Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.council.regular.20111011
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA October 11, 2011 5:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances a) Proclamation — Domestic Violence Awareness Month b) Award presentation — Gold Environmental Leadership IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #69, 2011 — Contract Geothermal Test Well b) Board Appointments — Commercial Core and Lodging Commission c) Minutes — August 30, September 26, October 3, 2011 VII. First Reading of Ordinances VIII. Public Hearings a) Ordinance #24, 2011 — Code Amendment Waste Reduction Single Use Bags b) Ordinance #28, 2011 — Lift One Lodge Final PUD IX. Action Items a) Winter Snow Polo Appeal of Special Events Committee Decision X. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting October 24, 2011 COUNCIL'S ADOPTED GUIDELINES • Stick to top priorities • Involve others in community problem solving • Be thorough, deliberate and accountable for consequences when making decisions COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. 9 1� PROCLAI ,47IOJV' ill �` City (Aspen, Colorado Inco jporatea }881 7V5IEREAS, the act of domestic viothnce violates an individuals safety and humanity, agency, and dignity, due to a pattern of behavior that uses pliysicaC emotionaC sexual psychological and 4 economic controff and 71/3fEREAS, domestic viothnce crosses over into all groups of people, I' and cuts across alt economic, racial and societal Barriers, as does 4 indifference,. and I \ 7V9{ RYAS, the impact of domestic violnce is -wife- ranging, directly b ; effecting individuals and society as a -whole, men and women, 9 children andyout4 Here in Colorado, throughout the VnitedStates, I ,` and the -work and it I' 71Y31EREAS, women are now looking to their fathers, brothers, uncles, 4 cousins, friends, and communities to take up the -wort together -with ( women in gender-specific man -to -man forts, that -wilfbring us all 1 together and include the many roads to peace repec�C and �� loving homes andretationslifpsfor everyone. I lo 1? s1 .N071; ?31ERE1 BEI2 - RESOLVED that the City ofAspen 11 i i proclaims the month of October to be it G' DOM TIC VIOL2WC'2'.AVARE SS .MOAfint s t,' / $ 1 Azns� _ t// _ a � y order f the City Council .Cathryn s jcli City Clerk this ittfay el October 201]. ■ 6 41 i _Michaele Ireland Alayo 9 I' rv- r ,� � `� _.„-c: S.. STATE OF COL John W. Hickenlooper, Governor Christopher E. Urbina, MD, MPH oY CO Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer N/ -- A o Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado R A 4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. Laboratory Services Division ti + Denver, Colorado 80246 -1530 8100. Lowry Blvd. rave Phone (303) 692 -2000 Denver, Colorado 80230 -6928 P Colorado Department Located in Glendale, Colorado (303) 692 -3090 • of Public Health http://www.cdphe.slate.co.us and Environment August 26, 2011 Jannette Whitcomb The City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Subject: Acceptance into Colorado's Environmental Leadership Program • Dear Ms. Whitcomb: After reviewing the application The City of Aspen submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's (the department) Environmental Leadership Program (program), it is with great pleasure that I welcome you as the newest Gold Leader to Colorado's program. Congratulations and thank you for the effort and dedication The City of Aspen has brought to environmental issues in Colorado. The program is about creating partnerships among businesses, governments and organizations. The goal is to foster good relationships, reward environmental performance and create a healthier, cleaner and more sustainable Colorado. We look forward to working with The City of Aspen in the coming year(s) to promote the type of commitment and environmental performance your facility demonstrates on a daily basis. As a first step in establishing our partnership, an agreement between the department and The City of Aspen is enclosed for signature. This agreement will become part of your application package and should be returned in the enclosed envelope. The agreement is simply a means of formally recognizing your facility's participation in the program and provides a structure for the department to offer some of the regulatory and non - regulatory incentives that your company may qualify to receive. Again, welcome to the program. I encourage you to contact Lynette Myers, Administrator of the Colorado Environmental Leadership Program, at (303) 692 -3477 or Lynette.Myers@state.co.us at any time with questions you may have related to the program. Sincerely, Christopher E. Urbina, MD, MPH Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer cc: Jeff Lawrence — Director, Division of Environmental Health and Sustainability Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment V1a_ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Lauren McDonell, Environmental Initiatives Program Manager CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE OF MEMO: October 3, 2011 MEETING DATE: October 11, 2011 RE: Contract for Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc. for the geothermal test well project REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends Council approve the Geothermal Test Well Project drilling and engineering contract with Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc for $172,850.00. PREVIOUS COUNCIL TION: NSW. d v (-4 /0 try pt V �y-3.2-12-k . BACKGROUND: In 2008, a preliminary feasibility study was conducted by Rocky Mountain Water Consulting, LLC, which evaluated Aspen's geothermal potential. Based on this study, staff believes temperatures in the 90- 100 - degree range are likely, which would be sufficient for heating buildings. This could represent an abundant, carbon -free source of energy which would help reduce Aspen's vulnerability to the volatile cost of natural gas. To confirm this geothermal potential, two or three test wells will need to be drilled to collect water temperatures and composition and pressure data. The feasibility study also identified potential sites for these test wells. The first test well is planned for the gravel parking lot across from Herron Park on Neale Avenue and Queen Street, an area identified as favorable in the 2008 study. Rocky Mountain Water Consulting, LLC has been hired to assist with this initial test well, helping with technical aspects, permitting, and data analysis. The Aspen Open Space and Trails Board unanimously approved the project on July 14, 2011. Drilling is planned for mid to late- October and is expected to take 20 -25 days from start to finish (with intermittent drilling), operating within the City's construction hours. To avoid winter conditions and minimize impacts on neighbors, a quick start date and efficient project are essential. Parking at Prockter Open Space will be unavailable during this time period. The drill site footprint will be approximately 3,000 — 4,000 feet. The hole itself will be about 1,000 feet deep and 6 -8 inches wide. Noise from the project will be managed according to the City's construction noise ordinance and controls will be put in place to reduce noise as much as reasonably possible. Once the test well is completed and data is collected, the well will be capped with a cover similar to that of a manhole, so that future Page 1 of 3 monitoring is possible. Otherwise, the site will be restored completely. The test well will not be converted into a production well at any time. A thorough outreach program has been implemented to increase public awareness, provide transparency, and encourage public input. In July, 2011, every neighbor within 350 feet of the project site was notified about the project by mail and invited to a neighborhood barbeque, where they could ask questions and share concerns. A total of 12 neighbors attended the barbeque. Doorhangers with details of the project and staff contact information were also hand delivered to neighbors located directly next to the project site. Staff also did outreach about the project at the ARE Day Energy Expo and Community Picnic. A website (www.aspengeothermal.com) was created to provide basic information on geothermal energy and project details and updates. This web address has been made widely available to neighbors and the public to provide easy access to information and opportunities for public input and questions. Upon breaking ground, educational signage will be posted at the project site to inform neighbors and passers -by about what the project is designed to accomplish. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The contract amount is $172,850. In the unlikely event that the project requires additional footage to be drilled beyond the anticipated 1,000 feet, the cost would be approximately $68 /foot up to 1,500 feet. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Funding Renewables Fund 444.94.43576 Geothermal Project $150,000.00 Colorado GEO Grant $50,000.00 Total $200,000.00 Expenditures Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc $172,850.00 Rocky Mountain Water Consultant, LLC $ 10,000.00 Contingency $ 17,150.00 Total $200,000.00 DISCUSSION: The initial Request for Proposals (RFP) for this project, which closed on August 29 resulted in no proposal submissions. The RFP was reopened on September 6 and based on vendor feedback from the initial RFP, the start and finish dates were extended (though project length requirements stayed the same) and the project was classified as a construction project, increasing noise limits from 55 decibels to 80 decibels at the nearest property line. Two proposals were received and opened on September 19, 2011. Proposals were received from two companies: Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc. $172,850.00 Page 2 of 3 HRS $155,320.00 The RFP Committee, comprised of the City's Utility Director and four members of the Environmental Initiatives Team, carefully evaluated the proposals and chose Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc. (see Attachment B - RFP Committee Decision Matrix). Though Dan's was not the lower of the two proposals in terms of cost, the RFP committee selected the contractor because of their previous geothermal experience, strong demonstrated problem solving skills, and ability to complete the project in a significantly shorter time span than required. In addition, Dan's would hire CTL Thompson, which has a Glenwood Springs office, to provide engineering consultancy, sampling, and analysis services for the project. Staff believes this vendor will successfully complete the project, while minimizing disruption to neighbors and the community. Staff recommends that it is in the City's best interests to award the final construction contract to this vendor. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The geothermal test well project will have minimal environmental impacts. Noise and air emissions will be minimized; drill cuttings will be disposed of in a safe, City- approved manner; and water quality and river health will be protected. If Aspen's exploration of geothermal potential reveals resources sufficient to replace natural gas in some of our community's residential or commercial heating, the use of this resource would reduce greenhouse gas and other harmful emissions significantly. It would also reduce our community's dependence on a fossil fuel with substantial environmental impacts in our region and beyond. If Aspen is able to tap into this clean, abundant resource for heating, it could provide a model for other mountain communities with similar resources. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve the Geothermal Test Well Project drilling and engineering contract with Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc for $172,850.00. ALTERNATIVES: Council may choose not to support staff's recommendation or to advise another alternative. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:L` a G�,,.�.,, - e I 5. yr �iC, tia 71�..,l' (/U o ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -- Contract for drilling and engineering consultant services (Dan's Water Well & Pump Service, Inc) Attachment B — RFP Committee Decision Matrix Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION # (Series of 2011) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND DAN'S WATER WELL AND PUMP SERVICES, INC. FOR A TEST WELL TO DETERMINE GEOTHERMAL ENERGY POTENTIAL AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for a test well to determine geothermal energy potential, between the City of Aspen and Dan's Water Well and Pump Services, Inc, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for a test well to determine geothermal energy potential, between the City of Aspen and Dan's Water Well and Pump Services, Inc, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of October 2011. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 11, 2011. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk The CitT eTYmen CITY OF ASPEN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT - 2009 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City of Aspen Project No.: 2011 -067. AGREEMENT made as of l 1 day of October, in the year 2011. BETWEEN the City: Contract Amount: The City of Aspen c/o Canary 130 South Galena Street Total: $172,850.00 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: (970) 920 -5055 If this Agreement requires the City to pay And the Professional: an amount of money in excess of $25,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid Dan's Water Well and Pump Services, Inc. until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. c/o Ivan Nahlik 8200 Collier Canyon Road City Council Approval: Livermore, CA 94551 Phone: 888 - 326 - 9355 Date: October 11, 2011 Resolution No.: For the Following Project: Test Well to Determine Geothermal Energy Potential Exhibits appended and made a part of this Agreement: Exhibit A: Scope of Work. Exhibit B: Hourly Fee Schedule. Agreement Professional Services Page 0 The City and Professional agree as set forth below. 1. Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 2. Completion. Professional shall commence Work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all Work pursuant to this Agreement shall be completed no later than November 30, 2011. Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project engineer for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional. 3. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit B appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed the amount set forth above. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. 4. Non - Assignability. Both parties recognize that this Agreement is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. Sub - Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors' officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub - contractor. 5. Termination of Procurement. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be canceled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 6. Termination of Professional Services. The Professional or the City may terminate the Professional Services component of this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be eamed after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement Professional Services Page 1 Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes of set -off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. 7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 8. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self - insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, if such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Professional, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. 9. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional Agreement Professional Services Page 2 shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. (b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims -made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (i) Workers' Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self - insured status may be substituted for the Workers' Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non - owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this contract. (iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) aggregate. (c) The policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or Agreement Professional Services Page 3 provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City. (0 City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. (g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Govemmental Immunity Act, Section 24 -10 -101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees. 10. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Proper- ty/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Risk Management Department and are available to Professional for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. 11. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. Agreement Professional Services Page 4 12. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered or mailed by certified mail retum receipt requested to the respective persons and /or addresses listed above. 13. Non - Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13 -98, pertaining to non - discrimination in employment. 14. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. 15. Execution of Agreement by City. This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this Agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. 16. Illegal Aliens — CRS 8 -17.5 -101 & 24- 76.5 -101. (a) Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06 -1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07 -1073) and 06 -1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. (b) Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. Agreement Professional Services Page 5 "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. (c) By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees are not employ illegal aliens. (d) Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. (iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre - employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a new employee who is an illegal alien, Professional shall: Agreement Professional Services Page 6 (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien; and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8- 17.5 -102 (5), C.R.S. (vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8- 17.5 -102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional's violation of Subsection 8- 17.5 -102, C.R.S. (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law, (2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24- 76.5 -101 et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24- 76.5 -103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 16. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. (a) Professional warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Professional for the purpose of securing business. (b) Professional agrees not to give any employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for Agreement Professional Services Page 7 ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefore. (c) Professional represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. (d) In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a Professional, contractor or subcontractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Professional; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 17. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 18. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. Agreement Professional Services Page 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date first written above. CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: PROFESSIONAL: [Signature] [Signature] By: By: [Name] [Name] Title: Title: Date: Date: Approved as to form: City Attorney's Office Agreement Professional Services Page 9 EXHIBIT A Scope of Work Approval to drill the test well will be obtained by the City of Aspen. The test well shall be completed in the Leadville Limestone Formation, which subcrops beneath the Roaring Fork alluvial aquifer about 1,000 to 1,500 feet east of the test well site and dips about 50 degrees to the west north -west. The formation is approximately 300 feet thick and borehole verticality must be monitored at regular intervals and maintained within a margin of 5 percent. Measures must be in place to prevent the release of drilling fluids and drill cuttings into the Roaring Fork River. All drilling activity must comply with the Colorado State Engineer's Geothermal Rules (2CCR 402 -10) and the Water Well Construction Rules (2CCR 402 -2). The ground water temperature is forecast to be less than 120 °F, and the static head is expected to be below the ground surface. However, the drilling contractor should assume Type A geothermal conditions and should provide adequate blowout prevention equipment and other devices to prevent the uncontrolled release of fluids into the Roaring Fork River and shall provide protective equipment for on -site personnel. The borehole will penetrate through glacial- fluvial deposits associated with the Roaring Fork River, Belden Shale Formation deposits (confining layer), and the Leadville Limestone Formation (Type I aquifer). Therefore, well construction must adhere to Rule 10 of the Water Well Construction Rules in terms of drilling, casing, annual space, and positive displacement grouting specifications, and use of centralizers. However, the aquifer shall be an open -hole completion. The selected contractor will be responsible for conducting geophysical logging and shall include cement bond (casing strings only), caliper, resistivity, gamma density, and spontaneous potential (of the open borehole reaches). Drilling should be accomplished by either the air rotary or cable -tool methods. Due to the site and geologic conditions a truck- mounted, top drive air -rotary or cable -tool rig would be well - suited for the drilling project; the drill area will be fenced and noise mitigation will be used in compliance with the City of Aspen construction noise ordinance (noise levels at the nearest property line must be 80 decibels or less). Once completed, the well will be capped with a locking lid and made flush with the gravel parking lot, to allow for future monitoring. Emergency vehicles must be able to access all properties on Neale Ave and Queen Street. Drill cuttings must be removed regularly to a pre- approved location. The main goals of the projects are to achieve the following: • Provide access to geothermal resources for testing and data collection. • Minimize negative impacts on area neighbors, park visitors, and the community. Agreement Professional Services Page 10 Dan's Water Well and Pump Services, Inc. agree to provide the following: • All labor and equipment necessary to complete the Scope of Work including mud mix additives, spare parts, maintenance and lubrication materials, signage, tie -downs and protective materials, and miscellaneous tools. • Mobilize equipment and personnel to test well site and set up • Prepare site for construction • Drill 12" diameter bore -hole at least 10% of total estimated depth of the completed test well and at least 10' into the Beldon Shale formation while obtaining samples of drill cuttings. • Set 8 5/8" domestic steel casing to bottom of 12" bore -hole using centralizers every 40' • Pump neat Portland type II cement from bottom to surface thru annulas • Standby 24 hours to let cement harden • Perform cement bonding log • Install blow out prevention equipment onto 8 5/8" casing • Drill 7 7/8" hole to a total depth of 1000' obtaining samples of drill cuttings representative of each 10' drilled, monitor and record temperature at surface discharge of fluids each 20' drilled. • Perform bore -hole caliper measurements and E- logging • Demobilization of equipment • Perform temperature measurements of aquifers with maximum recording thermometer and at a total depth of borehole. • Perform well site restoration • Obtain the necessary pipe and casing materials to meet the RFP specifications with all appropriate certifications and licenses. • The Professional agrees to hire a Roaring Fork Valley -based engineering firm to assist with the project. The test well project will be partially funded by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds through the Colorado Governor's Energy Office. This grant requires that the project use materials and manufactured goods (such as drilling fluid, drill bits, well casing, and cement) made in the U.S. as much as possible. The City agrees to allow excess water to be filtered out to acceptable turbidity limits similar to regular storm water and allow it to be discharged into the city storm system. Dan's Well and Pump Services reduced the cost as indicated on Exhibit B. Agreement Professional Services Page 11 EXHIBIT B Fee Schedule 1. Mobilize equipment and personnel to test site and set up $19,500 2. Prepare site for construction $ 6,500 3. Drill 12" diameter borehole and obtain sample drill cuttings $ 6,500 4. Set 85/8" domestic steel casing and centralizers $ 4,800 5. Pump cement from bottom to surface $ 3,800 6. Standby 24 hour for cement to harden $ 4,800 7. Perform cement bonding log $ 550 8. Install blow out prevention equipment $ 2,850 9. Drill 7 7/8" hole to 1000 feet $57,000 10. Perform borehole caliper measurements and logging $ 7,800 11. Demobilization $19,500 12. Perform temperature measurements $ 4,500 13. Perform well site restoration $ 3,500 14. Equipment rental $20,900 15. Onsite Engineer $10,800 16. Disposal of cuttings and spoils $ 4,250 17. Hotels /Accommodation/Meals $ 5,500 Subtotal $183,050 Less modification to Scope of Work discount - 10,200 Total Cost $172,850 In the event that additional drilling beyond 1,000 feet is required, the City will pay an additional $58 /foot, providing water volumes from the hole remain low enough to use air only and $68 /foot in the event that water volumes require mud to be used up to a maximum of 1,500 feet. Payment Schedule The City agrees to the following pay schedule: • Mobilization to be paid upon setting up drilling equipment and system • Remaining contract price to be paid 50% after reaching depth of 500 feet • Balance to be paid within 10 days after completion and receipt of final invoice Agreement Professional Services Page 12 © / lei } ( N us \ IRA 1 © • 00 00 ]f } - d ee cs }\ - / OS .0 I - QC /\ - e) mt 5 j Q o as o ) .a I. • \ }) © � E f {\ © � � 0 •_c 2§ �� \) / \ _ A - - - 0 a 7 ) a ( ) § ") .0. hl 0aa� } ) m a) j 7 \ . 