proximity of the trail and the retaining wall, the City must approve
the type of material used for the retaining wall so that the visual impact from the trail is
minimized.
The Applicant proposes a 14 foot easement for the bike path, this may not be wide enough for
drainage and snow removal operations for the trail - must be verified with Pazks.
To minimize the visual impact of the outlet protection from several outlets, the Ctiy will require
soil riprap.
To prevent drainage running across the bike trail from the new grading, a swale must be located
on the west side of the trail.
The erosion and sediment control plan needs to comply with the City standards and will be
review prior to building permit submittal.
Pedestrian access through the asphalt bike path, must be maintained through construction.
The Doolittle improvements along with the Castle creek crossing improvements must be
performed as part of Phase II
Transportation Impact Analysis must be finalized.
Environmental Health: Lee Cassin (2/2/2010)The City of Aspen Environmental Health
Department has reviewed the referenced land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code
of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments.
P47
Until details have been finalized in several azeas, there will not be sufficient information to assess
the degree to which this project will be consistent with the environmental sections of the code. In
some azeas, the impacts will be positive and in some they will be negative, but without information
on how programs will work, it is impossible to quantitatively detemune impacts.
There aze elements of this project that seek to reduce congestion and air pollution and promote
transit use. At this time it cannot be determined whether reductions will occur. As noted by the
Transportation Department, while there is a goal to reduce traffic by 20%, how this will be done
has not been determined. The strategies aze mainly existing programs, so it is uncleaz how they
will result in such a significant reduction in traffic. It is becoming more obvious as communities
throughout the country try to induce changes in behavior, that providing moderate incentives
does not counter the convenience of driving alone. Disincentives for driving and incentives for
alternative transportation use are still being determined, and details will determine how effective
the programs are. Effectiveness would vary greatly between a program where there is no single
occupant vehicle pazking, adequate enforcement, and significant altemative commute incentives,
compazed to a program of voluntary inducements. Policies or prograzns requiring paid parking
for employees, or requiring employees to use transit to travel to and from town, for example, aze
not included at this time. Number of additional vans, if any, structuring the cazshaze program so
it is not a "company caz", mazketing and policies to cause bus/bike/walking instead of driving,
have not been described. Cazshaze programs are much more effective if more cazs aze available
to more people than if several smaller entities try to operate sepazate programs, which cost more
and accomplish less.
The code requires that developments not impose undue burdens on infrastructure, such as the
transit system, but the application does not detail whether AVH will operate its own connecting
buses, or contribute to city transportation and RFTA to ensure they do not beaz the costs of added
transit demand. It is not clear how the application will mitigate traffic impacts through support of
alternative transportation modes in proportion to trips generated. The financial burden on the
transit systems depends on the details of the project's traffic demand measures, so cannot be
determined at this time.
If the applicant maintains its previous commitment to maintaining the walking trail from the
CEO's house to the hospital, that would provide some small mitigation of its impacts.
Traffic levels will not be less than they are now, and space devoted to the automobile will
increase. The applicant should consult with an engineering fum about the design of the
underground pazking structure ventilation system to ensure that ventilation is adequate to prevent
cazbon monoxide from reaching high levels inside the facility or in the neazby azeas outside it.
Exhaust ventilation should not be placed neaz any windows or doorways.
P48
In short, policies or programs that would create the traffic reductions projected in the application,
and that will ensure impact~on transportation infrastructure aze borne by the applicant, have not
been detailed yet.
On the other hand, by providing expanded space and public health services, the facility will
contribute to improved public health for the community, which is certainly an important
environmental and public health benefit. Given that the National Cancer Institute states that two
thirds of cancer risk in this country is attributable to environmental exposures and lifestyle
choices; and this facility may help reduce the latter category of risks, there should be a public
health benefit to this expansion. Again, quantifying this benefit would be difficult, but the benefit
would still occur.
The Aspen Area Community Plan duects that "Elected and appointed Boards and Commissions
should consider environmental and wildlife issues in all land use deliberations, discussions, and
decisions." Several elements of the project attempt to address these issues, and to "protect and
enhance the natural environment." Attention has been given to continuing the trail access to the
hospital. Speed and ease of trail access has had to be sacrificed to provide for the expansion, road
setbacks, sight lines, and stormwater facilities, but the applicant has tried to maintain the trail
system as much as these constraints allow.