3 m ƒ$ /\ G. CV _�§� u \ C 5 \ \ k / — m ) { \ ( ] &zz / \\'t 7. {) \ •s0 tn / =4u /3 C/7 \ VI b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: October 5, 2011 RE: Board Appointments Commercial Core and Lodging Commission Terry Butler Regular Member reappointment Don Sheeley Regular Member reappointment Riley Tippet Regular Member Kiki Raj Alternate Member By approving the consent calendar, Council is making the above appointments. MEMORANDUM "111 ase TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ashley Cantrell, Environmental Health Department THRU: Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Director F e CQ; a 4w" DATE OF MEMO: October 3, 2011 MEETING DATE: October 11, 2011 RE: Second Reading of Waste Reduction Ordinance REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests Council's final approval of an ordinance that requires grocers to charge a fee for all paper bags used at checkout and bans plastic carry out bags at grocery stores. This ordinance has the potential to eliminate a large percentage of plastic bags from Aspen's environment, while also reducing the amount of single use paper shopping bags that are used and thrown away by 50 -80 %, thus reducing energy use and waste and benefiting Aspen's and the global environment. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Staff presented a complete report on single use bags to City Council in February of 2009, with support from the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE). Prior to that date, staff discussed the topic informally numerous times with Council. In 2009, CORE provided an explanation of the different approaches Aspen could take to address single use bags, recommending that Aspen pass a fee on both plastic and paper bags. Council members were generally supportive of a bag fee, but requested that staff consult with community members and ACRA prior to drafting an ordinance to bring back to Council. At a worksession in January of 2011, staff presented to Council and requested direction on the details of an ordinance to address single use bags. Council directed staff to work together with other towns to create an ordinance that addresses single use bags by imposing a fee on plastic and paper bags at groceries, creating the same standard throughout the valley. The proposed ordinance was presented to Council for first reading on August 22, 2011 and passed with a vote of four to one. 1 Council discussed the ordinance when it was presented for second reading on September 12, 2011. At that time, Council postponed second reading to allow staff to make recommended changes, including changing from a fee to a ban on plastic bags. BACKGROUND: Over the last three years, City of Aspen and CORE staff have organized a number of outreach campaigns that aimed to reduce disposable bag use, including participating in the CAST Reusable Bag Challenge, partnering with the Aspen High School Earth Club to create reusable bags and place them in local hotels, and distributing free reusable bags at grocery stores. Despite these efforts, grocers report that there is no noticeable reduction in the use of single use bags at grocery stores. This evidence suggests that although visitors and citizens would like to see a reduction in bag use, voluntary outreach programs are not effective ways to reduce consumption. Staff from the City and CORE continue to receive inquiries about bag reduction programs from community members and businesses. With the introduction of this ordinance in multiple towns, the Roaring Fork Valley is poised to take the next step and lead the way in reducing waste and saving energy by significantly reducing the consumption of single use grocery bags. Existing Research and Action: The subject of paper and plastic bag use in cities like Aspen and countries around the world is well documented. Reliable data is available from several sources, and for this reason, over 80 national and local governments have taken action to reduce single use bags. A list of those communities can be found in Attachment A, but includes towns from Brownsville, Texas to Suffolk County, New York, along with many communities both in the US and in other countries. Attachment 8 provides a list of the majority of existing research that is available on this topic. Regional Cooperation: Following Council's direction, City staff has worked closely with representatives from Basalt and Carbondale to ensure a regional approach to this topic. Basalt passed an ordinance on first reading, August 23` , to put a fee on paper and plastic bags at grocery stores. Basalt then passed the ordinance on the second and final reading on Sept. 27` Beginning May 1, 2012, Basalt will charge a fee for each paper or plastic bag used at checkout. Carbondale discussed this topic at a meeting on September 13, 2011 and showed support for moving forward with an ordinance that includes a ban on plastic bags. Additionally, Glenwood Springs and the Town of Snowmass Village have been involved in the planning process and have expressed interest in addressing single use bags in their communities. Staff from Steamboat Springs is using Aspen's draft ordinance as a model for their new bag reduction policy. Passing the same ordinance as that of our neighboring communities, would simplify community understanding, but if the three towns all address single use bags in different ways, the end result still has the potential to be truly impactful for the regional and global environment. 2 Stakeholders: City and CORE staff have met with numerous stakeholders over the last year to ensure that all comments and suggestions were taken into account in the writing of the ordinance. Grocers: On May 17, 2011 staff from Aspen, Basalt and CORE met with representatives from local and regional grocery stores. At this meeting, staff reviewed the key elements of the proposed ordinance and took comments. The expertise of the grocers will be valuable in helping this ordinance succeed. Grocers requested that if the City passes an ordinance that will require new equipment or staff training on the part of the grocery stores, that the City help the grocers cover those costs. After further discussion with the grocers, the ordinance was change to allow the grocers to keep up to $1000 per month to cover the costs of implementing this new waste reduction program at their stores. However, once the idea of a fee was replaced with a ban on plastic grocery bags, the grocer community has expressed concern over removing customer's choices and increasing prices. Attachment C is an Aspen Daily News article that provides an overview of grocer concerns. ACRA: City staff members have met with representatives from the Aspen Chamber Resort Association. ACRA representatives felt that an ordinance addressing disposable bags would be generally supported by the local community. ACRA encouraged the City to make extra efforts to limit the financial burden on visitors, including working with property management companies to provide free bags and long -term education to visitors. Additionally, staff has worked with local business owners, hotels, and Saturday Market vendors in a variety of ways to include their thoughts and comments in the construction of this program. Local business owners generally support efforts to reduce single use bags, however they feel the City should start small, by starting at grocery stores, prior to expanding the ordinance to include all retail stores in Aspen. DISCUSSION: Key Aspects of the Ordinance: The proposed ordinance mandates that all grocery stores located in the City of Aspen charge a $0.20 fee for each paper bag that is provided to a customer at check out. Additionally, the ordinance prohibits any grocery store from distributing plastic carryout bags at check out. Ban on Plastic Bags: After the Council discussion on September 12, 2011, the ordinance has been changed to include a ban on plastic bags at grocery stores. This change has the potential to 3 eliminate a vast majority of plastic bags from the environment. This approach, like the fee approach, has pro's and con's for the City, grocers and customers. A ban will eliminate more plastic bags since customers will not have that option at grocery stores. The ban will steer customers towards using reusable bags, but customer will also increase the use of paper bags, which use energy and water as inputs and create air and water pollution in processing. A ban appears more heavy handed to consumers and has generated more opposition from certain groups than a fee. The ban eliminates a certain element of choice for those shoppers that forget their bags, but paper and reusable bags will still be available for a price. A ban will generate significantly smaller amounts of money to pay for the program and to reimburse the grocers. This has the benefit of keeping government smaller, but will also make it challenging to implement the program successfully without additional fees from the City's general fund. Use of Fees: The intent of the original ordinance was to use revenue from the bag fee for limited and defined uses and not for any other government purpose. However, the fees expected to be generated with only a fee on paper bags are expected to be quite small and may not cover the costs of the program. Whatever funds are collected after paying the grocers will be used for some of the following: • To provide reusable carryout bags to residents and visitors to the extent funding allows; and • To create signs and provide training to inform customers and to lessen the burden on grocers. Funding will probably not be enough to address the following, though if available, funds could be used: • To fund programs and infrastructure that allows the Aspen community to reduce waste and recycle, including the pickup and disposal of bags; and • To educate residents, businesses, and visitors about the impact of trash on the City's environmental health, the importance of reducing the amount of fossil fuel energy used to make disposable bags, the number of disposable carryout bags entering the waste stream, and the impact of disposable carryout bags on the waterways and the environment; and • To purchase and install equipment designed to minimize trash pollution, including, recycling containers, and waste receptacles; and • To fund community cleanup events and other activities that reduce trash; and • To maintain a public website that educates residents on the progress of waste reduction efforts; and • To pay for the administration of this program. 4 Outreach and Customer Communication: For this program to be successful, staff time and funding will need to be dedicated to implementing the waste reduction program. Successful implementation includes: • Providing assistance and resources to grocers to help in educating customers • Staff time and resources to work with the lodging industry to design customized programs for different locations to educate visitors. • Staff time and resources to work with local businesses and community groups to distribute free or inexpensive bags to the community and visitors. • Staff time to develop a tracking system A more detailed plan and budget is provided in Attachment E. With a detailed and inclusive outreach plan, the waste reduction ordinance has the potential to significantly reduce the amount of paper and plastic bags entering the landfills, littering the streets and endangering the wildlife. However, without an outreach plan in place to educate customers, the waste reduction ordinance might not be implemented to the best of the City's ability. Having attractive signs that explain the program in a positive way, having people explaining the program to shoppers, providing easy access to reusable bags, and being able to address peoples' questions would help the program run much more smoothly and be the kind of success Aspen aspires to. Communication with customers will begin as soon as the ordinance is passed, with a phased approach leading up to the implementation date of May 1, 2012. Aspen, Basalt and Carbondale will work together to educate the community about the coming change. Information can also be found on the website, Waste Free Roaring Fork.org. This website, created by CORE, will provide information about each jurisdiction's ordinance, specifically what the fee money will be spent on, and the website will let customers know where they can find reusable bags. Amount of fee: The purpose of the fee on paper bags is not to cause a financial burden on consumers, but rather to create awareness around the topic of single use items. The amount of the fee needs to be high enough to incentivize change; while not causing a financial burden and staff feels a fee of $0.20 on paper bags accomplishes that. A smaller ten or fifteen cent fee would likely not to be enough to affect the actions of customers. The amount of $0.20 was decided on by a community consensus resulting from a valley wide conversation. These conversations took into account the amount that other cities 5 charge for paper bags and focused closely on a study conducted by the City of San Francisco that estimated the taxpayer cost to subsidize the recycling, collection and disposal of plastic and paper bags amounts to as much as $0.17 per bag. Using this study, it is possible to calculate the tax payer cost in Aspen for each paper bag to be higher than the San Francisco estimate due to Aspen's distance from recycling markets and the smaller size of Aspen's waste stream, meaning that each bag has a larger impact proportionally. It is important to remember that although some people recycle their paper bags, only an estimated 10% of paper bags are actually recycled. Once a bag is used to carry groceries, that bag either ends up being landfilled, recycled or becomes litter on the streets. All of these ends have costs associated with them that are all covered by City of Aspen and Pitkin County taxpayers. If Council chooses to set the fee amount lower, there is a risk that it would be so small that, like the earlier incentive for bringing your own bag, it would simply not have enough effect. It also would continue the situation where the taxpayers as a whole have to bear the costs of dealing with single use bags, rather than the people who use them. It would not cover the costs to the government of dealing with those bags. A fee higher than 20 cents would be a stronger incentive and result in more bag reduction, but would mean Aspen's fee would differ from the ones in other area communities. Grocer Costs: Neither the groceries nor the city wants this program to be an undue burden on grocery stores, nor do they want it to create a windfall for either party. The goal is to reduce the use of single use bags and ease the transition for groceries. The grocery stores will have initial costs to train employees, update systems and alter practices. While groceries have absorbed similar costs and training for voluntary refund programs and self- checkout stations, they state that this cost should not be fully passed on to them. To assist with these costs, staff recommends that grocers be allowed to keep 25% of the fees collected monthly up to $1000 each month in the first year and $100 a month every month thereafter. Once the initial changes in checkout programming and employee training occur, the ongoing cost should be minimal. Plan to Track Changes: The goal of the proposed ordinance is to incentivize Aspen shoppers to use reusable bags. In the first year of the ordinance, it will be crucial to accurately track the reduction of paper bags at grocery stores and also track the use of plastic bags in the greater community. Staff expects to see a reduction of 50 -80% in the amount of paper bags used. With the ban, there will obviously be a 100% reduction in plastic bags coming from grocery stores. Using a combination of grocer calculations and calculations obtained from staff audits of the grocers, bag use will be tracked during different times of year. These reduction numbers will be reported to Council and the City Manager as the program progresses. 6 One Year Discussion Staff will return to Council one year after the effective date of the ordinance to discuss the challenges and successes of the first year, as well as to discuss the future of the ordinance. At that time staff will present recommendations, if needed, for changes to the ordinance. Although changes to the ordinance may not be recommended after one year, staff will provide updates to Council on: - Compostable bags if they exist, their suitability for heavy loads, issues related to educating people about how to compost them, and a program for picking up Compostable bags - Other stores besides grocers and the role they play in reducing single use bags in the community. Effective date: Staff recommends an effective date of May 1, 2012. Neighboring towns agree on this start date. Although the effective date is eight months from now, staff plans to immediately embark on an aggressive regional program including physical presence at grocery stores, and to the extent that funds allow, providing reusable bags to customers, working with hotels, training, producing signs, as well as providing information by conventional means. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: By only charging a fee on paper bags instead of the previous ordinance that put a fee on both paper and plastic, both the City and the grocers will take in far less in collected fee amounts than previously discussed. As mentioned above, until funds run out, these fees will be put directly towards providing bags to residents and visitors and providing signs and education. If there are funds remaining after the outreach plan is complete, funds will be used for other aspects of the program like additional places to recycle paper bags, recycling pickup infrastructure, and other waste reduction programs. Although Council is fearful that a windfall will be created by charging a fee, staff is confident that funds will primarily be used for implementation of the program in the first year and if there were any remaining funds, they would have to, by law, go directly towards reducing waste in the community. If more funds were collected than expected, staff would return to Council to discuss a plan to improve the program by better distribution of reusable bags or other means. The fees collected through this ordinance will be deposited into the Waste Reduction Account and can only be used for specific waste related projects. The account will rollover from year to year and will at no point transfer to the general fund. It is challenging to estimate the number of customers that will choose to pay for a paper bag and thus, the amount that will be brought into the account from the collection of fees. The goal is to create so much incentive for use of reusable bags that no revenues are generated. At first, there will be some paper bag use, but staff expects that amount to become very small in time. For reference, the Town of Telluride distributed 13,500 7 paper bags over the first four months of their ordinance. This would equate to a total of $2700, leaving just over $2000 after the grocers take their percentage. Aspen is a larger town with more visitors than Telluride, but these revenues are still valuable. Attachment D shows revenue estimates for Aspen. Staff estimates that gross revenue will be between $33,000 and $170,000, depending on the use that occurs. However, after paying the grocers up to $1000 /month in the first year, the net revenue available to pay for the program would be between $25,000 and $145,000. As shown in Attachment E, the low end estimate of $25,000 allows the City to purchase a few reusable bags for residents and visitors, but does not provide funding for other necessary types of waste reduction programs like signs and training. The high end estimate, $145,000 allows for free bags for visitors and residents, plus some funding for more signs explaining the law and its goals, recycling of paper bags or other related measures. Attachment E shows the proposed costs to the City for starting the program and the cost of the necessary outreach efforts. The cost of the program to the City will mainly consist of staff time to educate the public and work with grocers on implementation of the project, and to supply free reusable bags to shoppers. In future years, any remaining money can be used to improve use of reusable bags and community waste reduction programs. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The environmental impacts of both paper and plastic bags are widespread and affect numerous areas. In particular, the industry has adverse effects on human health, climate change, energy resources, resource consumption, terrestrial and marine ecosystems, and solid waste management. Both the plastic and paper bag industries are resource intensive from start to finish. In addition to actual raw materials manufactured, both types of bags require significant amounts of resources such as fossil fuels and water to transport, generate, and process materials. However, plastic bags are detrimental to wildlife, and are notorious for littering parks, wilderness, and waterways. Plastic bags, unlike paper bags never fully biodegrade, and remain in the environment for hundreds of years. Recycling of the bags is also highly energy intensive. Complete information on the environmental effects of paper and plastic bags is available in Attachment F. While producing reusable bags also has impacts, studies prove that after 4 to 10 uses of a reusable bag, the environmental effects of reusable bags are better than those of paper or plastic and the benefit increases with each additional use. Aspen is lucky enough to host many influential leaders and visitors from all over the world. By leading by example, Aspen is not only reducing energy use and waste locally, but is providing an example for other communities looking to make changes. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Aspen considers itself an environmental leader, and this topic presents an opportunity for Aspen to continue to take a progressive stance on environmental issues. Although bag use is one of many pressing environmental issues facing Council, it presents an easy and tangible opportunity to address community wide 8 sustainability. Other towns in the Roaring Fork Valley have adopted or are currently considering similar legislation. Moreover, cities and countries across the globe have implemented legislation aimed at reducing bag consumption and associated waste. Staff recommends that Aspen City Council take the first step in reducing single use bags by passing this ordinance. If Council does decide to adopt this ordinance, it would provide Council with an opportunity to lead by example and would be a good way for Council to jump start their 2011 -2012 BYY goals. ALTERNATIVES: Aspen City Council can choose to maintain the status quo, with free paper and plastic bags available in grocery stores. However, should Aspen choose to follow a business -as -usual path, the City will not be relieved of any costs associated with the transport and clean up of littered bags and /or the environmental implications associated with their use and disposal. Council could impose a fee on both paper and plastic bags, as previously discussed. If council feels that a ban will prove to be too problematic, this approach had wide community support and could easily be implemented. Both a fee and ban approach have pros and cons. Pros of a ban include: - Elimination of plastic bags at grocery stores - Strong message to residents and visitors Cons of a ban include: - Less of a choice for shoppers - Loss of grocer support - Lack of funding for outreach programs Pros of a fee include - Generally supported by grocers - Provides funding mechanism for outreach and implementation - Sends a message to shoppers without a feeling of prohibition Cons of a fee include: - Depending on the amount of the fee, may not see significant reductions in bag use - Regardless of fee, less effective than ban - Seen as an 'intermediate step' towards a ban - Could generate more revenue for government CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: List of Actions around the World Attachment B: Published Papers and Research Attachment C: Aspen Daily News Article Attachment D: Projected Revenues Attachment E: Implementation Budget Attachment F: Environmental Effects of Single Use Bags 9 Attachment A: Communities Across the World Have Taken Action to Reduce Plastic Bag Pollution • M ore than 80 national and local Bans on Plastic Bags governments across the world At least 20 nations and 46 local gov- have taken official action to ernments have implemented bans on protect the ocean by reducing the use distributing specific kinds of throw -away of plastic bags. In their place, retailers plastic bags. are selling reusable bags, or bags made Governments have had a variety of from compostable material. reasons to implement bag bans. Some Nations from Kenya to Mongolia, communities enacted bag bans spe- and local governments from Maha- cifically to reduce ocean pollution — a rashtra, India to Rio de Janiero, Brazil, rationale particularly common in com- have taken action to ban throw -away munities whose economies depend upon plastic bags. Dozens more, from Hong whale watching and other forms of ocean Kong to Ireland, have established fee tourism. Others chose to enact the policy programs to reduce plastic bag use or to reduce litter. For example, the state of support more sustainable alternatives. Maharashtra in India, where Bombay is Other nations and communities have located, banned plastic bags to prevent established taxes on businesses that them from clogging storm drains and distribute plastic bags. contributing to floods?" Communities Across the World Have Taken Action to Reduce Plastic Bag Pollution 11 10 Policies that ban the distribution Local Governments Abroad of plastic bags are the most effective at reducing plastic bag pollution. For Additionally, more than 20 local gov- example, the year after banning plastic ernments outside of the TJnited States have bags at pharmacies and supermarkets passed plastic bag bans, including: in 2007, San Francisco businesses dis- tributed 127 million fewer plastic bags, Dahka, Bangladesh (2002) and cut overall bag waste reaching the South Australia (2008) city landfill by up to 10 percent" And Northern Territory, Australia (2011) four months after Huntingdon, Canada, Loddon Shire, Victoria, Australia (2005) banned plastic bags, the owner of a gro Corsica, France (1999) cery store reported that 82 percent of his customers brought their own bags, while Paris, France (2007) the remainder chose paper. Rio de Janiero, Brazil (2009) Governments at the national, state and Buenos Aires, Argentina (2008) local level have created various types of Leaf Rapids, Manitoba, Canada (2007) plastic bag bans. Eriksdale, Manitoba, Canada (2008) Coldwell, Manitoba, Canada (2008) Nations Huntingdon, Quebec, Canada (2008) At least 20 nations have passed bans to Hurghada, Red Sea Province, (2009) reduce bag pollution, including:27 Egypt Delhi, India (2009) Bangladesh (2002) Maharashtra, India (2005) Bhutan (2005) Himachal Pradesh, India (2009) Botswana (2007)28 Chandigarh, India (2008) China (2008) Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan (2006) Eritrea (2005) Zanzibar, Tanzania (2006) Ethiopia (2008) Llandysilio, Wales (2007) France (2010) , b ow: „ . Kenya (2008) Italy (2007) India (2002) s. 1 Macedonia (2011) t Mongolia (2009) Papua New Guinea (2009) Rwanda (2005) Somaliland (2005) South Africa (2003) Taiwan (2003) Tanzania (2006) Policies that ban the distribution of plastic bags or establish fees or taxes on such bags Uganda (2007) are effective at reducing plastic bag pollution, United Arab Emirates (2011) and encouraging the use of reusable bags. 12 Leading the Way Toward a Clean Ocean 11 photo: Environm ent California staff Local Governments in .;rte_ • California Within California, 13 city and county - I " .E governments have taken action to re- duce plastic bag pollution, including . the citizens of Fairfax, in Marin County, .--41 who enacted a bag ban by popular vote through a ballot initiative in 2008. Legal 4.7. - w - challenges from plastic bag manufactur- — - :' ers ended up invalidating two of these - ,� . _ laws, in Oakland and Manhattan Beach." Eleven areas currently have bag ban poli- .:','' • cies in effect, including: Unincorporated Marin County (2011) Fairfax (Marin County) (2008) Eleven city and coun governments in Unincorporated L.A. County (2010) California have plastic bag bans in effect. Calabasas (LA. County) (2011) Malibu (LA. County) (2008) Long Beach (L.A. County) (2011) Local Governments in the United Santa Monica (LA. County) (2011) States San Francisco (2007) Well over a dozen American commu Unincorporated Santa Clara (2011) nities outside of California have acted County against plastic bags, including:40 Palo Alto (Santa Clara County) (2009) San Jose (Santa Clara County) (2010) American Samoa (2011) Maui County, Hawaii (2008) These areas represent fully 10 percent Kauai County, Hawaii (2009) of the population of California Ss At least 30 coastal (2009) communities in Alaska, including Bethel Fee Programs and Taxes Telluride, Colorado (2011) Westport, Connecticut (2008)43 Approximately 25 nations and to cal communities have established fee Unincorporated Marshall (2008)44 programs to reduce plastic bag use or County, Iowa encourage reusable alternatives. Outer Banks, North (2009) Fee programs and taxes can have Carolina multiple purposes. First, by establishing Southampton Village, New (2011) a price on disposable bags, governments York can send a price signal to citizens to mo- Suffolk County, New York ( 1998) ovate different behaviors. For example, in Brownsville, Texas (2011) 2002 the Republic of Ireland established a South Padre Island, Texas (2011)48 15 Euro cent tax on plastic bags (roughly equivalent to about 28 U.S. cents per bag Edmonds, Washington (2009)49 today), applied to consumers at the point Communities Across the World Have Taken Action to Reduce Plastic Bag Pollution 13 12 of sale. In the first year of this policy, tain one of the more durable plastic bags, consumers used 90 percent fewer plastic encouraging reuse 3 bags. The tax grew relatively less effective Governments that have created fee over time, so the nation increased the tax programs or taxes applied to throw -away in 2007. Overall, plastic bags have gone bags include: from 5 percent to less than 0.25 percent of the waste stream.S4 Nations Washington, D.C. provides another example. After the district implemented Belgium (2007) a much smaller 5 cent tax on plastic bags, Botswana (2007) the number of bags distributed by food Bulgaria (2011) retailers fell from 22.5 million per month to 3.3 million per month S That is a de- China (2008)61 crease of more than 85 percent. This ac- Denmark (1994)62 tion translated into an observed decrease Hong Kong (2009) in plastic pollution in area rivers and streams. According to the Alice Ferguson Germany (earlier than 2005) Foundation, since implementation of the Ireland (2002) bag fee, river cleanup efforts have turned Israel (2008) up 66 percent fewer plastic bags.S6 The Netherlands(2008)66 Fee policies can also reimburse shop owners for any added expense of policy South Africa (2003) compliance. For example, stores in un- Wales (2011) incorporated Los Angeles County must charge customers 10 cents for every pa- per bag provided. The store retains the revenue and can use it to cover the cost Local Governments Abroad of providing paper bags or the cost of educating customers about reusable bags. Northwest Territories, (2010) These types of features can help plastic Canada bag reduction policies win the support of Toronto, Ontario, Canada (2009) retail businesses. Amqui, Quebec, Canada (2008) Fee programs and taxes can also pro- vide funding for government programs. Mexico City, Mexico (2009) For example, Ireland uses the money Andalucia, Spain (2011) from its bag tax for recycling programs, enforcement of solid waste laws, and other environmental priorities 3 Some countries have both a ban on Local Governments in the certain types of plastic bags, and fees on others. For example, China has banned United States disposable bags that fail to meet the Washington, D.C. (2009) durability standards necessary to be Montgomery County, (2011) considered reusable. China then requires Maryland retailers to charge customers a fee to oh- , 14 Leading the Way Toward a Clean Ocean 13 bow: Sbunmrock Local Governments in California In California, state law prohibits local governments from enacting fees applying to plastic bags (although outright bans are permissible) 6 However, several commu- nities have established fees on alternative bags to direct consumer behavior. For example, after San Francisco's., plastic bag ban, critics noted that many people simply shifted to paper — another ; , x `> type of disposable bag with its own set of environmental problems." In response, .' several California communities have . t i established fees that apply to paper bags •. as a companion policy to a ban on plastic r`y bags. These policies serve as a signal to ". encourage consumers to furnish and use - their own reusable bags. These commu- nities include: ra Unincorporated L.A. County (2010) w: 1 `? Marin County (2011) Calabasas (LA. County) (2011) Long Beach (L.A. County) (2011) Santa Monica (LA. County) (2011) San Jose (Santa Cara County) (2010) Telluride, Colorado enacted a similar By taking action to reduce the use of plastic bags, communities fee policy to complement its plastic bag across California are making a real difference in the problem ban in 2011.. of ocean pollution. "Leading the Way Toward a Clean Ocean ", Travis Madsen, Frontier Group and Julia Ritchie, Environment California Research & Policy Center. 14 Attachment B: Published Papers and Research Impacts on Wildlife/ Environments/ Marine Health: - http: / /www.nytimes.com/ 2009 /11/10 /science /10patch.html o Floating trash o Marine degradation - http: // water. epa .gov /type /oceb /marinedebris /md impacts.cfm o EPA Website o Overview of marine debris impacts o Website also includes laws and regulations, monitoring, and basic info o Economic impacts and human health - http:// www.academicjournals.org /jtehs/ abstracts /abstracts /abstracts2011 /Augus t /Adane %20and %20Muleta.htm o Research Paper on Environmental impacts of plastic bags in SW Ethiopia o 2011 Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health - http: / /www.5gyres.org/ o Non - profit research organization that is studying the plastics in the 5 ocean Gyres o Very informative website including plastic facts, global research and their mission - http: / /news.bbc.co.uk /2 /hi /science /nature /8534052.stm o N. Atlantic debris Waste: - http: / /www.epa.gov /osw /conserve /materials /plastics.htm o Plastic Facts and waste facts from US EPA - http://www.npr.org/ 2011 /04/19/135245835 / our - toxic - love - hate - relationship- with- plastics o Article of Susan Freinkel's book - Plastic: A Toxic Love Story o Details on plastic industries side and interview highlights with the author Human Health Impacts: - http:// www. scientificamerican .com /article.cfm ?id= plastic- not -so- fantastic o Harmful impacts on environmental and human health o Explains effects on humans (phthalates & BPA's) o Impacts and disturbances on marine life - http: / /www.ecologycenter.org /factsheets /plastichealtheffects.html o Ecology center of Berkeley, CA o Adverse health effects of plastics - including a chart of particular plastics , their common uses and their known health effects Consumer Behavior: - http: / /works.bepress.com /alice baker /1/ 15 o Altering Consumer Behavior by Taxing Environmentally Damaging Choices by Alice Baker Vermont Law School Bag Proposals/ Bans: - http: / /www.nytimes.com /2010 /05 /21 /us /2lsfplastic.html o Paper Bags or Plastic Bags? Save The Bay Bag Ordinance - http: // documents.latimes.com /1a- county- plastic- bag -ban/ o County of LA Department of Public Works Ordinance o Has Public works document, easily navigable a lot of info - http: / /www.npr.org /templates/ story /story.php ?storyld= 89 135360 o Has a great column on plastic bag laws history in the world Basic Facts: - http: / /www.reuseit.com/ learn - more /top- facts /impact -on- oceans o Although this is a reusable bag website it has a great compilation of facts from many different cited sources. - http: / /www.plasticdebris .org /bibliography.html o Bibliography website, tons of research cited - it is from a Marine research foundation and the California Coastal Commission. - http:/ /www.washingtonpost.com /wp- dyn /content /graphic/ 2007 /10/03/GR2007100301385.html ?referrer = emaillink o A good depiction of paper vs. plastic and the harms of both, how each are made and the processes. - http: / /www.npr.org/ templates/ story /story.php ?storyld = 127600685 o Environmental effects - http: / /ladpw. org /epd /pdf /PlasticBagReport.pdf o Comprehensive report created for the L.A. County Board of Supervisors 16 Attachment C: Aspen Daily News Article Groo3s opposed to plastic bag ban aspendailynewsonline Published on Aspen Daily News Online (htn: /lwww.asnendai vnews.com) Grocers opposed to plastic bag ban Writer: Curtis Wackerle Byline: Aspen Daily News Staff Writer Local gr ocery stcre operators said they are uncomfortable with potential legislation that would ban plastic bags from their establishments. "I think its pretty heavy handed of our city government to take it upon themselves to tell residents and visitors what they can and can't use to go gr ocery shopphg," said Tom Clark, Jr., president of the Clark's Market grocery store company. A majority of Aspen City Council on Monday expressed Its preference for an outright ban on plastic bags at gro cery stores and a fee for paper bags. The council was set to vote that night on a 20 -cent fee on paper and plastic bags handed out at grocery stcres as a way to encourage reusable totes. The next council meeting m the bag ordinance will be Oct. 10. Basalt and Carbondale town councils are considering similar bag ordinances. At a Carbondale Board of Trustees meeting on Tuesday, the board considered moving toward a ban instead of a fee, and will take up the issue again on Oct. 25. Clark, who has stcres in Aspen and Basalt, as well as six other locations in Colorado and Utah, said he would be mcre comfortable with a bag ban If it extended to all businesses, not just gr ocery stcres. if they want to ban plastic bags then It reeds to be across the entire city," Clark said. City Market and King Soopers spokeswoman Kell' McGarr non said the chain, which has about 140 stores in Colorado, "prefers to let cur customers choose what bags they wart to use. We certahiy are not in support of a ban on plastic bag" "We support sustainability," McGamon said, noting the stcres' plastic bag recycling progams. "It's a joLrney of 1,000 miles, we cannot do it with one quick sweep" Both McGannon and Clark said they are concerned that barring plastic, but allowing fee -based use of paper bags, would mean more people would use paper bag, which cost "three times as much," Clark sa Id. Said McGannon: "Pnything that dives up grocery stcre expenses drives up the cost to the consumer." Clark said he is concerned that baming plastic bag; would increase the use of paper bags, which would have a higher net carbcn footprint than the states quo. In Telluride, where Clark's Market has a store, the town's ban on plastic bags and fee for paper bag went into effect this spring. Clark said the progam has "for the most part worked," although it can be frustrating for visitors. "The residents there have always been progessive with reusable bags, even before the ban," Clark said. City of Aspen environmental health specialist Ashley Cantrell said she was not surprised by the council's shift in direction Monday night. If the obpctive is to get rid of plastic bag;, which require fossil fuels to make and have harmful environmental effects, It's hard not to conclude that a ban is the correct policy, lIe:/// GI /..lingt9ngleek2ouse'/o20Bags/ cot ,dl %20Nneno5 /Attachmentr/Attac ent%2O % 2a% 2ogroaer %20aonoerns.t /3/2ou 9:52:32,6M] 17 Grocers opposed to plastic bag ban she said. If the city goes with a ban instead of a fee, there is a potential that trade groups representing plastic bag manufacturers could sue, charging unfair discrimination against their products versus paper products. However, city attorneys believe the they could defend such a case, Aspen Mayor Mick Ireland said. curtislaaspendailynews.corrt [1] archive_date: 1 day Source URL: http: / /www.aspendailynews.com /section /home /149089 Attachment D: Revenue from Paper Bag Fee Collection Assumes $0.20 fee Population shopping # of Bags Potential Population in Aspen Used /Year Total Aspen Full -time Residents 6,671 2000 400 800,000 Unincorporated Pitkin County 7,000 2100 400 840,000 Average Aspen Visitors per Year 84,000 14641 4 58,564 Total Potential # of Bags Used /yr. 1,698,564 50% of shoppers 20% buy paper 10% buy buy paper bags 30% buy paper bags bags paper bags Total # of Bags Used per Year 849,282 509,569 339,713 169,856 Revenue from $0.20 fee $169,856 $101,914_ $67,943_ $33,971 Grocers take 25% up to $1000 /month for the 1st year for a total of $12,000 per grocer = $24000 Total Revenue to City of Aspen $145,856 $77,914 $51,193 $25,479 Calculation for If of visitors shopping in Aspen: 83% of visitors stay overnight. 70% of those visitors stay in Aspen. Staff assumed 1/3 of overnight visitors shop. 18 Attachment E: Implementation Budget Funding Needed Total $37,640 Bags for visitors /locals $20,000 Radio Ads $4,000 Newspaper Ads $5,000 Bag Bins for distribution and collection $2,000 Signs $3,000 Stickers, hanger cards, magnets, etc. $1,000 Mail Campaign $2,640 Staff Time Total 55,520 345hrs. Meet with hotels 40 Meet with grocers 30 Order bags 8 Website 20 Record Radio Ads 4 Design Newspaper Ads 2 Distribute Bags 80 Design Hotel Program 20 Help grocers with outreach 20 Training for grocer staff 6 Events /Newsletter outreach 20 Press Inquiries 10 19 Solicit Local business involvement and work with ACRA 5 Continue regional partnerships with neighboring towns - provide consistent message 15 Create signs /handouts 15 Develop tracking system 10 Track effectiveness 1st year 30 Develop complaint response 5 New bag collection system (grocer request) 5 20 Attachment F: Environmental Considerations Paper or Plastic? PAPER PLASTIC Consumption Americans consume more than 10 The U.S. uses 100 billion plastic bags billion paper bags /yr. annually. Production 2,511 BTU's of energy for one paper 594 BTU "s of energy for one plastic bag. Transportation, processing, bag. Refining, heating, forming and cleaning, packaging and shipping of transporting plastic resin, a by- paper from trees. product of oil refining. Pollution Air and water pollutants are associated with both types of bags. Both bags are responsible for polluting our cities, towns and waterways. Recycling 1,444 BTU's of energy to recycle one 17 BTU's of energy to recycle one pound of paper. Ten to fifteen pound of plastic. Only 1-3% of all percent of paper bags are recycled plastic bags are actually recycled. by consumers. A complete report follows. 21 I MORE THAN 1acETS THE EYE Rncccasiora l feature that digs deeper into thi ngsyou've been wondering about P aper or Plastic? 1. r a hear the question almost every time we go grocery shopping. m Some shoppers answer automatically. plastic — cciiviuced that hey are making a better choice for the environect. Others ask for paper, believing the very same thing. The reality is that both paper and plastic bags gobble u natural resources and cause significant ca When you weigh all the costs to the envlronnert, you might just choose to tense: `- PAPER PLASTIC CONSUMPTION Americans consume more than four out of tree grocery bag Worldwide, an estimated 4 billion 10 billion paper bags each year. in tsls cguntry are plastic. plastic bags end up as litter each Some 14 million trees ere cut The U.S. uses 100 billion plastic year, Tied end to end, the bags down annually for paper bag bapsannrsgy, made from an could circle the Earth 63 times. p , ou � I , estimated 12 mhen barrels of oil. 1 aaii x 63 IIIIIII . . PRODUCTION Paper, of course, conies Piastk Is a by- product of oil Pellet from trees. Trees are grown or It takes more than four times as rafting. Plastic bags are made t4oxii. found, then marked and felled. much energy to manufacture a from polyethylene. which comes °ae1 "". L Logs are moved from the paper bag as n does a plastic hag. from oil refineries as small resin 0 . � `' forest to a mill, whore there is a pellets. throe- year wait for tha logs to dry Energy to produce bags: Y 9 rY L A machine heats the pellet to before they can be used. Plastic - 594 MS' about 340 degrees and pulls out 0 2. Logs are stripped of bark and Paper ® from k a long, thin tube of - chipped into one -inch squares. cooling plastic. The chips are "cooked" with 3.A hot bar is dropped on the © tremendous heat and pressure. T in lO Americans do not tube at Intervals. melting a line. know that plastic is made -- _ " 3. Then. they are "digested" with from petroleum products 3. Each melted line becomes the limestone and sulfurous acid until primarily oil, according to a bottom of one bag and the top of the wood becomes pulp. recent nationwide online survey. another. O 4. The pulp Is washed. requiring e r e e e a s 4. The sections are cut out and a thousands of gallons cf fresh f «ffy� hole for the bag's handles is water and bleach, then pressed stamped in each piece. 0 Into finished paper. • 5. Cutting. printing, packaging NIL= eklsn rn.mw °M` and shipping to make paper bags O require additional time, labor and energy. 0 0 1 POLLUTION The use of toxic chemicals Plastics production requires toxic rkuina rho prrxkrrtinn of papa, Thr amrbeonn of mprr, ha0c rhnmirals In an FPA ranking of for bags contributes to air generates 70 percent more air and chemicals that generate the most pollution, such as acid rain. 50 times more water pollutants hazardous waste, five of the top and water pollution. than productional plastic bags. six were commonly used by the Air pollutants plastics industry. Plastic 1.11 Hundreds of thousands of marine mammals die every year after Paper eating discarded plastic bags. Water pollutants Turtles think the bags are jellyfish, their primary food Plastic I source. flags choke animals or Paper block their intestines. 22 RECYCLING Paper must be returned to pulp Recycling almost ary kind of by usng many chemicals to It takes 98 %less energy to plastic involves remelting and bleach and disperse the fibers. recycle a pound of plastic than it re- forming it. Because bags Although paper bags have a takes to recycle a pound of paper. must first be separated by the higher recycling rate than type of plastic they were made plastic, each new paper Energy used to recycle bags from. the process s grocery bag you use is made Plastic 117 BTUs time- consuming and expensive. from mostly virgin pulp for For example, it car cost $4,000 better strength and elasticity. Paper 1,444 BTUs to process and recycle 1 ton of Bags that are recycled are But recycling rates of both types plastic bags. This can then be often turned into corrugated of bags are extremely low. sold on the commodities market cardboard, not new paper for about $32. More often than bags. Percentage of bags recycled: not, bags collected for recy 1 -3% 10 -15% never get recycled. A growing I ® trend is to ship them to T countries such as India and Plastic Paper China, where they are cheaply incinerated under more lax environmental laws. BIODEGRADABLE? Paper is degradable, but it cannot ben though petroleum-based bd Petroleum -based plastics are completely break down in modern not biodegradable, meaning landfills because of the lack of plastic will never biodegrade, they will net decompose over water, light, oxygen and other nearl 4 in 10 believe p lastic time. But they do take up less necessary elements. About 95 will blade g rdde undetgmund, s in landfills or in the ocean. pace than paper in a landfill: percent of garbage is buried 2,000 plastic bags weigh 30 beneath layers of soil that make it pounds; 2,000 paper bags difficuh for air and sunlight to tiff weigh 280 pounds. reach it. SOURCES Amencan Chemistry Counce American Forest ano Paper Association - Companscn of the Effects on the Environment of Polyethylene and Paper Cartier Bags' Federal Office of the Environment. August 1983. Institute for Llfetycle Environments; Assessment. Raper Industry Association Counal, 'Resources and Environmental Profile Analysis of Polyethyylene and Unbleached Paper Grocery Sacks" Franklin Group. 1990. Reueablebags corn Society of Pfastcs Industry. .1 S Environmental Protection Agency. lilbndwatch Institute. GRAPHIC. Brenna Maloney and Laura Stanton - The Washington Post t) 2007 The Washington Post Company • 23 Ordinance No. Series of 2011 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING TITLE 13 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 13.24 ENTITLED: "WASTE REDUCTION." WHEREAS, The City Council has a duty to protect the natural environment and the health of its citizens and visitors; and WHEREAS, the use of all single -use shopping bags (plastic and paper ) have severe environmental impacts on a local and global scale, including greenhouse gas emissions, litter, harm to wildlife, atmospheric acidification, water consumption and solid waste generation; and WHEREAS, despite recycling and voluntary solutions to control pollution from disposable carryout bags, very few disposable carryout bags are recycled, and these bags last decades in the landfill, taking up valuable landfill space; and WHEREAS, numerous studies have documented the prevalence of single -use plastic bags littering the environment, blocking storm drains and endangering wildlife; and WHEREAS, approximately two billion (2,000,000,000) single use plastic bags are used annually in Colorado but less than five percent (5 %) are recycled; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen's taxpayers must bear the brunt of clean-up costs of this litter; and WHEREAS, of all single -use bags, plastic bags have the greatest impact on litter and wildlife; and WHEREAS, it is known and documented that disposable paper bags are not environmentally sound alternatives to plastic carryout bags because the production of these types of bags contributes to natural resource depletion, greenhouse gas emissions, and waterborne wastes; and WHEREAS, the use of disposable paper bags results in greater greenhouse gas emissions, atmospheric acidification, water consumption, and ozone production than single -use plastic bags; and WHEREAS, from an overall environmental and economic perspective, the best alternative to single -use plastic and paper bags is to shift to reusable bags for shopping; and WHEREAS, there are several alternatives to single -use bags readily available in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen aims to conserve resources, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, waste, and litter, and to protect the public health and welfare, including wildlife, all of which increase the quality of life for the City's residents and visitors; and WHEREAS, evidence indicates that a vast majority of single use disposable bags are used for the bagging and carryout of products purchased from grocers; and WHEREAS, studies document that banning plastic bags and placing a mandatory fee on paper bags will dramatically reduce the use of both types of bags; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen believes that residents and visitors should use reusable carryout bags and that a fee on the distribution of paper bags by grocers is appropriate to fund the City's efforts to educate residents, businesses, and visitors about the impact of trash on the regional environmental health and to fund the use of reusable carryout bags, City cleanup events and infrastructure and programs that reduce waste in the community; and WHEREAS, Environmental Health Department staff commit to returning to Council within one year of the implementation date of this ordinance to discuss the successes of the ordinance and provide suggestions for future programs; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens and visitors of Aspen to reduce the cost to the City of solid waste disposal, and to protect our environment and our natural resources by banning the use of disposable single use plastic bags and to mandate a fee for the use of paper bags at grocery stores. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That Title 13 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen is hereby amended by the addition of a new Chapter 13.24, which chapter shall read as follows: Chapter 13.24 WASTE REDUCTION 13.24.010 Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them: Disposable Paper Bag. The term Disposable Paper Bag means a bag made predominately of paper that is provided to a customer by a Grocer at the point of sale for the purpose of transporting goods. Disposable Plastic Bag. The term Disposable Plastic Bag means any bag that is less than two and one - quarter mil thick and is made predominately of plastic derived from petroleum or from bio -based sources, provided to a customer at the point of sale for the purpose of transporting goods. Disposable Carryout Bag does not mean: (a) Bags used by consumers inside stores to: (1) Package bulk items, such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, candy or small hardware items; (2) Contain or wrap frozen foods, meat, or fish; (3) Contain or wrap flowers, potted plants, or other items where dampness may be a problem; and, (4) Contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods; (5) A non - handled bag used to protect a purchased item from damaging or contaminating other purchased items when placed in a recyclable paper bag or reusable bag. (b) Bags provided by pharmacists to contain prescription drugs; (c) Newspaper bags, door -hanger bags, laundry-dry cleaning bags, or bags sold in packages containing multiple bags intended for use as garbage, pet waste, or yard waste bags; Grocer. The term Grocer means a retail establishment or business located within Aspen City limits in a permanent building, operating year round, that is a full -line, self - service market and which sells a line of staple foodstuffs, meats, produce, household supplies, or dairy products or other perishable items. Grocer does not mean: (a) Temporary vending establishment for fruits, vegetables, packaged meats and dairy. (b) Vendors at farmer's markets or other temporary events. (c) Location where foodstuffs is not the majority of sales for that business. (d) Location where the facility is less than 3500 sq. ft. Reusable Bag. The term Reusable Bag means a bag that is: (a) Designed and manufactured to withstand repeated uses over a period of time; and (b) Is made from a material that can be cleaned and disinfected regularly; and (c) That is at least 2.25 mil thick if made from plastic; and (d) Has a minimum lifetime of seventy five uses; and (e) Has the capability of carrying a minimum of eighteen pounds. Waste Reduction Fee. The term Waste Reduction Fee means a City fee imposed and required to be paid by each consumer making a purchase from a Grocer for each Disposable Paper Bag used during the purchase. 13.24.020 Prohibitions On and after the effective date: (a) No Grocer shall provide a Disposable Plastic Bag to a customer at the point of sale. (b) Nothing in this section shall preclude persons or Grocers from making Reusable Bags available for sale or for no cost to customers. 13.24.030 Paper Bag fee requirements (a) Grocers shall collect from customers, and customers shall pay, at the time of purchase, a Waste Reduction Fee of $0.20 for each Disposable Paper Bag provided to the customer. (b) Grocers shall record the number of Disposable Paper Bags provided and the total amount of Waste Reduction Fee charged on the customer transaction receipt. (c) A Grocer shall not refund to the customer any part of the Waste Reduction Fee, nor shall the grocer advertise or state to customers that any part of the Waste Reduction Fee will be refunded to the customer. (d) A Grocer shall not exempt any customer from any part of the Waste Reduction Fee for any reason except as stated in Section 13.24.070, below. 13.24.040 Voluntary Opt In (a) Any store or business with a City of Aspen business license may voluntarily opt in to the Waste Reduction Program and apply the ban and Waste Reduction Fee to its business by applying with the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department. 13.24.050 Retention, remittance, and transfer of the Waste Reduction Fee (a) A Grocer may retain 25% of each Waste Reduction Fee collected up to a maximum amount of one thousand dollars ($1000) per month within the first twelve (12) months of the effective date of this ordinance and one hundred dollars ($100) per month for all months thereafter. (b) The retained percent is limited to allowable use for the Grocer to: (1) Provide educational information about the Waste Reduction Fee to customers; (2) Train staff in the implementation and administration of the fee; and (3) Improve or alter infrastructure to allow for the implementation, collection and administration of the fee. (c) The portion of the fees retained by a Grocer pursuant to this ordinance shall not be classified as revenue for the purposes of calculating sales tax; (d) The remaining portion of each Waste Reduction Fee collected by a Grocer shall be paid to the City of Aspen Finance Department and shall be deposited in the Waste Reduction and Recycling Account. (e) A Grocer shall pay and the City of Aspen shall collect all Waste Reduction Fees at the same time as the City Sales Tax. The City shall provide the necessary forms for Grocers to file individual returns with the City, separate from the required City Sales Tax forms, to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. (1) If payment of any amounts to the City is not received on or before the applicable due date, penalty and interest charges shall be added to the amount due as described in Section 13.24.080. (f)The Waste Reduction Fee shall be administered by the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department. (g) Funds deposited in the Waste Reduction and Recycling Account shall be used for the following projects, in the following order of priorities: (1) Campaigns conducted by the City of Aspen and begun within 365 days of the effective date of this act, to: (A) Provide reusable carryout bags to residents and visitors; and (B) Educate residents, businesses, and visitors about the impact of trash on the City's environmental health, the importance of reducing the number of disposable carryout bags entering the waste stream, and the impact of disposable carryout bags on the waterways and the environment. (2) Ongoing campaigns conducted by the City of Aspen to: (A) Provide reusable bags to both residents and visitors; and (B) Create public educational campaigns to raise awareness about waste reduction and recycling; (C) Funding programs and infrastructure that allows the Aspen community to reduce waste and recycle. (D) Purchasing and installing equipment designed to minimize trash pollution, including, recycling containers, and waste receptacles; (E) Funding community cleanup events and other activities that reduce trash; (F) Maintaining a public website that educates residents on the progress of waste reduction efforts; and (G) Paying for the administration of this program. (h)No Waste Reduction Fee collected in accordance with this ordinance shall be used to supplant funds appropriated as part of an approved annual budget. (i) No Waste Reduction Fee collected in accordance with this ordinance shall revert to the General Fund at the end of the fiscal year, or at any other time, but shall be continually available for the uses and purposes set forth in Subsection (g) of this Section without regard to fiscal year limitation. 13.24.060 Required Signage for Grocers. Every Grocer subject to the collection of the Waste Reduction Fee shall display a sign in a location outside or inside of the business, viewable by customers, alerting customers to the City of Aspen imposed ban and fee. 13.24.070 Exemptions A Grocer may provide a Disposable Paper Bag to a customer at no charge to that customer if the customer provides evidence that he or she is a participant in a Colorado Food Assistance Program. 13.24.080 Audits and Violations (a) Each Grocer licensed pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter shall maintain accurate and complete records of the Waste Reduction Fees collected, the number of Disposable Paper Bags provided to customers, the form and recipients of any notice required pursuant to this Chapter, and any underlying records, including any books, accounts, invoices, or other records necessary to verify the accuracy and completeness of such records. It shall be the duty of each Grocer to keep and preserve all such documents and records, including any electronic information, for a period of three (3) years from the end of the calendar year of such records. (b) If requested, each Grocer shall make its records available for audit by the City Manager during regular business hours in order for the City to verify compliance with the provisions of this chapter. All such information shall be treated as confidential commercial documents. (c) Violation of any of the requirements of this act shall subject a Grocer to the penalties set forth in this Section. (1) If it is determined that a violation has occurred, the City of Aspen shall issue a warning notice to the Grocer for the initial violation. (2) If it is determined that an additional violation of this Chapter has occurred within one year after a warning notice has been issued for an initial violation, the City of Aspen shall issue a notice of infraction and shall impose a penalty against the retail establishment. (3) The penalty for each violation that occurs after the issuance of the warning notice shall be no more than: A) $50 for the first offense B) $100 for the second offense C) For the third and all subsequent offenses there shall be a mandatory Court appearance and such penalty as may be determined by the Court pursuant to Section 1.04.080. (4) No more than one (1) penalty shall be imposed upon a Grocer within a seven (7) calendar day period. (5)A Grocer shall have fifteen (15) calendar days after the date that a notice of infraction is issued to pay the penalty. (6)The penalty shall double after fifteen (15) calendars days if the Grocer does not pay the penalty; or fails to respond to a notice of infraction by either denying or objecting in writing to the infraction or penalty. (d) If payment of any amounts of the Waste Reduction Fee to the City is not received on or before the applicable due date, penalty and interest charges shall be added to the amount due in the amount of: (1) A penalty of five percent (5 %) of total due, not to exceed ten dollars ($10) each month. (2) Interest charge of one percent (1 %) of total penalty per month. Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 3 Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4 Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect on May 1, 2012. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2011. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2011. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk John Worcester, City Attorney MEMORANDUM Vili 0 TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director /�/} RE: Lift One Lodge Final PUD & Timeshare Review v Y - y f 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011 Public Hearing Continued from September 26 b■; DATE: October 11, 2011 APPLICANT /OWNER: , ' ;y Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge — Aspen, LLC. . f S REPRESENTATIVES: V Bob Daniel, Roaring Fork Mtn. Lodge : t Sunny Vann, Vann Associates. 't w Stephen Holley, Poss Architecture 1 ? .Q LOCATION: 1 ` l` ' � k Willoughby Park (City owned). �, Lift One Park (City owned). M 233 Gilbert Street (Skier Chalet Lodge)... Illr 1 710 S. Aspen St. Skiers Steakhouse).'--` • 720 S. Aspen St. (Holland House). ' � w SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: _ Development of a timeshare lodge on the (former) Holland House, • , ' ,, Skier Chalet Lodge, and Skier Chalet Steakhouse properties. The , g Lodge contains 22 lodging units divided into one - eighth (1/8) "lock-off' the 22 units represent 84 - k - E F - interests. With lock -off capability, p ust «��oocE keys; 5 free - market residential units; 155 subgrade parking spaces k- k. t ''' k '. (50 for public use); and a public restaurant with apres ski deck. Relocation and rehabilitation of the Skiers Chalet Steakhouse as affordable housing. Relocation and rehabilitation of the Skier's Chalet Lodge as a Ski Museum to be owned and operated by the Historical Society. Numerous infrastructure upgrades including reconstruction of South Aspen and Deane Streets. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the project meets all review criteria and aligns with the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan. The project will be a significant improvement for this neighborhood and to the lodging base of Aspen. Staff will provide a summary of findings at the October 24 hearing along with P &Z minutes and a review of the proposed Ordinance. Staff recommends City Council receive the presentation, ask questions, etc. and continue the pub hearing to October 24 Page 1 of 7 REVIEW SCHEDULE: Staff has scheduled a series of meetings to review the final application. This project has been in the planning process since 2006 and has undergone several changes. The project was granted conceptual approval by City Council in late 2009. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended in favor of the application after seven meetings. • September 26 — The first public hearing provided an orientation to the project. The presentation will covered the history of the project, the changes the project has undergone, details on the uses and program of the proposal. City Council asked questions about the project, its history, and why certain changes were made. • October 11 — The second public hearing will provide a more detailed presentation of the project — getting into the details of the architecture, massing, heights, parking, street vacations, zoning changes, etc. A project model will be presented. Staff will provide an overview of the reviews necessary. Depending on time, staff may provide an overview of the review criteria and findings. This meeting should also provide staff and the applicant time to follow -up on questions from the first meeting. • October 24 — At the third public hearing staff will present review criteria and findings, comments provided by referral agencies, and a recommendation. Staff will provide an overview of the Ordinance. The Applicant and staff will respond to questions /issues raised in previous meetings. Other items will be addressed as needed. • November 14 — The fourth public hearing will provide further review and refinement of the Ordinance. Other items will be addressed as needed. • November 28 — The fifth public hearing will provide further review and refinement of the Ordinance. Other items will be addressed as needed. BACKGROUND: This neighborhood has had multiple development 4 applications proceeding through development review in , } the past few years. The owners of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain project, the Lift One Lodge project, the Aspen Skiing Company, and the City of Aspen jointly initiated a master planning process in early 2008 — the '` J '''- Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP. That process incorporated a citizen task force and developed a master plan for the entire neighborhood. The master - plan was not adopted and that process was eventually CO WOP Task Force Meeting terminated. Prior to entering into the neighborhood master planning process, the Lift One Lodge project had received positive recommendations for the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Commission for their Conceptual PUD application. The Conceptual Page 2 of 7 application was not forwarded to City Council, but rather tolled for the term of the master planning effort. After the neighborhood master planning effort was terminated, the Lift One Lodge PUD application was re- activated and forwarded to City Council. Obviously, the 2006 PUD application did not incorporate the newer ideas of the master planning exercise as it was prepared prior to that effort. Some of the new ideas were off - property items and could not be accommodated on the smaller land area. Some of the ideas were still valid and were integrated into the PUD application. The Conceptual application for the Lift One Lodge was approved by City Council through the adoption of Resolution No. 52, Series of 2009. Since Conceptual approval the project has decreased in size. The upper parcel, the Lift IA property, is no longer part of the development. Below is a summary of the changes. Conceptual Approval Final Submission Units / Keys 27 Units / 107 Keys 22 Units / 84 Keys Free Market Units 5 units, total of 20,395 s.f. 5 units, total of 13,013 s.f. Affordable Housing: % mitigated: 100% Mitigation 100% Mitigation # housed on -site: Minimum of 40% On Site Minimum of40 %On Site Commercial SkiCo Ticketing and Restaurant Restaurant Public Restaurant w/ Apres Ski Deck, Public Restaurant w/ Apres Ski Deck Dining Beer /Boots /Brats AHS Museum reusing Skiers Chalet AHS Museum reusing Skiers Chalet Lodge Museum Lodge Floor Area- Total Museum: 4,320 s.f. Museum: 4,320 s.f. Steak House: 2,594 s.f. Steak House: 3,184 s.f. Lodge: 1 16,779 s.f. lodge: 77,010 s.f. Total: 123,693 s.f. Total: 84,514 s.f. Room Size- Average Average Key: 612 s.f. Average Key: 537 s.f. Parking- Lodge /Public 200 / 50 105 / 50 Yes, sidewalks Snowmelt Yes, sidewalks and street No, streets- enhanced driving surface and sanding with capture basins Ski Lifts New Lift 1A, New Surface Lift Funding for Surface Lill Page 3 of 7 Earlier this year the applicant gained final — ` i - . HPC approval for the relocation and = .,. rehabilitation of the two historic resources ,;.. ,, on the roe The Skiers Chalet Lodge �° a.:t�.r�• (an "Ordinance 48 property ") will be �- relocated onto Willoughby Park and _ converted into a skiing museum to be F: I' O owned and operated by the Historical j I ,�} Society. The Skiers Chalet Steakhouse will . i / ! be moved slightly north and west and 0 / become affordable housing. ` / q N °` A Final PUD/Timeshare application was T , '� v submitted to ComDev in December 2010. - This is the last step in the process. The / 7 - City's Planning and Zoning Commission ` 1 7 reviewed the Final PUD application over a 1 11.11v 't' t' ' � '/ K� A lwr series of seven meetings and recommended � in favor of the project. P &Z meeting ' qr HPC \ minutes will be provided with the Plan approved by HP September 26 packet. 