The applicants also have discussed energy efficiency measures from the possibility of ground
source heat systems to LEEDS certification and this will be addressed by others. Obviously the
extent to which these or similar measures are committed to, would contribute to reducing the
environmental impacts of the project.
Truck trips during construction and resulting air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions could be
calculated fairly easily, and several steps can be taken to minimize these impacts, including
requiring all contract vehicles to meet the strictest emissions standards. We would be happy to
provide appropriate language to the applicant.
This azea has had wildlife conflicts in the recent past. The applicant should make sure that the trash
storage azea has adequate wildlife protection and that adequate recycling space is provided for all
commodities, since haulers are required to include recycling of cazdboazd, newspaper, office paper,
and co-mingled containers for commercial buildings as part of their trash service.
Parks Department Requirements: Brian Flynn (1/20/2010)
1. An approved tree permit will be required before any demolition or access infrastructure work
takes place. Please contact the City Forester at 920-5120. Mitigation for removals will be
paid cash in lieu or on site. The overall mitigation for removals during this phase of
improvements already has a carry over from the construction of the Obstetrics Unit.
P49
2. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or
groupings of trees on site. The vegetation fence shall be installed at the edge of the
construction impacted as depicted on page PI01, Master Site Phasing Diagram. This fence
must be 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 backfill, 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.
3. General Landscaping notes:
(a) New landscape along the paved trail should be no closure than 2-feet when the species
reaches maturity. A 2-foot fall zone should be maintained along both sides of the paved
trail.
(b) The drip lines of the new landscaping along the proposed Nordic alignment should no
encroach over the edge of the trail easement. Mature landscaping should not grow into
the trail easement requiring maintenance or interfere with the grooming equipment.
(c) New landscaping at the trail intersections for the Terrace and the Hospital entrance, pages
L-105 and L-106, needs to be reconsidered. The landscape details are nice but will
become a site line and maintenance issue which we strongly recommend against.
(d) On page, L-106 the azea located between the right hand tum into the hospital and the
current trail currently has an abundance of native vegetation which will be lost during
construction. It doesn't show anything new being replanted in this location. Pazks
suggest that the lost infrastructure be used to replace the native chazacter of this right
hand turn area.
4. Parks requests a final opportunity to field locate the Nordic trail in an effort to decrease some
of the proposed slopes. Once a final alignment for the Nordic trail is determined and
approved by the Pazks Department the alignment and use shall be memorialized with a trail
easement granted by the Hospital to the City of Aspen for use as a trail easement. This
should be identified (called out) on the site plans and in a signed easement document.
Support of the proposed Master Plan Facility is contingent on acquiring an easement.
5. Staff requests to review in more detail the proposed culvert crossing for the summer trail and
the proposed Grasscrete access the paved trail for snow reomval. Warning signs will need to
be installed at the snow dump entry, "driveway crossing"
6. The current proposed Nordic alignment should align with the connection to the existing trail
located across Castle Creek Road. The connections and turns have to be able to allow for the
operation of a snow cat based on the machines specifications and capabilities to properly
groom.
P50
7. It is critical that that the construction of the detention ponds and the trail alignments aze
completed prior to the start of the winter seasons. Pazks will not allow any construction
activities of any kind to take place within the Nordic alignments, or azound the Nordic
alignments. Construction impacts to these azeas will greatly reduce the skiers experience and
more importantly viability of the snowpack.
8. A trail detour plan needs to be developed during the construction project in order to allow for
the continued public access along the south side of Castle Creek Road.
9. If there is any storm runoff terminating on or in the Mazolt property into the storm basin
located neaz the roundabout, there should a discussion on formatting an agreement foz
maintenance and to make improvements to the out fall located on City property in order to
correctly convey the water to the pond.
10. Is there an agreed upon solution for the Castle Ridge Apartments sidewalk and the hospitals
possible improvements? If not, Staff encourages support from the Hospital in order to
include these improvements in Phase 2.
Transportation: Lynn Rumbaugh (2/3/2010)
I. Infrastructure
a. Vanpools
Will AVH increase its van fleet as part of this development in order to provide service to
more employees?
b. Cazshaze vehicles
What is the operating plan for the cazshaze vehicles? How will they be utilized to
encourage alternative modes of transportation to work rather than just being fleet vehicles
for any employee?
Staff has previously requested that a parking space be allocated in the proposed pazking
gazage for a CAR TO GO cazshaze vehicle. What is the reason for operating an AVH
only program rather than offering the City's existing cazshaze program to employees?
g. Doolittle bus stop
RFTA and City staff is seeking an altemative that provides pull out space for two buses
and appropriate turning radius for safe entry/exit. Staff is coordinating another on-site
meeting to discuss the latest bus stop iteration as per the discussion on page 13 of the
Master Plan:
"The Applicant shall continue to refine the design of the RFTA bus stop to enable
queuing of two busses and ensuring that wheel paths and turning radiuses work
appropriately."
P51
h. Close-in pazking spaces
How many spaces aze being reserved for carpools? Vanpools? How will these spaces be
monitored and enforced. Where will they be located?
II. Marketing Strategies
Staff would like copies of/information about the Bicycle Riders Guide, Bus Riders Guide,
Employer Orientation Packet and special events for records. These may be shazed with other
employers.
III. Incentive Strategies
b. Cazshaze Program
See comments above.
c. Work with RFTA and the City of Aspen to improve bus service
The concept of routing the Burlingame/Hwy 82 route to AVH was rejected by City
Council as part of the 2009 Short Range Transit Plan. With this in mind, what does AVH
propose as an improved connection? What does AVH see its role being in a proposed
service improvement? Is there an alternative scenario in which AVH singulazly, or in
partnership with other employers, provides its own connecting service?
g. Guazanteed Ride Home
This service is funded by the City of Aspen TOP program, which has limited annual
funding and an expanding membership. Should the TOP program reach its ERH budget,
does AVH plan to fund its ERH trips independently as part of this proposal?
h. Parking Management
How will access be restricted? Will alternative transportation users (ie: cazpoolers,
vanpoolers) have access to gazage pazking?
Monitoring Program
a. Baseline data
Staff would like an updated employee survey to be used for baseline purposes, as the
previous survey is four yeazs old.
Other comments
*The monitoring program outlined in Appendix G requires more information (chart 1,
figure 1, etc aze not included).
* When are monitoring traffic counts proposed to be undertaken in the winter/summer?
P52
* When aze employee surveys proposed to be undertaken? What will the survey questions
be?
* When does the applicant propose to turn in the annual reports?
General Comments
How does AVH plan to meet a goal of a 20% traffic reduction without new TDM measures in
place? The vanpool, carpool stipend, bus pass subsidy and information kiosk aze existing. AVH
should describe how a 20% goal will be met without major additions to the TDM program, or via
the new elements including a cazshaze program and monitored parking.
Utilities: Andy Rosello (2/2/2010)
Water Comments:
1. All City Of Aspen Water Distribution System Standazds shall be followed
2. The Water Department requests a meeting with the developer prior to preliminary Plan
approval to discuss water service and design.
3. Please include a master, or Overall Utility plan.
4. Ensure that there aze proper separation distances between water, sewer, and stormwater
systems.
5. It appears at station 8+00 that there is a retaining wall within the Ufility R.O.W. standazds do
not allow structures within Utility Easements and R.O.W.s
6. Check all Utilities at Doolittle and Castle Creek.
7. Please check all service line sizing and provide proof of size requirements (specifically
Whitcomb Terrace).
8. Be sure to use three valve complexes where appropriate.
9. Lines at the pazking garage seem to be incorrectly labeled.
10. There does not appear to be any Ground Source Heat Pump included at this stage in Design.
The engineer realizes that these aze not Construction Level Plans and aze intended for Planning
and Zoning purposes only. Further review as the plans proceed towazds Construction is
requested.
**These aze Preliminary Notes and do not constitute a full Plan review**
**The Water Departrent requests additional oversight as the project Proceeds**
Electric Comments:
1. Al] City of Aspen Electric System Standazds Shall be followed.
Aspen/Pitlcin County Housing Authority, Cindy Christensen 2/18/2010
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval to move forward with Phase II of the Master Facilities Plan.
BACKGROUND: Phase I has been completed which was the new birth center. Aspen Valley Hospital
(Hospital) was required to do an employee audit. The Hospital has provided those numbers and there were
no new employees attributed to Phase I. Phase II proposes atwo-story addition on the north and east sides of
the existing Hospital building. The basement is to be expanded and a second floor will be added over the
P53
current patient caze area of the Hospital. Phase II will increase the number of single occupancy patient caze
rooms to 27 rooms and add 4 rooms to the intensive care unit. Currently, there are 25 patient beds in 16
rooms.