'ter 6 , ,,,,, IICAN6" YTFCCT fp.D.O.I AM NAr LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This application is subject to the Land Use Code in effect at the date of initial submission — November, 2006. The P &Z reviews have been combined with City Council review. The Code provides this option to ensure clarity of entitlements and minimize conflicting approvals. The project remains subject to all review criteria and public noticing requirements. This project requires the following reviews: Final Planned Unit Development: An application for Final PUD, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.030 (B)2, requires the City Council, at a public hearing, to approve, approve with conditions or disapprove of the PUD after receiving a recommendation by the Planning Zoning Commission. The City Council is the final decision - making body. Timeshare: An application for Final PUD, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.590.040, requires the City Council, at a public hearing, to approve, approve with conditions or disapprove of the Timeshare use plan after receiving a recommendation by the Planning Zoning Commission. The City Council is the final decision - making body. Subdivision: An application for Subdivision, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.040(C)1, requires the City Council, at a public hearing, to approve, approve with Page4of7 conditions or disapprove of the Subdivision after receiving a recommendation by the Planning Zoning Commission. The City Council is the final decision - making body. Amendment to the Zone District Map [Rezoning]: An application for Amendment to the Zone District Map, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.020, requires the City Council, at a public hearing, to determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the Zone District Map after receiving a recommendation by the Planning Zoning Commission. The City Council is the final decision - making body. Growth Management Review — Incentive Lodge Development: An application for the development of new lodge units, commercial space, and associated free - market residential pursuant to Land Use Code Section Sec. 26.470.040.C.3. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Growth Management Review — Essential Public Facility: An application for the development of an essential public facility (the museum) pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040.D.3. The City Council is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. Growth Management Review — Affordable Housing: An application for the development of new affordable residences pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040.C.7. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.I. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commercial Design Review: All development with a commercial or lodging component are required to be reviewed under the Commercial Design Review standards of Chapter 26.412. These standards address building design, but not style. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Special Review for Average Lodge Unit Size: An application for Special Review to consider the average lodge unit size, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.710.190.E. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Conditional Use for Restaurant and Bar: A conditional use application to consider the restaurant and bar (within the lodge) pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.425.050. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section Page 5 of 7 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Conditional Use for Dormitory Units: A conditional use application to consider dormitory style housing units pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.425.050. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mountain View Plane Review: An application to the effects of the project on the Wheeler Opera House designated view plane Land Use Code Section 26.435.050. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Condominiumization: An application for condominiumization, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.090, requires the Community Development Director approve a plat for recordation to affect a condominium form of ownership. This review has been combined pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1. City Council is the final review authority. The plat will be presented for administrative approval and recordation upon substantial completion of the improvements. Right -of -Way Vacations: Pursuant to C.R.S. 43 -2 -303 the City Council may vacate a public right -of -way upon adoption of an Ordinance. City Council is the final review authority. Extended Vested Rights: Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.308.010, City Council may grant a period of statutory vested rights in excess of the minimum three -year period. City Council is the final review authority. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the project meets all review criteria and aligns with the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan. The project will be a significant improvement for this neighborhood and to the lodging base of Aspen. Staff recommends the City Council receive the presentation. At the conclusion of the hearing, staff will recommend continuation of the hearing to October 24` CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue the public hearing for Lift One Lodge to October 24` " ALTERNATE MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011." Page 6 of 7 PREVIOUS ATTACHMENTS: A — Lift One Lodge Application A2 — Application Supplement — September 2, 2011 B — Lift One Lodge Application Appendix CURRENT ATTACHMENTS: C - Review Criteria and Findings Page 7 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. 28 (SERIES OF 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL, SUBDIVISION APPROVAL, REZONING APPROVAL, FINAL TIMESHARE APPROVAL, GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVALS, APPROVAL OF RIGHT -OF -WAY VACATIONS, APPROVAL OF ASSOCIATED LAND USE REVIEWS, AND AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE LIFT ONE LODGE SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 233 GILBERT STREET, 710 SOUTH ASPEN STREET, 720 SOUTH ASPEN STREET, WILLOUGHBY PARK AND LIFT ONE PARK, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735 - 131 - 168 -51, 2735 -131- 210 -01, 2735 -131- 210 -02, 2735 - 131 - 198 -51, 2735- 131 - 190 -01 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application for the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD (the Application) from Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge — Aspen, LLC (Applicant), represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, and with consent from the City of Aspen and the Historical Society of Aspen, for the following land use review approvals: • Final Planned Unit Development, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445. • Final Timeshare, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.590. • Subdivision, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.480. • Amendment to the Zone District Map, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.310. • Growth Management Review — Replacement of Existing Commercial and Lodge Development, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. • Growth Management Review — Replacement of Demolished Multi- Family Units, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. • Growth Management Review — Incentive Lodge Development, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. • Growth Management Review — Essential Public Facility, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. • Growth Management Review — Affordable Housing, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. • Special Review for Average Lodge Unit Size: An application for Special Review to consider the average lodge unit size, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.430. • Conditional Use for Restaurant and Bar, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.425. • Conditional Use for Dormitory Units, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.425. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 1 of 42 • Mountain View Plane Review, pursuant to Section 26.435.050. • Condominiumization, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.090. • Commercial Design Review, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.412. • Right -of -Way Vacations, pursuant to C.R.S. 43 -2 -303 for certain streets, easements, and alleyways within the project site. • Extended Vested Rights, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.308, for a 10 -year period. ; and, WHEREAS, all code citation references are to the City of Aspen Land Use Code in effect on the day of initial application — November 24, 2006, as applicable to this Project; and, WHEREAS, the subject Properties are commonly known as Willoughby Park, Lift One Park, 233 Gilbert Street, 710 South Aspen Street, and 720 South Aspen Street, City of Aspen, Colorado, and as more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and, WHEREAS, the Application for the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD proposes: On Lot 1— Lift One Lodge: • A multi -story structure consisting of 22 timeshare lodging units divided into one- eighth (1/8) interests with a total of 176 owner interests. With "lock -off" capability, the 22 units represent a total of 84 keys. • 5 free - market residential units. • A sub -grade parking garage with no more than 155 parking spaces, 50 of which dedicated for public use as replacement of lost parking on South Aspen Street and the current Willoughby Park surface parking. 105 spaces are for lodge, commercial, residential, dormitory, and other uses associated with the lodge. • Subgrade utility infrastructure including a ground - source heat system. • A public restaurant and apres ski area. • Fitness facilities. • Lodge guest facilities. • Public access and ski easements. • Ski area operations On Lot 2 — Skiers Chalet Steakhouse: • A relocated and rehabilitated Skier Chalet Steakhouse building containing housing for 16 employees in 8 dormitory-style units. • Subgrade utility infrastructure including a ground - source heat system. On Lot 3 — Lift One Park: • A public park. • One lift tower of the historic Lift One apparatus. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 2 of 42 • Underground parking (part of the subsurface parking garage on Lot 1) • Subgrade foundations and structural support systems, and utility infrastructure including a ground- source heat system. • Public access and ski easements. • Ski area operations On Lot 4 — Willoughby Park: • A public park. • A relocated and rehabilitated Skier Chalet Lodge and pool house buildings containing Historical Society Museum. • The historic Lift One terminal and wheelhouse. • A skier drop off area. • Underground utility systems, inclusive of a ground- source heat system • Public access and easements • Ski area operations ; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development, and Section 26.590, Timeshare Development, a Conceptual approval must be granted by the Aspen City Council Prior to Final Review and was granted by the Aspen City Council via Resolution No. 52, Series of 2009; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.415.070.D., Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, of the Land Use Code, Final approval may be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) at a duly noticed public hearing and was granted for the review of Willoughby Park, Lift 1 Park, and Skier's Chalet Steakhouse by the HPC on November 10, 2006, via Resolution No 14, Series of 2010, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building Department, Fire Protection District, Environmental Health Department, Parks Department, Parking Department , Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, Public Works Department, and the Transportation Department as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, of the Land Use Code, a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority is required and a recommendation for approval by the board was provided at their March 2, 2011, regular meeting; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the proposed Final PUD and Final Timeshare and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Final PUD approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 3 of 42 recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.480 of the Land Use Code, Subdivision approval 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, pursuant to Chapter 26.310 of the Land Use Code, an amendment to the Official Zone District Map (Rezoning) 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, pursuant to Chapter 26.590 of the Land Use Code, Final Timeshare approval 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, pursuant to Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and Section 26.304.060.B.4, Modification of Review Procedures, all other necessary land use reviews, as identified herein, have been combined to be considered 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, such combination of review procedures was done to ensure clarity of review, was accomplished with all required public noticing provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, and the public was provided a thorough and full review of the proposed development; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Application during multiple public hearings in which the recommendations of the Community Development Director and comments from the public were requested and heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission ; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on June 7, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing, considered the Application, received presentation from the Applicant including information in Power Point and physical model forms, considered the comments and recommendations of the Community Development Director, considered comments and recommendations of other members of City staff, considered comments and suggestions offered by members of the public, considered questions and responses by staff or the Applicant, considered comments and discussion by Commission members, and continued the public hearing to June 14, 2011, June 21, 2011, July 5, 2011, July 19, 2011, August 2, 2011, August 2, 2011, and August 23, 2011 at which hearings additional presentations, recommendations, information, questions and answers, public comments and suggestions, and Commission discussion occurred; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on August 23, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Application, found the Project meeting or exceeding all applicable development review standards, and recommended City Council approve the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Application and all necessary land use Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 4 of 42 reviews, as identified herein, by a four to three (4 -3) vote, with the recommended conditions of approval listed hereinafter; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the streets, alleyways and easements to be vacated by this Ordinance, as identified in Section 1.2, which are adjacent to land owned by the Applicant, are not owned in fee by the City, are no longer necessary for any public purpose and, as of this determination, will no longer be in use for public purposes. Furthermore, the Aspen City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the City to vacate the streets, alleyways and d easements identified in Section 1.2 in furtherance of the public benefits associated with the development proposal approved hereby, including the private land areas to be dedicated or devoted to public purposes and community benefits. This Ordinance constitutes a vacation ordinance as described and required by the provisions of C.R.S. 43- 2- 303(1)(a); and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, opened a duly noticed public hearing, considered the Application, received presentation from the Applicant including information in Power Point and physical model forms, considered the comments and recommendations of the Community Development Director, considered comments and recommendations from other members of City staff and referral agencies, considered comments and recommendations of the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, considered comments and suggestions offered by members of the public, considered question responses by staff and the Applicant, considered comments and discussion by fellow Council members; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards of all applicable land use reviews, as identified herein, with conditions, and that the approval is consistent with the goals and elements of the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, as follows: The Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Final Planned Unit Development is hereby granted all necessary land use approvals including Subdivision approval, Rezoning approval, Final Timeshare approval, Growth Management approvals, approval of all associated land use reviews cited herein. The vacation of the streets, alleyways and easements as described in Section 1.2 pursuant to C.R.S. 43- 2- 302(1)(a) is hereby approved and a Development Order for a Site Specific Development Plan for the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD, subject to conditions of approval listed herein is hereby issued. Section 1: Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Plat, Street Alleyway and Easement Vacation Plat, & Final PUD Plans Within one year following the date of final approval by the City Council, the record owners of the underlying lands shall prepare and submit a Subdivision Plat, Street Alleyway and Easement Vacation Plat, and Final PUD Plans for the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD to be reviewed to ensure each item and condition of approval is documented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, and the City Attorney prior to final signatures by the Mayor and recordation. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 5 of 42 1.1 A Subdivision Plat that subdivides the land into the following parcels, as depicted on the Proposed Subdivision Map, attached as Exhibit B. Lift One Subdivision/PUD Lot 1: Lift One Lodge Lift One Subdivision/PUD Lot 2: Skiers Chalet Steak House Lift One Subdivision/PUD Lot 3: Lift One Park Lift One Subdivision/PUD Lot 4: Willoughby Park & Ski Museum The Subdivision Plat shall grant certain perpetual easements as follows: a. A easement to the Aspen Skiing Company, the City of Aspen, and the Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge — Aspen, LLC, or successors and assigns, through Lots 1, 3, and 4 for purposes of constructing, operating, and maintaining a surface lift and other associated improvements necessary for uploading skiers from Willoughby Park to a point south of Lot 1 such that a skier could access Lift lA or a relocated Lift 1A. b. An easement granted to the Aspen Skiing Company, the City of Aspen, and the Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge — Aspen, LLC, or successors and assigns, through Lots 1, 3, and 4 for purposes of constructing, operating, and maintaining a skiing corridor and associated improvements and operations necessary for skiing, including creating and maintaining acceptable snow surface conditions for skiing. c. A perpetual public pedestrian access easement through the center portion of Lot 1 proximate to the auto court and through the southerly portion of Lot 2 allowing access to and from South Aspen Street, Lift One Park, and Willoughby Park. d. A perpetual public recreation, access, and maintenance easement through Lots 1, 3, and 4, including those sections of former Gilbert and Hill Street public rights -of -way directly north and south of Lift One Park, allowing continuous access from Willoughby Park through Lift One Park and through the portion of Lot 1 directly south of Lift One Park. e. A perpetual subsurface easement beneath Lot 3, Lift One Park, and a portion of the Gilbert Street right -of -way for the use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project for purposes of constructing, accessing, operating, using, and maintaining a below grade parking garage and other lodge facilities, foundations and structural support systems, and utility infrastructure including a ground source heat system. f. A perpetual subsurface easement beneath Lots 1 and 3 for the use and benefit of the general public for purposes of accessing and using portions of the parking garage allocated for public use and subject to reasonable restrictions, limitations, and usage fees as outlined in the Lift One Lodge Parking Garage Operations Plan, as may be amended from time to time. g. A six -foot wide "no- build" and maintenance easement on the surface of the property along the east and west property boundaries of Lot #3 and along the western property boundary of Lot #4 for the purposes of accommodating sufficient fire protection and fire code compliance for the proposed improvements on Lot #1 and Lot #2 and to accommodate the periodic maintenance of same. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 6 of 42 1.2 A Street, Alleyway and Easement Vacation/Dedication Plat that accomplishes the following changes to public rights -of -way as depicted on the Proposed Street Vacation/Dedication Map, attached as Exhibit C: a. Vacation of the eastern 37.5 feet of South Aspen Street from the centerline of the Hill Street right -of -way north to the southern edge of the Deane Street right -of -way. b. Dedication to public right -of -way an area within the northwest portion of Lot #4, Willoughby Park, associated with the proposed turn- around and drop -off area at the corner of South Aspen and Deane Street. The final design and exact dimensions of this dedication shall be as depicted and described in the Subdivision Plat. c. Vacation of the northern 25 feet of Hill Street east of the South Aspen Street right -of- way to the eastern boundary of the Eames Addition. d. Vacation of the remaining dedicated portions of the alleyway of Block 9, Eames Addition. e. Vacation of a Utility and Alleyway Easement encumbering the eastern 10 feet of Lot 2 Block 9, Eames Addition, recorded at Book 203, Page 375. £ Vacation or extinguishment of an easement for skiing purposes assigned to the City of Aspen in connection with the conveyance of Lift One Park which affects Parcel B g. Vacation of Gilbert Street from the eastern edge of the South Aspen Street right -of -way east to a line extending south from the boundary between Lots 11 and 12 of Block 8 and connecting to the boundary between Lots 3 and 4 of Block 9, Eames Addition. h. Vacation of Juan Street east of the South Aspen Street right -of -way to the eastern boundary of the Eames Addition. i. Vacation o the alleyway of Block 8, Eames Addition. j. Vacation of the alleyway of Block 7, Eames Addition. 