Phase II will include the following:
Basement Level:
• a second loading and receiving azea
• food service receiving
First Floor:
• 27 patient care rooms
• nucleaz medicine
• relocated flood service, including dining azea
• reception azea
• central plant additions
• gift shop
• 4 intensive Gaze unit rooms
• cazdiopulmonary
• same day surgery
Second Floor:
• cazdiac rehabilitation and physical therapy
• specialty clinics
• oncology
• administration offices
• medical offices
Phase II also is to include the following:
• construction of 22 affordable hospital employee housing units
• expansion of Whitcomb Terrace senior housing
• three-level pazking garage on the east side with capacity for 221 spaces
• partial construction of a loop service road and water line expansion
• access improvements to the driveway entrance of Pitkin County Senior Center/Whitcomb Terrace
and related road improvements to Castle Creek Road
• meadow, wetland and drainage improvements, and realignment of the Nordic trail
partial reconfiguration of the existing pazking lot
• RFTA bus stop improvements
The squaze footage for the new development (not including the affordable housing units or the pazking
structure) is 61,505. This includes a small lobby in the sub-basement connecting the elevator with the lower
level of the garage (approximately 1,645 squaze feet).
On-Site Hospital Emalovee Housing:
P54
The Hospital is proposing 22 one-bedroom and studio employee dwelling units with one pazking space per
unit. Most of the pazking will be tuck-under pazking accessed by a perimeter service drive. The units aze
intended for occupancy by Hospital employees. There aze 8 studios and 14 one-bedroom units proposed.
The one-bedroom units aze to be 701 squaze feet and the studios 505 squaze feet. The Hospital is proposing
to deed restrict the units as Category 3 and 4. The units aze proposed as rental units. Staff would
recommend that the deed restriction state that the first priority for rentals is for hospital employees, but if
there aze no qualified hospital employees, that another qualified employee be offered the unit. APCHA does
not want the unit to sit empty.
MTlICATION:
The Housing Boazd first discussed the Master Facilities Plan in July of 2008 and recommended approval for
the Hospital to utilize employee credits from Mountain Oaks and the Beaumont. At that time, staff was
unsure of the number of credits the Hospital cun•ently had left based on use of some of the credits for other
expansions of the Hospital. During the conceptual process, however, a review of documents provided an
amount of about 65 credits left, utilizing the Beaumont, Mountain Oaks and the CEO house. At the
conceptual review, the City of Aspen recommended approval, but with the understanding that the number of
credits for the units at Mountain Oaks and the Beaumont can only be based on the number of people actually
residing in the units. The applicant has, provided information that states the studios housed 1 FTE, the one-
bedroom units housed 1 FTE, the 2-bedroom units housed 2 FTE's and the CEO's three-bedroom home
housed 2 FTE's; therefore, the Hospital can utilize the existing stock of 57 credits for future mitigation. Just
as a FYI, the Guidelines allow for a studio to mitigate at 1..25 FTE's, aone-bedroom to mitigate at 1.75
FTE's, atwo-bedroom to mitigate at 2.25 FTE's and athree-bedroom to mitigate at 3 FTE's. If utilizing
these numbers to calculate the number of credits in the Hospital's existing stock, the credit would amount to
71.25 FTE's, a difference of 14.25 FTE's.
The amount of FTE's generated with the development in Phase II is higher than noted in the application.
Updated information has been provided to staff that the squaze footage for the Medical Office Building will
be increased from 9,035 squaze feet to 11,825 square feet. The total squaze footage, however, will not change
as the squaze footage has been shifted between the Medical Office Space and the hospital facility. This
change in squaze footage increases the mitigation requirement for the Medical Office Building to 26.25
(11,825 = 1,000 X 3.7 X 60% required mitigation). The total mitigation requirement for Phase II is 45.95
FTE's. The 22 proposed employee housing units mitigate for 34.5 FTE's. With the on-site housing
mitigating at 34.5 FTE's, the balance of 11.45 will come from the 57 FTE credit leaving a credit balance of
45.55 FTE's. If 100% mitigation were required at this time, the required mitigation would be 11,825 = 1,000
X 3.7 = 43.75; added to the hospital facility of 19.7, employee mitigation would be 63.45. After taking into
consideration the on-site mitigation and the credits of 57, the Hospital would be left with a balance of 28.05
credits versus a balance of 45.55 FTE's utilizing the 60% mitigation requirement as stated in the Land Use
Code.
RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board reviewed the application at their regulaz meeting held
February 17, 2010 and recommended approval of the application with the following conditions:
P55
1. An employee audit shall be conducted by the Hospital, in conjunction with APCHA, two years after
completion and Certificate of Occupancy of Phase II. if such audit shows a higher employee base
then stated in the application, additional credits and/or additional mitigation shall be required;
however, if the audit shows less, credits will NOT be added back.
2. There shall be 22 on-site deed-restricted units specified as Category 3 and 4. A deed restriction
shall be recorded prior to CO. All units require a lease for a minimum of six months.
The deed restriction shall state that the Hospital has a priority to rent the units for Hospital
employees; however, if a unit is unoccupied for 45 days, the Hospital shall rent the unit to another
qualified employee of Pitkin County or Aspen.
Pitkin County: Board of County Commissioners/Ellen Sassano (2/2/2010)
Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the Phase II -Final Planned
Unit Development Application for the Aspen Valley Hospital Master Facilities Plan. The
following comments were endorsed by the Pitkin County Boazd of County Commissioners at a
regulaz worksession on February 2, 2010:
We support the following aspects of the Plan, which address concerns raised by the County at
the conceptual phase of the Pl7D, as well as other community needs:
1. Provision of 22 on-site deed-restricted category 3 and 4 rental employee units to address
impacts of proposed improvements;
2. Payment of a proportionate shaze for capital projects to improve capacity of the Highway 82
Roundabout and Cemetery Lane intersections;
3. Accommodation for a new Nordic trail alignment and payment of a proportionate shaze for
improvements to pedestrian bicycle access to and from the Hospital campus.
4. Design and construction of a ten-unit addition to the Whitcomb Terrace assisted living
facility; Given the immediate need for senior housing, we recommend that the Hospital be
required to design and construct the addition at as eazly a stage in Phase II as possible.
Furthermore, we encourage the continued effort of the Hospital to work with their azchitects
on behalf of the Pitkin County Senior Council to determine whether it is possible to design
and build more than ten units within the proposed footprint for the Whitcomb Terrace
addition.
5. Improvements to the location of, and pedestrian access to the RFTA bus stop facility serving
the hospital campus; We request that improvements take into consideration the entire
hospital campus, including the Senior Services and Health and Human Services buildings;
and incorporate "night-sky" friendly lighting to enhance safety.
As you review the Hospital Plan, we also request your consideration of the following issues:
Affordable Housing
I. In order to ensure that the Hospital adequately addresses it's affordable housing mitigation
requirements from hereon out, we recormend that they be required to provide an on-going
accurate audit of the number of existing employees on staff; the number of employees gained
P56
and lost in each additional phase, and an accounting of how and where "housing credits"
have been generated, and/or applied to address mitigation.
2. In the event that affordable housing units built by the Hospital aze not occupied by hospital
employees, their partners or spouses as proposed, we recommend that they be made available
to any qualified members of the community, as determined by the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority.
Growth Management Exemption
1. It is uncleaz on what basis the Hospital is requesting the proposed medical office space as an
essential community facility that should be exempt from Growth Management. There is
nothing in the application to indicate that this medical office space is different than the
medical office space allowed for by zoning in Aspen or in the Aspen Airport Business
Center, where growth management allocations aze necessary. At face-value, the exemption
provides an unfair advantage to those with medical offices on the hospital campus. Such a
precedent may suggest that all medical of3ice space should be exempt from Growth
Management competition, which would be a significant departure from current City and
County Growth Management Land Use Code provisions. We recommend that the medical
office space be required to compete for growth management allocations, as required in the
City Land Use Code.
Parking
I . As part of the construction management plan for Phase II improvements, we recommend that
provisions be made to ensure that pazking for Aspen Valley Hospital visitors, staff and
construction workers will be accommodated in a location other than in the Health and Human
Services lot.
2. If there is a fee for use of the proposed pazking structure, we recommend that the Hospital
provide some sort of enforcement to ensure that citizens doing business at the Hospital will
not pazk in the Health & Human Services or Senior Services lots (which aze free.)
AVHCampus Circulation
1. As the Hospital, Health & Human Services Center and Senior Center aze all co-located on
one campus, and there will be the addition of at least affordable housing and structured
pazking in Phase II, we recommend that the Hospital be required to work collaboratively to
improve traffic flow, pedestrian access and signage to the greatest extent possible to provide
a user-friendly experience for citizens using all of the facilities.
Phasing Improvements Commensurate with Needs
It's cleazly important to bring the Hospital facilities into compliance with current standards,
requirements and norms. However, given the fluctuating economy and significant Community
impacts associated with the addition of 60,000 + squaze feet of proposed improvements, we
recommend that the Hospital build improvements in phases as commensurate with need. In the
P57
event that identified needs change, we recommend that the timeframe for completion of Phase II
be modified to accommodate such a change, based on a revised needs assessment.
Community Input
I. In the event that the Hospital hasn't already done so, we recommend that they present the
Plan and/or make the Plan available to the following entities to provide an opportunity for
input prior to the public heating process:
-. Maroon/Castle Creek Caucus;
-~ Aspen School District;
-~ Pitkin County Health & Human Services Tenants;
-~ Music Associates;
-~ Homeowners Associations immediately adjacent to the Hospital.
r
P58
Memo
~~#t~B~r .~-
To: Ms. Jennifer Phelan, Assistant Director Aspen Community Development Department
From:Leslie Lamont
Date: February 16, 2010
Re: Aspen Valley Hospital Master Facilities Plan 2010 Growth Management Allocation
The purpose of this letter is to request a Growth Management allocation for 27,000 square feet of
commercial net leasable square footage from the 2010 annual development allotment for the
purpose of developing medical office space in Phase II and Phase III of the Aspen Valley Hospital
Master Facilities Plan. Per Section 26.470.110 this request is being made for the February 15,
2010 allocation process.
In May 2009, Aspen Valley Hospital received conceptual PUD approval for the Master Facilities
Plan. A final PUD application for Phase II of the Master Facilities Plan was submitted tc the City of
Aspen on December 21, 2009.
Conceptual review and approval included identification of the proposed medical office space for
Phase II and Phase III. During conceptual review and approval it was the understanding of the
Hospital that the entire Master Facilities Plan would be considered an Essential Public Facility (as
defined in the Land Use Code Section 26.104.100) for purposes of GMOS and consistent with
previous approvals from the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners' finding related to the
medical office space in 1997. However, d is the interpretation of the Community Development
Director that the medical office space is commercial. square footage and should be subject to
Chapter 26.470 of the Aspen Land Use Code. While we are submitting this application at
staffs direction we wish to preserve the rights to address our position at a later time.
Allocation Request
Aspen Valley Hospital proposes to develop leasable medical office space (MOS) for local
physicians. Co-locating doctor's offices on the Hospital campus promotes a fundamental goal of
the Master Facility Plan which is to enhance quality patient care.. Proximity of Hospital functions
and offices enable physicians to respond quickly to emergencies and more efficiently attend to
patients in the Hospital while serving others in their offices. Additionally, the hospital campus will
provide improved space and patient access for physician offices, at more affordable rates, than is
currently available in the core of Aspen.
Phase II of the Master Facilities Plan includes approximately 12, 000 square feet of MOS and
Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan includes approximately 15,000 square feet of MOS. The
P: 970-963434 e:llamont@sopris.net c: 970.94&1357
P59
total amount requested from the net leasable commercial square footage of the 2010 annual
development allotment is 27,000 square feet.
Division of Allocation between Phase II and Phase III
The request uses the terms "approximately" because until specific medical practices confirm their
relocation plans, the fit out of the space is not specifically defined. Also, the hospital needs to
maintain the ability to utilize portions of the space, both in the near and long term, to accommodate
hospital operafions. Therefore actual Net Leasable Commercial and Office Space, as defined in
the Land Use Code, will not be established until submittal of the building permit for the build out of
the MOS.
It is the intent of the Hospital to use up to 12,000 square feet in Phase II. The final PUD application
states that 9,035 square feet of MOS is proposed. However that has increased to 11,825 square
feet due to the reduction of Hospital functions in this area and the current need of local physicians
for this space. The total amount of new square footage for Phase II has not increased; the space
has only shifted toward MOS needs and from Hospital functions.
The design team has not begun the detailed process to develop Phase III beyond conceptual and
requests the ability to preserve the flexibility to allocate Phase III square footage between MOS
and Hospital functions in a similar manner as Phase II. Therefore the allocation for MOS space for
Phase III is also stated as "up to" 15,000 square feet of MOS for Phase III.