1.3 A Final PUD Development Plan Set that includes: a. An illustrative site plan showing the layout of planned improvements as depicted in attached Exhibit D. b. An architectural character plan showing the massing, fenestration, and materials of each building as generally depicted in attached Exhibit E. c. Dimensioned drawings of all buildings proposed within the project showing dimensions for all zoning parameters in graphic and tabular format. Project dimensions approved for the project are as described in Exhibit F. Heights of building shall be in substantial conformance with those depicted in attached Exhibit G. d. An exterior lighting plan meeting the City's outdoor lighting limitations. e. Illustrative plans for the reconstruction of South Aspen Street and for that section of Deane Street right -of -way between the South Aspen Street and South Monarch Street. The Plan shall be coordinated with the City of Aspen Community Development, Parks, and Engineering Departments. All of the $250,000 allocated to Deane Street Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 7 of 42 improvements by Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2005 (the Chart House contribution) shall be allocated by the City for the design and implementation of these improvements. The skier drop off area planned for the intersection of Deane and South Aspen Streets shall be Option 2 of Exhibit 4 of the civil plan supplemental to the application submitted May 5, 2011, prepared by SGM Engineering and attached hereto as Exhibit H. The design for South Aspen Street north of Deane Street shall be Option 2 of Exhibit 2 of the civil plan supplemental to the application submitted May 5, 2011, prepared by SGM Engineering and attached hereto as Exhibit I. f A Master Utility Plan including profiles and sections acceptable to the City Engineer and the City of Aspen Utilities Department. Some modification of the proposed location of dry utilities may be necessary to avoid over digging of adjacent properties and to avoid access lids within sidewalks. g. A Drainage Plan and report that complies with the City's Urban Runoff Management Plan. Pursuant to review by the City Engineer, the initial drainage concept appears to comply. In addition to site drainage, the project will have to address street drainage. The project proposes to change the hydraulics and capacity of Aspen Street's drainage system. Therefore, the project will be required to install curb, gutter and other drainage control features (such as inlets and piping) on both sides of the street. (Also see infrastructure investment recapture provisions of sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3.) Because the enhanced sanding method for maintaining Aspen street in winter months will have negative impacts on street runoff water quality, the City Engineer will require additional water quality mitigation efforts. The project will need to provide plans for water quality treatment of Aspen Street runoff. The proposed island off of Deane Street and the bulb outs on South Aspen Street may be potential locations for water quality improvements as determined acceptable by the City Engineer and City of Aspen Parks Department. h. An Interpolated Natural Grade Plan. i. A Tree Removal and Mitigation Plan. j. A Landscape Plan for each of the four lots. The landscape plans should be reviewed and approved by The Parks Department with a required signature on the Landscape sheets. To the extent practical, planting strips within the right -of -way should provide 5 feet or more in width between the back of curb and the edge of the sidewalk. Planting strips should be designed with 4 feet of good quality topsoil and growing media. The Applicant will be required to use structural soils where a non - compacted continuous root zone cannot be provided. These soils will be required within the City Rights of Way and/or as may be required on the private property. Structural Soils are applicable in situations where tree rooting potential is insufficient in designated planter areas adjacent to sidewalks. Spacing and type of tree must be coordinated with the Parks Department. Sidewalks shall be designed and built in a manner that reduces the impact to existing trees and roots systems. All sidewalks located within the drip line of trees to be saved shall be built on grade in a manner that allows for the sub -grade prep and sidewalk to float over the roots preventing any excavation into the soil. All work in protection zones is to be Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 8 of 42 accomplished by handwork only, without machines. Plantings with the City right -of -way must be approved by the City Parks Department. All plantings along the edge of private property and the City ROW should be of size and species which will not require major maintenance, pruning, or trimming due to over growth. Tree lighting electrical conduits must comply with City of Aspen standards; The landscape plans shall include provision of irrigation connections that provide adequate pressure and coverage, for landscaped areas of the right -of -way and the two public parks. The City shall be provided adequate access to maintain and control irrigation of the two public parks. The Development Agreement shall address maintenance, control, and responsibilities for the irrigation for these two parks to the satisfaction of the Parks Department. Section 2: Rezoning Contemporaneously with and effective upon the recording of the Subdivision and Street Vacation Plats the Lots within this Subdivision, as described above and reflected in the Subdivision Plat, shall be zoned as follows: Lot 1: Lodge, Planned Unit Development (L -PUD) Lot 2: Lodge, Planned Unit Development, Historic (L- PUD -H) Lot 3: Public, Planned Unit Development, Historic (P- PUD -H) Lot 4: Public, Planned Unit Development, Historic (P- PUD -H) Section 3: Development Agreement Contemporaneously with the recording of the Subdivision and Street Vacation Plats, the record owners of the lands within the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD shall prepare, execute and record a Development Agreement meeting the requirements of Section 26.445.070.0 to be reviewed to ensure each item and condition of approval is documented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, and the City Attorney prior to final signatures by the Mayor and recordation. The Development Agreement shall set forth a description of the proposed improvements and obligations of the parties, including the following: 3.1 The reconstruction of South Aspen Street, Deane Street, and associated sidewalks, curbing and drainage improvements as depicted in the Final PUD Plans. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that the City shall require that in the event property owners adjacent to improved portions of South Aspen Street seek improvements to their property such property owners shall be responsible for their prorata share of the cost of the improvements associated with this section and such costs shall be reimbursed to the Applicant prior to the adjacent property owner receiving their building permit. The prorata share shall be further defined in the Development Agreement but generally will be based upon linear feet of frontage along South Aspen Street as compared to the total amount of property frontage along South Aspen Street. The City of Aspen as owner of property along South Aspen Street shall not be subject to this reimbursement as their prorata share shall be borne by the Applicant. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 9 of 42 3.2 The installation and/or relocation of all utilities depicted and described in the Master Utility Plan of the Final PUD Plans. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that the City shall require that in the event property owners adjacent to improved portions of South Aspen Street seek improvements to their property such property owners shall be responsible for their prorata share of the cost of the improvements associated with this section and such costs shall be reimbursed to the Applicant prior to the adjacent property owner receiving their building permit. The prorata share shall be further defined in the Development Agreement but generally will be based upon linear feet of frontage along South Aspen Street as compared to the total amount of property frontage along South Aspen Street. The City of Aspen as owner of property along South Aspen Street shall not be subject to this reimbursement as their prorata share shall be borne by the Applicant. 3.3 The installation of all drainage facilities depicted and described on the Drainage Plan of the Final PUD Plans. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that the City shall require that in the event property owners adjacent to improved portions of South Aspen Street seek improvements to their property such property owners shall be responsible for their prorata share of the cost of the improvements associated with this section and such costs shall be reimbursed to the Applicant prior to the adjacent property owner receiving their building permit. The prorata share shall be further defined in the Development Agreement but generally will be based upon linear feet of frontage along South Aspen Street as compared to the total amount of property frontage along South Aspen Street. The City of Aspen as owner of property along South Aspen Street shall not be subject to this reimbursement as their prorata share shall be borne by the Applicant. 3.4 Identification of all public improvements to be subject to Section 3.15 Financial Assurance and Performance Bond. This shall include provision of $62,000 for purchase and outfitting a sanding truck for the City of Aspen dedicated for South Aspen Street winter maintenance and a lump sum payment of $20,000 for the annual provision of special sanding material. 3.5 An agreement to provide a public locker facility. The facility shall have a mix of 40 day lockers, 50 seasonal lockers and 40 shoe cubbies all in no less than 900 square feet with direct access to the ski corridor as represented in the Final PUD Application. The seasonal lockers shall be made available to the general public free of charge on a seasonal basis via a valley -wide lottery and daily lockers and cubbies on a first come, first served basis. The seasonal locker rental agreements shall prohibit assignment and subrental. 3.6 An agreement to provide a dedicated maintenance /storage facility of up to 290 square feet (Note: Applicant needs to confirm this with Parks) within the parking garage for the use by the City of Aspen Parks Department for the storage of maintenance vehicles used for maintenance of parks facilities located within the central area of Aspen. 3.7 A Modified Historical Society Ski Museum Lease Agreement between the Historical Society and the City of Aspen is contemplated, with approval from the City Attorney's Office and the Parks Department. The lease agreement will be modified to include an operations plan clearly indentifying and describing the leased areas within Willoughby Park and general Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 10 of 42 operating characteristics of the museum including typical operation, special events, outdoor uses, outdoor displays /exhibits, permitting responsibilities, and maintenance responsibilities of the grounds. The operations plan shall describe public access to the museum, and limits thereto, and provide flexibility for insignificant changes from time to time. The operations plan shall recognize and permit public access to all exterior areas of Willoughby Park, excluding exterior areas restricted for safety, security, or similar considerations, and shall permit pedestrian and skiing access in and through these exterior areas. The operations plan shall specify expectations and responsibilities regarding maintenance of improvements and the grounds, including irrigation, and shall include enforcement provisions and remedies. The operations plan shall permit occasional changes to the operating characteristics of the property and the responsibilities of the parties by approval of the City Manager and the Historical Society Director. If the Manager and the Director cannot agree, the changes shall be forwarded to the Aspen City Council for resolution. Failure to agree on an operations plan shall not unreasonably restrict the Applicant from proceeding with finalizing other required documents or proceeding with other aspects of the development plans. If necessary, this provision may be amended to be finalized prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on the museum building located in Willoughby Park. 3.8 A Skiing & Snow Surface Conditioning and Maintenance Agreement between the Applicant and the City of Aspen to regularly groom and maintain the snow conditions in the surface lift corridor from Willoughby Park to the Lift IA terminal. The agreement shall allow a third party operator to provide this service. This agreement may include operational provisions and usage limitations for safety and functional reasons. This agreement shall not prohibit the making, moving, spreading, and grooming of this area and preparing of an artificial snow base in the ski and surface lift corridor in accord with typical annual snowmaking, terrain opening logistics, and mountain operations. 3.9 A final Transportation Management Plan, approved by the Transportation Director. The conceptual plan is acceptable, as outlined in the April 27, 2011, TDA Traffic Analysis in the TDM section on pages 22 and 23. The following changes are required: a. Provision of a Lift One Lodge Garage Operations Plan for the 50 public parking spaces including pricing, entry /exit technology, residential permit distribution and monitoring, carpool parking distribution and monitoring, enforcement and special event usage. Staff requests the designated parking spaces for carshare and carpool uses be combined to a pool of 11 TDM - related parking spaces that can be utilized for either use as determined appropriate by the City Parking Director every two years during the first 10 years. For example these spaces could become 3 carshare spaces and eight carpool spaces or whichever combination is deemed appropriate at that time. b. A reporting requirement every two years for the first 10 years to include garage usage trends and TDM program participation. At each two -year cycle, elements of the Plan may be changed as needed and as acceptable to the City Transportation Director and the Applicant. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 11 of 42 3.10 Timeshare and Transfer Disclosure Documents. An agreement to incorporate the requirements and restrictions of the City's Timeshare Regulations into the final timeshare instruments, including State requirements, provisions for reserve funds for ongoing maintenance, prohibited practices and uses, limits on marketing techniques, a prohibition against long -term storage of owner vehicles, and prohibitions on offering non -Aspen gifts within a marketing plan. Real estate transfer documents shall include disclosure of the future construction, operation, and maintenance of a surface lift uploading skiers from Willoughby Park to a point south of Lot 1 through the easement described in Section 1.1.a, above, and in the recorded Subdivision Plat. Real estate transfer documents shall include disclosure of the future construction, operation, and maintenance of a skiing corridor and associated improvements and operations necessary for skiing, including creating and maintaining acceptable snow surface conditions for skiing through the easement described in Section 1.1.b, above, and in the recorded Subdivision Plat. Real estate transfer documents shall include disclosure of the public rental requirement for time spans not utilized by owners as cited below in section 3.12 and as included in the Condominium Declaration. 3.11 Occupancy report. After the third and fifth years of lodge operation the Applicant shall be required to provide an occupancy report. The report shall include occupancy rates by month, season, and year and by type of occupant (i.e. owner or general public). This report shall be submitted to the Community Development Director and shall be made available to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. 3.12 A public rental requirement assuring that unused lodge rooms will be available to the general public at market rates so as to encourage their rental. Such rental requirement shall be documented in the Lift One Lodge Condominium Declaration and shall contain a provision that this requirement cannot be eliminated from the Condominium Declaration without approval from the City of Aspen City Council. 3.13 A plan for dormitory operations, including the following: a. A statement by the Applicant that the deed restriction and subsequent rental rate restrictions are being provided voluntarily by the Applicant. b. The template lease for the on -site dormitory units must be reviewed by APCHA along with the initial rental amount as it is not stated in the Guidelines. Once the rental amount is set and stated in the recorded deed restriction, the rent may increase annually by the lesser of 3% or the Consumer Price Index, as such index is stated in the APCHA Guidelines. c. The dormitory units must be rented to qualified employees within Pitkin County and must be qualified through APCHA prior to occupancy. If the owner is unable to fill the units with employees of the development, then the units shall be leased to other qualified employees. The owner must provide signed leases to APCHA within five days of both parties' signatures. If the owner is unable to fill the units with employees of the development, than the units shall be leased to other qualified employees. The leases shall be for at least a six -month period of time. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 12 of 42 d. The owner /operator of the dormitory units must provide and maintain the following amenities for use by the tenants: a common laundry facility in the basement area; eight reserved parking spaces within the Lift One Lodge parking garage; sixteen storage units (one for each resident) in the basement area; a fully functional kitchen and common area. e. The ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the dormitory units. f. Paid memberships to the car -to -go program for dormitory residents for the first 5 years of operation of Lift One Lodge. 3.14 An Employee Generation Audit and Reconciliation. The Applicant shall agree to submit an employee generation audit two years after operations have commenced and reconcile any difference in actual additional employees and mitigated employees. The agreement shall require mitigation of additional employees be provided through the provision of housing units within the Urban Growth Boundary including "buy- downs ", the provision of cash -in- lieu at the rate applicable on the date of payment, the provision of employee mitigation credits for extinguishment, or a combination thereof. The Applicant shall agree that the City may revoke the Certificate of Occupancy for Lift One Lodge as a remedy if after proper notice and remedy to cure the Applicant fails to provide required additional mitigation within a reasonable timeframe or other such remedies as identified in the Development Agreement. Credit for actual additional employees being less than mitigated shall be reconciled by City issuance of employee mitigation credits in the amount of overage. 3.15 Financial Assurances & Performance Bond. The Development Agreement shall include the Applicant's commitment and agreement that before a Building Permit is issued for the Lift One Lodge on Lot #1, the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Director and the City Attorney for review and approval satisfactory evidence that the Applicant has in place sufficient financing to accomplish and complete the construction of the development, including all public improvements required under the Development Agreement and covered by the Building Permit. Such financing may include, without limitation, a construction loan from an institutional lender or lenders and equity capital investments from the Applicant and/or third party investors. Supporting cost estimates for all improvements covered by the requested Building Permit shall be prepared by the Applicant's General Contractor. The Applicant shall further commit and agree that before a Building Permit is issued for the Lift One Lodge on Lot #1, the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Director and the City Attorney for review a copy of a Performance and Payment Bond issued or committed to be issued to the Applicant's General Contractor by an institutional surety company. The Performance and Payment Bond shall name the Applicant as the beneficiary or insured thereunder to grant them a direct right of action under the Performance and Payment Bond in order to construct or finish public improvements, and to complete the construction of the improvements covered by the Bond. Separately, the Applicant shall Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 13 of 42 provide the City of Aspen with an assignment of its rights under the Performance and Payment Bond. 3.16 Site Protection Fund. The Development Agreement shall include the Applicant's commitment and agreement that before a Building Permit is issued for the Lift One Lodge on Lot #1, the Applicant will deposit with a title company ( "Escrow Agent ") the sum of $100,000 in the form of cash or wired funds (the "Escrow Funds ") and will execute an Escrow Agreement and Instructions with the Escrow Agent which recites and agrees as follows: In the event construction work on Lift One Lodge on Lot #1 shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer (`work stoppage') without a cure of such work stoppage after fifteen days (15) days notice by the City and such work stoppage not being a result of any event of force majeure, prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for purposes of protecting and securing the Project site and improvements from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized persons, and for purposes of improving the Project site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other persons. The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to the Applicant upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project. The City shall be a named third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time. 3.17 Cross - References. The Development Agreement shall include cross - references to recorded plats, easements, agreements, and PUD plan sets as described herein. 3.18 Tramway Variance. Documentation of the State Tramway Board variance provided for the surface lift. Section 4: Growth Management and Affordable Housing Obligations 4.1 Reconstruction Credits. City Council Resolution No. 52, Series 2009 confirmed the following reconstruction credits have been verified by the City of Aspen and shall be credited towards the Growth Management Quota System allotment and affordable housing requirements of the Lift One Lodge Project. a. A total of 38 lodging reconstruction credits consisting of 20 lodge units in the former Holland House Lodge; 10 lodge units in the former Skiers Chalet Lodge; and 8 lodge units in the former Skiers Chalet Steak House are credited towards the Lift One Lodge Project's lodging GMQS allotment request. The 38 reconstruction credits equate to 76 lodging pillows for allotment purposes. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 14 of 42 b. One free market residential reconstruction credit from the former Holland House Lodge is credited towards the Lift One Lodge Project's free market residential GMQS allotment request. c. A commercial reconstruction credit of 2,429 square feet of net leasable area from the Skiers Chalet Steak House is credited towards the Lift One Lodge Project's commercial GMQS allotment request. 4.2 Growth Management Allotments. The following growth management allotments are granted to the Lift One Lodge Project: a. 46 lodging bedrooms = 92 lodging pillows. Added to the reconstruction credits, the project represents 84 lodging bedrooms or 168 pillows. b. 4 free market residential allotments. Together with the reconstruction credits, the project contains 5 free - market residences. c. 3,560 square feet of net leasable commercial space. Added to the reconstruction credit of 2,429 square feet, the project contains 5,989 square feet of commercial net leasable space. The gross commercial space is planned to be 7,047 and minor adjustments to the final net leasable figure may occur. d. 8 units of affordable housing situated in a dormitory -style building on Lot #2 and housing 16 employees. The building is approximately 3,184 square feet of floor area plus additional basement space. e. An essential public facility - the ski museum owned and operated by the Aspen Historical Society, a not - for - profit organization. The building and former pool house is approximately 4,320 square feet of floor area with additional basement space. 4.3 Lift One Lodge Employee Generation. The Applicant has committed to provide affordable housing mitigation for 100 percent of the net additional employees generated by the lodging project. This exceeds the 60% requirement. The Project's employee generation is as follows: Employee Mitigation Generation Requirement (FTEs) (FTEs) The Lift One Lodge Project contains 84 lodge bedrooms and has a reconstruction credit of 38 bedrooms. The 23.0 6.9 Project's 46 net new lodge bedrooms are expected to generate 23 employees. The Project will contain 5,989 square feet of net leasable commercial space of which 2,429 is a reconstruction credit from the Skiers Chalet Steakhouse. The Project's 11.27 3.38 additional net leasable commercial space of 3,560 square feet is expected to generate 11.27 employees. The Project will contain 5 free - market residences, one of which is a reconstruction credit from the former Holland Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 15 of 42 House. The City does not have `employee generation' 3.35 3.35 requirements for residences, but does have inclusionary requirements and replacement requirements. The Project's four new free market residences require housing for 2.1 employees. The replacement unit requires housing for 1.25 employees. Additional employees generated 37.62 Minimum mitigation required 13.63 Mitigation required at 100% 37.62 4.4 Lift One Lodge Employee Housing Requirement. A total of 37.62 additional employees are expected to be generated by the Lift One Lodge project and the applicant has represented a commitment to mitigate 100% of this impact. The applicant is providing on -site dormitory units for 16 employees. The additional mitigation of 21.62 FTE's must be provided through the provision of housing units within the Urban Growth Boundary including "buy- downs ", the provision of cash -in -lieu at the rate applicable on the date of payment, the provision of employee mitigation credits for extinguishment, or a combination thereof, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Lift One Lodge. Off -site for -sale units shall be transferred according to the APCHA Guidelines. Off -site rental units shall be available to all qualified employees in Pitkin County, although the applicant shall maintain the right to place qualified employees of the Lift One Lodge. 