The total square footage thus requested in this application, for both Phases II and III, is a
maximum of 27,000 square feet.'As the competing needs for space, between MOS and hospital
purposes, becomes known through the design process, the actual amount of space utilized for
commercial purposes will be further defined.
Expiration of Allotments
The Aspen Valley Hospital Master Plan contemplates three remaining phases of development in
order for the Hospital to remain open and servicing the community while construction occurs.
Timing of the construction for each phase will depend on a combination of logistics, approvals and
funding, and may not occur sequentially due to the challenges associated with each. Therefore,
the construction date for Phase III may occur more than three years after the date of the
development order granting the GMOS allotment and the Hospital requests that the development
allotment for Phase III be exempt from the development limitations of 26.470.110 E. that would
cause the expiration of the growth management allotment.
Attachments
The following items are attached to this memo to support this allocation request:
1. Section 26.304.030 Application Information
2. Section 26.470.050 General Requirements & Response
3. Employee Generation & Mitigation Matrix
4. AVH Medical Office Space -Conceptual Program-more definftion of Phase II & Phase III
5. Letter of Authorization
P: 970-963$434 ~ e:llamont@sopris.net c: 970.94&1357
P60
Attachment 1 -Section 26.304.030 Application Information
Aspen Valley Hospital has submitted a land use application Phase II Final PUD. The application
was submitted on December 21, 2009. The application contains a vicinity map, site plan, site
improvement survey, and civil engineering studies for the entire proposal. In addition, disclosure of
ownership of the parcel and the legal description are found in the application. Finally, the final
PUD application responds to the review standards of the Code relevant for this project including
the employee generation and mitigation.
Attachment 2 -Section 26.470.050 General Requireme~rts
1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed
development.
Response: The annual development allotment for commeroial net leasable square footage is
33,300 square feet. The Hospital requests 27,000 square feet of net leasable.
2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Response: This review criteria and the response can be found in the Phase II Final PUD
application Section V. A. 1 -page 19.
3. The development conforms to the requirement and limitation of the zone district.
Response: This review criteria and the response can be found in the Phase II Final PUD
application Section V. A. 2 -page 21.
4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Planned Unit Development
approval as applicable.
Response: The provision of MOS was identified and reviewed for Phase II and Phase III as part
of the conceptual review process. Although the conceptual approval outlined a total of 17,716
square feet of MOS at build-out, the Hospital realized that the amount is not enough. During the
many presentations that the Hospital team made during the conceptual review, it was consistently
represented that the Hospital intended to accommodate all the physicians that were associated
with the Hospital. At this point in time, the Hospital is not adding additional square footage to the
overall total of the Master Facilities Plan to accommodate MOS. During initial planning phases of
this project the Hospital facility encroached into the MOS; therefore it is necessary to now shift
toward medical space and from Hospital functions within the total square footage of the Phases.
5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty (60) percent of the employees generated by
the additional commercial...development, according to Section 26:470.100.A, Employee
Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
Response: Please refer to Attachment 3. This outlines the employee generation for the Hospital
facility and MOS. Employee mitigation is also addressed in Attachment 3. The Hospital, as part of
Phase II development, intends to construct 22 units of employee housing on-site. Per Section
26.470 of the Land Use Code, 75% of the employees generated for all of Phase II (expanded
Hospital functions and MOS) will be mitigated wRh employee housing on-site: The new on-site
employee housing units shall comply with APCHA Guidelines.
P: 970.963-8434 ealamont@sopns.net c: 970-948-1357 3
P61
In addition, the Hospital has, over the last 20 years, built or acquired housing for their employees
that were not a requirement of growth but were a necessity to maintain a qualify community facility.
The conceptual approval affirmed the Hospital's ability to-use those existing employee dwelling
units as a "credit" to be applied to growth related to the Master Facilities Plan. At this point in time
the Hospital proposes to use credits for employees generated in Phase III.
6. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.070.4 and be restricted to
Category 4.
Response: The on-site affordable housing will be rental units and deed restricted to categories 3
and 4 and shall comply with Section 26.470.070.4.
7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional
demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project.
Response: The Master Facilities Plan applications for conceptual review and Phase II final PUD
thoroughly address the site improvements and public infrastructure improvements required to
support the Master Facilities Plan at full build-out. Not only has the Hospital addressed the
improvements related to the MOS but also the improvement required to support the on-site
affordable housing.
P: 970-963434 ealamont@sopns.net c: 970-94&1357 4
P62
Attachment 3 -GMQS Employee Flouring Mitigation Matrix
Fmpleyee Phase 1 Phase Y Net Phsmr Y geWhenxm Phase Net plese YI RequlrtaaeM
GenerWon 41ML Yedumen pes/LUC ig 40%Yeduclbn pxfW[
semen z4.47atao a semen 7nw7o.oso s
Medical fNhce 0 44.4 26.6 55.5 33.3
Space
Hasputal Faclit 0 19.fi 19.6 20 20
Total 0 fi4 4G.2 755 53.3
Employees
Mitigated w/
On-site ANs
8 studio units = 10
1.25 employees
housed/uMt
14 one-bedmom 24.5
units • 1.75
employees/unit
Total Employees 34.5 345 a 79%hdused on-
Naned Phase 11 Ntea
Total Empbyee 43.3
Mitigation
Phase III
Employee 97
Credits"
Remaining 3.7
Employee
Credits
MOS for Phase 11 haz been Ircreased 9,035 to 12,OD0 NSF Far4'hase Y aM t,561 w 15,000 NSF For Phase Ia.
' Per YescYrtbn e3 - i7E aep.n of MM (OPerhead dNlded Into Phases Y-rvi Employees Generated was not
reduced m fiD%.
No vedrt required per Sec[lon 2&470.100116
`based upon Resolu[lon a3
' Pending Audh
' Pursuant to Section 26.170.100 k1 of the Aspen WC
P: 970-963434 e:llamont@sopris.net c: 970-94&1357
P63
4
s
W ~
~
y~~
G
~
~
~
~
~
~~
~
~
N
A 9
~ E
~
~
~
'~~
~ ~+
R
`°
~ N
N - u
4f fT
fT
N
d
O
J
~
~
~
2
'
~
~
,
$
ry` f~
o ~$
q~~f
a ~V
E
a
'?
tl
S }p
G
~
~
~ py
O qp /(~~
O O S
O ~ ~
T _
N
T
UJ
y
~
~
1
b
N
b
Y fJ
~ fY
44 // R
~ N
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
J ~
2
~ T. p
W ~
~ p
W p
M
X pp
pp
W ~ r
p
Q W
~ y'
~
~~
. ~
~
~
a
a ~
a ~
~ ~ ~
~
~.
T
a
z
3
A
C
2
'4
n
fR
9
d
O
9
C
P64
Attachment 5 -Letter of Atrthorization
Februtut' 16. ~111p
Ms..cncli[er Abelan. As~:atape Bite:•mr
Cornmuniry [kw•clopm:nt Acparm.-nr
City a1 nipcn
1305aath Gacna 5ttcel
.l,peo, CO H 1 C:1
Rn: Aspen Vnlle;• Hospitn! Muter roc 3iUe. pia, 20)0 G?~SQS tYmua]'~evrloluncnt
A11atncnt
Ucgr Jmnifer
Fon tltc pu>jrngxs o[purwing s G~4QS Fr,:_ul de.•ulopnenl q:lctmrnt [rrr i0I0 ar ary
coaamnitstloa uieb Qe Ciiy ai'Agper., J.eslle Taman[ of Leman[ r;ansiny Ser,~ccs,
LLC:, aad Gi<eor. Sau[rtlau o[Kaufrnap Pycrson & Dishlcr PC, .gill ac: as au[6oured
sprescnlativcs on bcb:dr of the AsPCn Va::cy HCSpifal.
I.eslir Laa:ant Gideon l:au&nak
[stnon: PIn~nL-.a Sar+dCS, i.LC Kau Cmgp pe'ersrn R Diphlen AC
775 \icfisx Lace 315 Las' Y.;•mrt Avenue
Catbond s le, CQ 8 i5.^3 Aspon, CO 8l [; I
97!J~963-8439 V70.92_L0-8166
r. Unvc Roesler
Aepcn YallCy hospital
0401 Castle Crock Rrred
Aspen, CO B1G11
564?-]2G1
I•d n02E 13fT7S111 dH MHnb:ll OlCc lI uad
P: 970.963434 e:llamont@sopris.net c: 970-948-1357