4.5 Ski Museum Employee Housing Requirement. The Community Development Director finds the Museum meeting the definition of an Essential Public Facility (a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use or benefit of the general public and serves the needs of the community). The Aspen Historical Society is a not - for -profit organization with a mission of enriching the community through preserving and communicating Aspen's remarkable history. They are supported through donations, limited fee services, and the Aspen Historic Park and Recreation District property tax. The facility is proposed to serve educational needs of the community and will be for the use and benefit of the general public. The employee needs for the museum are expected to be handled through existing staffing with minimal additional demand. In light of the project's overall commitment to affordable housing and the significance of preserving and enhancing the Aspen's skiing legacy, the employee housing requirements of the Museum are waived. Section 5: Building Permit Submission Requirements Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 16 of 42 In addition to the standard submission requirements for a building permit, the Applicant shall submit the following: a. A signed copy of the Final HPC Resolution, the final City Council Ordinance and the Development Agreement granting land use approvals. b. A letter from the primary contractor stating that the Final HPC Resolution, the final City Council Ordinance, and the Development Agreement have been read and understood. c. A tree removal plan and a tree protection plan. (See Section 10) d. Detailed civil plans for the reconstruction of South Aspen Street, Deane Street, and associated sidewalks, curbing and drainage improvements as depicted in the Final PUD Plans. e. Detail civil plans for the installation and/or relocation of all utilities depicted and described in the Master Utility Plan of the Final PUD Plans f. Detail civil plans for the installation of all drainage facilities depicted and described on the Drainage Plan of the Final PUD Plans; g. A signage plan for approval by the Community Development, Parking, and Engineering Departments signing both sides of Aspen Street as No Parking Fire Lane; signing the public parking spaces within the turn- around as Emergency and Official Vehicles Only; and specifying location of sign receivers to be placed during construction. Final verbiage for the signs may be different, as determined by said departments. The City shall manage the public rights -of -way and all parking therein to achieve public policy objectives, which shall not prescribe or preclude public parking. The City may change the physical layout, applicable policy, posted signage, or operational practices of the parking at its sole discretion on a temporary or permanent basis. Implementation of certain public parking allowances and restrictions does not guarantee against or preclude future changes to those allowances and restrictions on a temporary or permanent basis. h. Ground Stability monitoring report as defined in Section 9. Section 6: Building Permit Issuance Requirements In addition to the standard requirements for issuance of a building permit, the following conditions must be met prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The Applicant shall pay all impact fees and school lands dedication fees applicable and per the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit submission, payable upon issuance of the full building permit. b. The Applicant shall provide sufficient evidence of financing and a performance bond, as required in Section 3.15. c. The Applicant shall provide site protection escrow funds, as required in Section 3.16. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 17 of 42 d. The Applicant shall provide $150,000 towards the relocation costs of the Willoughby Volleyball Courts. This is in addition to Parks Impact Fees. This requirement must be fulfilled in conjunction with the first building permit for Lot #4 — the Ski Museum, including an Access/Infrastructure permit, and shall represent the complete obligation of the Applicant regarding volleyball relocation. The funds shall be placed in a separate account within the City of Aspen Parks Department so as to assure their use for volleyball court replacement. e. The design for Lift One Lodge shall be compliant with projected mudflow impacts and recommended design accommodations as identified in the mudflow and debris study prepared by the Applicant and reviewed by the City of Aspen Engineering Department. f. Lift One Lodge shall be designed to a "highrise" standard for fire protection and be acceptable to the Fire Marshall and as described in the May 13, 2011, Hughes Associates letter. g. The final application represented that the Lift One Lodge will meet specific energy performance measures and commitments equivalent to LEED Gold certification. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for the Lift One Lodge, sufficient evidence, such as an acceptance of the project registration and a LEED Design Review that indicates the appropriate points are "anticipated" or "pending ", demonstrating the project has been designed to meet this standard shall be presented to the Chief Building Official for acceptance. In case the LEED process has changed prior to submittal, the Chief Building Official shall determine the equivalent requirement for documenting progress toward LEED Gold certification. h. The installation of vegetative protection fencing as required by Section 10. i. Payment of ACSD connection fees per Section 11. Section 7: Construction Management Plan Requirements A construction management plan must be submitted to the City Engineer in conjunction with the first building permit application within the project (excluding permits for repairs and upkeep of existing buildings). The plan must include a planned sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts to the public. If the project is bifurcated into phases, a CMP for each phase will be required. The plan shall describe management of: parking, staging /encroachments, truck and construction traffic during peak traffic and seasonal periods, noise, dust, erosion/sediment pollution, and emergency access during construction. Any Construction Management Plan for work within the project shall accommodate the annual Winternational event operations to the satisfaction of the local FIS event coordinator and the Aspen Skiing Company. This may include work stoppage on event days. Section 8: Measurements Height. Due to the nature of this site and consistent with the approach taken in the review of this project, the maximum height for development within this project, shall be calculated and depicted in the building permit submission as the maximum distance possible measured vertically from interpolated natural grade to the highest point or structure within a vertical plane. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 18 of 42 Architectural and mechanical appurtenances including but not limited to elevator overruns, mechanical equipment, antennas, chimneys, flues, vents, trellises, or similar structures shall be depicted and not extend over ten (10) feet above the specified maximum height limit and be limited to areas fifteen (15) or more feet from the outermost wall edges. Lot Area. For the purposes of calculating Floor Area Ratio of development on Lots #1 and #2, the areas of the vacated rights -of -way shall not be deducted from Lot Area. Floor Area. Due to the nature of this site and consistent with the approach taken in the review of this project, floor area shall be calculated as that floor space within the surrounding exterior walls as measured from the outside face of the nominal structure. For any story that is partially above and partially below interpolated natural grade, only the floor space above the point at which interpolated natural grade crosses the subfloor elevation of that story shall be counted towards floor area. The floor area tabulation shall include a separate measurement for decks, balconies, exterior stairways, gazebos, porches, and similar features. Areas exempt from the calculation of Floor Area shall be those areas identified in the Land Use Code in effect on the day of initial application — November 24, 2006, as applicable to this project. There is no limitation for at -grade landscape terraces. Reversion to Current Code. The above provisions for measuring improvements shall be in effect through the vested period or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each building, plus six months, whichever is later. Upon reversion, all built improvements and dimensions thereof shall be considered conforming. Subsequent improvements shall be measured according to the method in effect at the time of building permit submission for such improvement. Section 9: Ground Stability Monitoring In order to ensure the development does not exacerbate ground movement, the existing inclinometer shall continue to be maintained by the Applicant with bi- annual readings taken through issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Lift One Lodge. The Building Permit application shall include a report on the readings and a subsequent report is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Section 10: Tree Permits and Protection Requirements Tree removal permits are required prior to issuance of a building permit for any demolition or significant site work. The City will issue a removal permit for the large spruce tree located on the corner of Gilbert and S. Aspen Streets. Please contact the City Forester at 429 -2026. Mitigation for removals must be met by paying cash in lieu, planting on site, or a combination of both, pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City Municipal Code. A tree protection plan indicating the drip lines of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site shall be included in the building permit application for any demolition or significant site work. The plan shall indicate the location of protective zones for approval by the City Forester and prohibit excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, and access over or through the zone by foot or vehicle. The plan shall Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 19 of 42 include provision of six inches of mulch within each protection zone. The plan shall include irrigation of the protected vegetation throughout the entire length of the construction. The contractor must supply water to the trees at a rate which is appropriate for proper health. Due to the proximity and nature of the excavations, the protective zones will be required to be twice the width of the drip lines. Excavations within the protection zones shall be minimized and must utilize vertical excavation only, with no over digging. These excavations must be soil stabilized in a manner that prevents over excavation of the site. This will require a one sided pour for all foundation walls located within these protection zones. Areas of roots cutting shall require burlap protection to cover over the cut roots and additional watering in order to keep the soil and burlap moist along the cutting edge. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the protective zone edge for each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site. This fence must be installed and inspected by the City Forester or his/her designee prior to issuance of a building permit for demolition or significant site work. The protective fencing and vegetation protection protocols shall remain in place through -out the construction period or as otherwise allowed to be removed by the City Forester. Section 11: Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Since an upgraded main sanitary sewer line will be required to serve this new development, a "Line Relocation Request" and a "Collection System Agreement" will be required, both of which are ACSD Board of Director's action items. Generally one tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line. A wastewater flow study is required for this project to be funded by the Applicant. The Applicant's engineer must provide the district an estimate of anticipated daily average and peak flows from the project. If the study projects flows exceeding the planned reserve capacity of the existing collection system or treatment system, an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system constraint, the treatment capacity constraint, or both constraints. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. If the study projects flows exceeding the existing capacity of the current collection system or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. In this case, the District will fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for a larger line). The District will not approve a recapture provisions. The final design must provide enough room for all utilities in the re- design of Aspen street to accommodate the main sanitary sewer line relocation according to ACSD specifications. ACSD will administer and construct the proposed new main sanitary sewer line in Aspen Street at the developer's expense. The main sanitary sewer line relocation will have to be extended Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 20 of 42 approximately an additional 200 feet to the south to accommodate the upper traffic circle in Aspen Street, the Ski Company's on mountain sewer line, and the service line for the Shadow Mountain Condominiums. When new service lines are required for existing development the old service lines (3) must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements and prior to all soil stabilization activities. On -site sanitary sewer utility plans require approval by ACSD. On -site drainage and landscaping plans require approval by the district, must accommodate ACSD service requirements and comply with rules, regulations and specifications. Permanent improvements are prohibited in areas covered by sewer easements or right of ways to the lot line of each development. Below grade development will require installation of a pumping system. Plumbing plans for the pool and spa areas require approval of the drain size by the district. Glycol snowmelt and heating systems must have containment provisions and must preclude discharge to the public sanitary sewer system. All clear water connections are prohibited (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) including trench drains for the entrances to underground parking garages. Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all new and remodeled food processing establishments. Oil and Sand separators are required for public vehicle parking garages and vehicle maintenance facilities. The elevator drains must also be plumbed to the o/s interceptor. Plans for interceptors, separators and containment facilities require submittal by the applicant and approval prior to a building permit application. The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Amendments to the above requirements agreed to in writing by the Applicant and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District shall supersede the sanitation requirements listed herein. Section 12: Requirements for Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy on Lift One Lodge Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for Lift One Lodge, the following conditions must be met: a. Completion of the improvements to Deane Street as described in the Final Plat, PUD Plans and Development Agreement. An additional surety at twice the remaining estimated costs of improvements may be accepted by the City to address timing issues related to seasonal construction or other practical issues. b. Approval and filing of a deed restriction for the affordable housing units located in the Skier Chalet Steakhouse building. c. Voluntary transfer of 1 /10 of one percent undivided interest in the dormitory units on Lot #2 to the City of Aspen to the extent determined necessary by the City Attorney. d. Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the affordable housing units located in the Skier Chalet Steakhouse building. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 21 of 42 e. Completion of the Ski Museum building located on Lot #4 to a "white box" or "shell" level of finish. This shall be met either through issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building or by completion of all structural, utility, grading/drainage, access /egress, ADA, fire protection, and fenestration improvements covered by the building permit and all exterior improvements required by the final HPC approval for the Ski Museum. f. Provision of employee housing for 21.62 FTE's through the provision of housing units within the Urban Growth Boundary including "buy- downs ", the provision of cash -in -lieu at the rate applicable on the date of payment, the provision of employee mitigation credits for extinguishment, or a combination thereof. g. Provision of $600,000 to be held in escrow by the City of Aspen for the eventual planned installation of a surface ski lift (a.k.a. platter lift) with an expected terminal facility located in Willoughby Park adjacent to the Skier's Chalet Steakhouse on Lot 2 and taking skiers uphill to the existing or relocated Lift IA terminal. This $600,000 shall be held in a separate account that is specifically earmarked for a planned surface lift connecting Willoughby Park and Lift 1A, as presented in the application. In the event that there is not a surface lift installed within 5 years of the Certificate of Occupancy of the Lift One Lodge, upon agreement between the City Council and the Applicant, such funds may be made available for contribution to an alternative means of transporting skiers from Willoughby Park to Lift 1 A. h. The final application represented that the Lift One Lodge will meet specific energy performance measures and commitments equivalent to LEED Gold certification. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Lift One Lodge, a final tabulation certified by the Project Architect and a Commissioning Report will be submitted that verifies each of the components that were a part of the LEED Design Review noted in Section 6 were completed as a part of the project. This tabulation shall be presented to the Chief Building Official for acceptance. i. Provision of $62,000 to the City for a sanding truck dedicated for winter maintenance of South Aspen Street and a lump sum payment of $20,000 for future sanding materials that are unique to the site. Section 13: Willoughby Park, Lift One Park, & Volleyball The Parks Department and The City of Aspen appreciate the Applicant's commitment to contribute $150,000 towards the relocation costs of the Willoughby Volleyball Courts. Payment of this shall represent the complete obligation of the Applicant regarding volleyball relocation. The City will decommission the volleyball court on Willoughby Park prior to or upon issuance of an Access /Infrastructure permit for Lot #4. Section 14: Environmental Health Department The State of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regard to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement and pool designs. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 22 of 42 Section 15: Water Department The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards. Section 16: Outdoor Spaces Outdoor terraces, balconies, decks, trellised areas, and the pool deck may have umbrellas, canopies, awnings, trellises, fans, portable or integrated heating elements, and similar devices to facilitate comfort and use of these exterior spaces. These spaces shall not be enclosed with temporary or permanent walls /windows or otherwise enclosed as interior conditioned space without an amendment to this approval. Section 17: Public Restaurant and Apres Ski Deck The final application has represented and provided assurance that the entirety of the restaurant located on level 3 and a portion of the apras ski deck located on level 4 will be accessible to the general public and will not be an owners -only amenity. This does not prohibit the applicant or operator from limiting public access from time to time in the normal course of business. This obligation shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. Any changes that limit the public's access to the publicly accessible portions of this amenity (i.e. an owners -only or similarly restricted amenity) shall require a substantial amendment of the PUD. Section 18: Skiers Chalet Steakhouse and Lodge Buildings Prior to redevelopment, the Skiers Chalet Steakhouse (a designated historic landmark) and the Skiers Chalet Lodge (proposed for re -use) shall be maintained in a reasonable state of repair by its owner. Periodic access shall be afforded the City's Historic Preservation staff to view the condition of the buildings and to conduct follow up visits to ensure that the resources are not becoming damaged through neglect. The Skiers Chalet Lodge and Skiers Chalet Steakhouse may continue to be utilized, including necessary upgrades, as housing for working residents prior to relocation and redevelopment of the buildings. The continued temporary use as housing shall not affect a change in use in the properties and shall not be subject to the City's Housing Replacement Program. All building and fire codes must be met. Relocation and rehabilitation of these two structures and the old lift one stanchion within Lift One Park shall be according to the allowances and limitations of the final Historic Preservation Commission approvals. Upon final installation of the original Lift 1 stanchion within Lift One Park, the official zone district map shall be amended to reflect Lot #3 of the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD and this relocated structure as a designated historic landmark. Upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the relocated Skiers Chalet Steakhouse (the dormitory), the official zone district map shall be amended to reflect Lot #2 of the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD and this relocated structure as a designated historic landmark. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 23 of 42 Upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the relocated Skiers Chalet Lodge (the ski museum), the official zone district map shall be amended to reflect Lot #4 of the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD and this relocated structure as a designated historic landmark. Section 19: Development of Surface Lift Approved The proposed future development, construction, operation, and maintenance of a surface lift (a.k.a. platter lift) through Lots 1, 3, and 4 and other associated improvements necessary for uploading skiers from Willoughby Park to a point south of Lot 1 such that a skier could access Lift 1A or a relocated Lift IA is hereby approved subject to a final review by the Community Development Director for sighting of stanchions, sighting of other necessary apparatus, sighting for safe alignment with Lift 1A, confirmation of approval from the State Tramway Board, and the required reviews by the Historic Preservation Officer and the Building Department for issuance of any permits required for its construction. Section 20: Condominiumization Approved Condominiumization of units, including the parking spaces, to define separate ownership interests within a Lot of the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD is hereby approved by the City of Aspen, subject to recordation of a condominiumization plat in compliance with the current (at the time of condo plat submission) plat requirements of the City's Community Development Department. Section 21: Amendments Conversion of fractional lodge units to whole ownership residential units or non - fractional lodge units shall require a substantial amendment. The conversion of whole ownership residential units to fractional lodge units may be approved administratively. Section 22: Representations Preserved All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. The Applicant has represented that the trellis - 1 structure originally proposed on the top floor of the G east building will be removed, as shown in the , P it ,) ` Cn adjacent diagram. The Applicant represented that y, . ' ! li I{ the east wing will not protrude north into the Gilbert c >`( Street Right -of -way, as correctly diagrammed in Exhibit D. Section 23: Vested Rights Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011 Page 24 of 42 The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site - specific development plan vested for a period of ten (10) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly submit all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within one year of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site - specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of ten (10) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lift One Lodge Subdivision/Planned Unit Development located on property commonly known as 233 Gilbert Street, 710 South Aspen Street, 720 South Aspen Street, Willoughby Park, and Lift One Park, City of Aspen, Pitkin County Colorado, as more fully described in City of Aspen City Council Ordinance No. Series 2011. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 24: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 25: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof'. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 25 of 42 Section 26: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 27: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 26 day of September, 2011, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, City hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 28: This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption. [signatures on following page] Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 26 of 42 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12 day of September 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Exhibit A — Property Descriptions Exhibit B — Proposed Subdivision Map Exhibit C — Proposed Street Vacation/Dedication Map Exhibit D — Proposed Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit E — Proposed Architectural Character Plan Exhibit F — Proposed Dimensional Allowances and Limitations Exhibit G — Proposed Heights Exhibit H — Design for Deane Street Skier Drop -off Exhibit I — Design for South Aspen Street Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 27 of 42 Exhibit A Legal Descriptions The subject property is generally located on the east side of South Aspen Street south of Deane Street. The subject property consists of five parcels and the rights of way to be vacated in connection with this Application described as follows: Parcel A is legally described as Lots 1, 2, 13, and 14, Block 9 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, including the portion of the vacated alley between Lots 1 and 14 and the west 20 feet of Lots 2 and 13. Parcel A is the former site of the Holland House Lodge, which was demolished in 2008. Parcel B is legally described as Lots 4 and 11, less the west twenty -two feet thereof, and Lots 5 through 10, Block 9 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, including the portion of the vacated alley between said Lots. Parcel B is currently the site of the Skiers Chalet Lodge. Parcel C is legally described as Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 8 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen. Parcel C is located adjacent to South Aspen Street on the north side of Gilbert Street. Parcel is currently the site of the Skiers Chalet Steak House. Parcel D is legally described as Lots 3 and 12, and the west 22 feet of Lots 4 and 11, Block 9 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, including a portion of the undeveloped alley between said lots. Parcel D is commonly known as Lift One Park and is owned by the City of Aspen, who has consented to the application. Parcel E is legally described as Lots 1 through 14, Block 7 and Lots 1 through 3, Block 8 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, including the undeveloped portion of Juan Street between Blocks 7 and 8 and the undeveloped alley within Blocks 7 and 8. Parcel E is commonly known as Willoughby Park and is owned by the City of Aspen, who has consented to the application, and is leased in whole to the Aspen Historical Society, who has consented to the application. The following is a summary of the street vacations and dedications associated with the Lift 1 Lodge proposal: • Vacation of the eastern 37.5 feet of the South Aspen Street right -of -way from the centerline of the Hill Street right -of -way north to the southern edge of the Deane Street right -of -way. • Dedication to public right -of -way an area within the northwest portion of the proposed Lot #4, Willoughby Park, associated with the proposed turn- around and drop -off area at the corner of South Aspen and Deane Streets. The final design and exact dimensions of this dedication shall be as depicted and described in the Subdivision Plat. • Vacation of the northern 25 feet of Hill Street east of the centerline of South Aspen Street to the eastern boundary of the Eames Addition. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 28 of 42 • Vacation of the remaining dedicated portions of the alleyway of Block 9, Eames Addition. • Vacation of a Utility and Alleyway Easement encumbering the eastern 10 feet of Lot 2 Block 9, Eames Addition, recorded at Book 203, Page 375. • Vacation of Gilbert Street right -of -way from the eastern edge of the South Aspen Street right -of -way east to a line extending south from the boundary between Lots 11 and 12 of Block 8 and connecting to the boundary between Lots 3 and 4 of Block 9, Eames Addition. • Vacation of the Juan Street right -of -way east of the South Aspen Street right -of -way to the eastern boundary of the Eames Addition. • Vacation of the alleyway of Block 8, Eames Addition. • Vacation of the alleyway of Block 7, Eames Addition. • Vacation or extinguishment of an easement for skiing purposes assigned to the City by the Aspen Skiing Company in connection with the conveyance of Lift One Park which affects a portion of Parcel B. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 29 of 42 Exhibit B Proposed Subdivision Map Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 30 of 42 Exhibit C Proposed Street Vacation/Dedication Map t=1 i ere 8 k ®2 § • h = 2 \ § ' 0 to CP 2 2— - i ! ! w « !%#! 2 k \\ , .h# * ° \ \. ` ROSS a q $ -- ' / \ ƒ ,1 y § . | ! b § . : ) ) I------f- ) \: . — , p_ .. / \/ ' 2 . R i »� } « : $i , I ° B © : • ) S ) R x . 1.. > ! || '' » ' . R R , ice% § :,; ,a. . - - -- - « « w U ( " � } � / 4 , ` *& 62, L4 \ j y ƒ: < . . 21 \ CA. �. . . . . . , Ar ( } § ! ) § \ o & - \ - Ordinance No aSeries 2011 Page ,z< Exhibit D Illustrative Plan , t. • . . . • 1_\ \ ' *-..-: . ." .' --..- ..' ..- •-: 4st. . .., ... .....e.i V." 1 _,. 1 i . ........- .t ''—'■ r. " . _ ' IV 1.N. i.e. , .._,..., . :.., :.,.....,. . ,..• 5 . ) •J a - ' ' I . . _ .-,... , . .. .. _ 4100,1141 -...,4 I . .i-,., , , 1 - a . • • - . ' ' I ,„., I -.•:...... .: .1,11' . 4 11 , ll i ' 1 . j , 110 , maw 1 ft II \._ .. - — ' i A ,...., - 7 • ' . I •-• ., i -:.... i , , . ' . . ••■■ L .. , . diki Nir • ' ( ■61.1 - - i I i 1 Ali - . . •V-+ , //'*-- N . . iii . Ill ( ' .. - '‘. • 1 N. ri ' I I " - -. ' J Wat- / .......... t o.i' - :. • ' .. . i • ' ..-.., • " • t .. .-- ---,"" , . . ,.."..* _ _..; ,I __„,.... i ( ' 1 J - , ,,,,,,,..• Ora...-r N \ • 11 . .: .. ... - Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 32 of 42 1 i Exhibit E Approved Architecture Ili a ,-.,_ - livic . - -, - .� } —. � .: RLl i f t i - 1 i 7 � e., ---1. -'b lam. „ ` { . ; y_ = i _. _ — — 1, I '. , 7ii• -6 West Elevation of West Wing r — '; • 1. _, f ,, 4411 T ,.' _ 1,.. . [ 1 •• ♦ . y ., -•/ a ilt : ' -, '4(•”. r . mo w a . f . 7 �, N t i. , . A, . ! v: a. t . ii Ir r i� ` 1 ; 1 View of Lodge from southwest i -7 , __ _i, _J___ , 1 1 .--lit`//\.)S7\j- It ''II 1 1 ' 41■■■■ I --- .__E _.___ .- _. .1 . I . .4.,......-.--.. —1 Hi n'r 11 11 11 G - Architectural Floor plan of lodge unit and lock -offs Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 33 of 42 Exhibit F Approved Dimensions i l �" 4; � ;i x. 's'e'.C.�f N w> , 1� '''�L � , vw p, -. Lift One Lodge, Lot 1 Minimum Lot Size 41,258 sq. ft. 3,000 sq. ft. Lot Area for Density 19,296 Site Specific Lot Area for Floor Area 38,975 Site Specific Lodge Unit Density Standard 537 sq. ft. of lot area per unit See Note Below* Minimum Lot Area per 3,859.2 sq. ft. 3,000 sq. ft. dwelling Unit (free market) Minimum Required Lot Area 19,296 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft. (sq. ft.) Minimum Lot Width 265 ft. 30 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback East Wing: 1 ft. 5 West Wing: 4 ft. East Wing North: 1 ft. East Wing South: 1 ft. Minimum Side Yard Setback 5 West Wing North: 2 ft. West Wing South: 3 ft. Minimum Rear Yard Setback East Wing: 12 ft. 5 West Wing: 1 ft. Maximum Height Per height plan as represented Sloped Roofs: 38 Ft. in Exhibit G Flat Roofs: 42 Ft. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. P age 34 o f 42 's ! 2 ms -u s �` Y 2 '?t { . a » x z a t ` p Lodge Units: 1.16:1, or Lodge Units: 2:1, or 75,848 45,142 sq. ft. sq. ft. Commercial Uses: 0.17:1, or Commercial Uses: 0.25:1, or 6,552 sq. ft. 9,481 sq. ft. Floor Area Ratio Non -Unit Space: 0.32:1, or Non -Unit Space: 0.5:1, or 12,304 sq. ft. 18,962 sq. ft. Free Market Residential Free Market Residential Units: 17% of total lodge Units: 25 %, or 19,252 floor area, or 13,013 sq. ft. Pedestrian Amenity Space No Requirement* No Requirement Lodge Units: 42 Spaces Lodge Units: 0.5 Spaces/Unit Commercial Uses: 6 Spaces Commercial Uses: 1 Space /1,000 Sq. Ft. Net Free Market Residential: 5 Leasable Spaces Project Parking* Residential Uses: 1 Affordable Housing Units: 8 Space/Unit Spaces Public Parking: 50 Spaces Lodge Members: 44 Spaces Skiers Chalet Steak House Affordable Housing, Lot 2 Minimum Lot Size 3,562 sq. ft. Established via PUD Lot Area for Density None See Note Below Lot Area for Floor Area 3,562 See Note Below Minimum Lot Area per 445 sq. ft. (8 Units) Established via PUD Dwelling Unit Minimum Lot Width 95 ft. Established via PUD Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 35 of 42 :7 11 ,r 3 m fr x s '^ k Minimum Front Yard Setback 5 ft. Established via PUD Minimum Side Yard Setback North Side Yard: 10 ft. Established via PUD South Side Yard: 30 ft. Minimum Rear Yard Setback None Established via PUD Maximum Height 33 ft.'" Established via PUD .89:1, or 3,184 sq. ft. Established via PUD Floor Area ratio Pedestrian Amenity Space Remainder of lot Established via PUD Aspen Historical Society Museum and Willoughby Park, Lot 4 Minimum Lot Size 38,356 sq. ft. Established via PUD Minimum Lot Width 190 ft. Established via PUD Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 ft. Established via PUD Minimum Side Yard Setback East Side Yard: 20 ft. Established via PUD West Side Yard: 125 ft. Minimum Rear Yard Setback 25 ft. Established via PUD Maximum Height 31 ft. Established via PUD .11:1, or 4,320 sq. ft.* Established via PUD Floor Area ratio Pedestrian Amenity Space Remainder of lot Established via PUD Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 36 of 42 {r € cue , +Pi , + �` > n ff + a�"F r `u. ,r4 "F -4-;" Notes: • Lodge Unit Size Standard: The Applicant is requesting a Special Review for the average lodge unit size. • Floor Area Ratio, Lot 1 and 2: For the purposes of calculating a Floor Area Ratio on Lots #1 and #2 that more accurately represents the numerical relationship between land area and floor area, the area of vacated rights of way have not been deducted from Lot Area. This calculation is not intended to modify the definition of Lot Area as set forth in the Land Use Code. • Pedestrian Amenity: This site is outside of the area requiring pedestrian amenity space. • Project Parking: The project parking section of this table reflects the entire project, not just Lot 1. • Maximum Height: The heights for the Skiers Chalet Steakhouse Affordable Housing and Aspen Historical Society are taken from the ridge of the roof • Floor Area Ratio, Lot 4: This includes both the Museum and pool house. Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011 Page 37 of 42 Exhibit G Height Representations r `� p - ,_ �� --n 1- 40' • 11---; . I ,1 =� �,_ 1 it �I ell_ _ -- - - /s � rl i i� I Y.� - �1 i. � i - I 3 ' .,.0,, �1 — ' 0 _ 11 1 1 it . � 42 East Side of East Wing 42' 48' ____ i. R grn N ; , . in fl11 all I 1 i t T 4 West Side of West Wing Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 38 of 42 51.50 ft 49.50 ft li 'a l = !_ _ li i* 44. ft 1 f � I ■ tt 40.40 ft _( 1Y "' { I f"I! 171 -Li 43.50 ft 4 Heights: East Wing 42.00 ft 53.40 ft 46.90 ft \ 1 43.90 ft 3700ft - • 1 20 ft . . 4 /:a5 ft _ . ' , �� � { • {_ ��' ' '�1 i Ini 6 I', � S. i i. t u W 1 aI: T.ii: - , 1 - 1 'i, n I�i1 4 w ' , � Heights: West Wing Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011 Page 39 of 42 F f. .- -r 1 i Chimney soof Elevator Shaft Roof' Exit5ltairwa Chimney , I 4 AI i y -. A} T ` S ir P _. _ 4 Portions of East Wing above 54' feet • Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 40 of 42 Exhibit H Skier Drop Off Area Deane Street CI [graphic needs to be updated] Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 41 of 42 Exhibit I Design for South Aspen Street [graphic needs to be updated] Ordinance No. 28, Series 2011. Page 42 of 42 EXHIBIT C LIFT ONE LODGE FINAL REVIEW REVIEW CRITERIA & FINDINGS FINAL REVIEW CRITERIA PUD pg. 2 Timeshare Lodge Development pg.17 Subdivision pg. 22 Growth Management - Affordable Housing pg. 26 Growth Management - Essential Public Facility pg. 28 Growth Management - Remodeling or Replacement of Existing Commercial or Lodge Development pg. 30 Growth Management - Replacement of Demolished Multi - Family Residential Units pg. 31 Growth Management - Incentive Lodge Development pg. 32 Conditional Use for Restaurant/Bar, Dormitory Units and Commercial Parking Facility pg. 35 Amendment to the Zone District Map (Rezoning) pg. 38 Commercial Design Review pg. 42 Special Review pg. 47 Mountain View Plane pg. 49 Condominiumization pg. 51 Rights -of -Way Vacations pg. 52 Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 1/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: PUD A development application for PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements (staff findings follow each requirement): A. General requirements. I. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Staff Finding Staff finds the proposal is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Outlined below is the project's consistency with applicable individual goals in the AACP. Managing Growth The community goals listed in the AACP include: • "Provide for a `critical mass' of permanent local residents by providing a limited number of affordable housing units within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary." The proposal houses 100% of the additional employees generated by the development. This exceeds the City's Land Use Code standard requirement of 60% mitigation and far exceeds the 30% mitigation requirement for this type of lodging. The proposal includes housing units for on -site workers, assisting with the long -term viability of the lodge operation, and is committed to meeting the remaining requirement through .off -site house which could include use of the recently- created housing credit system. Staff finds the proposal meets this goal of the AACP. • "Contain development with the creation of the Aspen Community Growth Boundary..." The proposed development is within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary. Staff finds the project meets this goal of the AACP. • "Foster a well- balanced community through integrated design that promotes economic diversity, transit and pedestrian friendly lifestyles, and the mixing of people from different backgrounds." The project creates spaces for free - market and deed - restricted residences, lodging opportunities, lodging associated commercial, improved access to skiing, a ski museum, and enhanced pedestrian connections. The proposal includes a range of economic diversity — space for a non - profit, affordable housing, free - market housing, and market rate lodging. The uses are integrated into the site design in a manner that creates pedestrian places and opportunities for locals and tourists to integrate. Staff finds the project meets this goal of the AACP. • "We should endeavor to bring the middle class back into our community. We should discourage sprawl and recognize its cost to the character of our community, our open spaces and our rural resources as well as the fiscal expenses associated with the physical infrastructure of sprawl" The base of Aspen Mountain is an appropriate place for high density lodging development. This area is within walking distance to all the City's attractions and connections to the region's transit services. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 2/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The proposal does not contribute to sprawl and, by housing many of the employees on -site, attempts to limit additional sprawl. The proposal will also enhance a forgotten neighborhood. This "side" of Aspen Mountain accounts for only 3% (approx.) of the daily initial uplift of Aspen Mountain. Redevelopment of this area will bring back some vitality of this once popular area, highlight the area's historic resources, and utilize the area's public infrastructure. Staff finds the proposal meets this goal of the AACP. Transportation The community goals listed in the AACP include: • "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..." The area now has very limited pedestrian infrastructure. In fact, one of the current obstacles to the use of Lift 1A is the absence of proper pedestrian connections — the area is not currently convenient for pedestrians. The proposal focuses on accessibility by providing pedestrian infrastructure where none exists today, potential for a surface lift providing access to Lift 1A, public parking, automobile drop -off zones, and shuttle service for lodging guests. Staff finds the proposal meets this goal of the AACP. • "Reduce the adverse impacts of automobiles on the Aspen area." The development includes underground parking for tenants and residents of the development and public parking for visitors, skiers, lodge guests, and restaurant patrons. The project provide enough parking for the businesses to be commercial successful without inducing unnecessary traffic. The area's surface parking will be removed (replaced underground) and the aesthetics will be substantially enhanced by this change as the streetscape will not be dominated by autos. The location of the public parking reduces the impact these cars would otherwise have on the surrounding community if they were required to park at street level in the neighborhood. Staff finds the proposal meets this goal of the AACP. • "New development should take place only in areas that are, or can be served by transit, and only in compact, mixed -use patterns that are conducive to walking and bicycling" The proposed development is served by existing transit (one half -block away) and is composed of compact mixed -uses conducive to walking and bicycling. The site is ideal for utilizing existing transit and encouraging walking/bicycling. Staff finds the proposal meets this goal of the AACP. The intent of the Transportation section states: • "The community seeks to provide a balanced, integrated transportation system for residents, visitors, and commuters that reduced congestion and air pollution. Walking, Bicycling and transit use is promoted to help us reach that goal." The proposed development promotes the use of transit and a pedestrian friendly lifestyle. The development is within walking distance to the center of town, shopping, recreation, and regional transit. Deane Street is proposed to be enhanced as a pedestrian friendly connection to other lodging and the Gondola Plaza. The existing Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 3/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council pedestrian experience along South Aspen Street is poor and this development will improve the situation by providing sidewalks, landscape improvements, interesting architecture and pedestrian- oriented commercial space. Staff finds the proposal meets the intent of the Transportation section in the AACP. Housing The community goals listed in the AACP include: • "Encourage development to occur within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and emphasize `good city form'. " The project is within the Aspen Growth Boundary and within the Aspen infill area. The development also promotes "good city form" by focusing development within areas already served with infrastructure. By providing additional lodging at the base of Aspen Mountain more visitors can be within walking distance of downtown Aspen, thereby minimizing the resort-wide reliance on the automobile. Staff finds the proposal meets this goal of the AACP. • "The public and private sectors should work together to ensure success in providing affordable housing" And "Encourage greater participation by the private sector in developing affordable housing." The project includes affordable housing on -site with the provision of dormitory style housing units. The project has committed to housing 100% of the additional employees generated by the development, exceeding the City's standard of 60% and far exceed the 30% requirement for lodging of this type. Staff find the proposal meets these two AACP goals. • "New affordable housing projects should reinforce and enhance a healthy social balance for our community and enhance the character and charm of Aspen." The proposal provide short-term rental housing for lodge employees, a critical need in the community, by retrofitting an historic structure — the Skier Chalet Steakhouse. This housing will relate well to the existing neighborhood structures, maintain historic reference to the original base of Aspen Mountain, and provide much needed rental housing. Staff finds the project meets this goal of the AACP. Economic Sustainability The intent of the Economic Sustainability section includes: • "Maintain a healthy, vibrant and diversified year -round economy that supports the Aspen area community..." The proposal includes much need lodging at the base of Aspen Mountain. This project will partially make up for the dramatic loss in bed base that the community has experienced over the past 10 years and will help sustain Aspen's resort and year -round local community. The significant provision of affordable housing will help sustain the social infrastructure of Aspen as well as local businesses. Staff finds the project meets the intent of this section of the AACP. • "Enhance the wealth - generating capacity of the local economy while minimizing the rate at which cash flows through the local economy and limiting the expansion of the physical size of the community." The project occurs within the Aspen Growth Boundary and attempt to maintain the region's bed base and tax generating commercial uses within the City limits. The development will increase the local economy's wealth - generating capacity by providing commercial and lodging uses Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 4/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council within the existing footprint of the community. The project also houses a non - profit (the ski museum), a significant amount of affordable housing, and a restaurant expected to be popular with visitors and locals. The project does not increase the physical size of the community. Staff finds the proposal meets the intent of this section of the AACP. Parks, Open Space, & the Environment • "Seek opportunities to discourage sprawl in order to preserve open spaces between communities. Encourage infill projects that integrate more housing into the existing urban fabric." The development enhances access to Aspen Mountain, the community's primary recreation facility, and provides functional open space within the project. The project discourages sprawl by effectively utilizing land within the existing footprint of the community to achieve community goals for lodging, affordable housing, recreation, historic preservation, and mountain access in a manner that re- vitalizes and visually enhances the neighborhood. Staff finds the proposal meets this section of the AACP. Design Quality The intent of the Design Quality section includes: • "Ensure the character of the built environment in Aspen is maintained through public outreach and education about design quality, historical context, and the influence of existing built and natural environments." This project addresses this goal by providing a home for a skiing museum. This idea has been on the "drawing board" for many years as a way to sustain understanding of the community's skiing heritage. Chalet architecture was prevalent in Aspen during the early years of skiing in North America. The proposal includes retrofitting of two chalet buildings — one for affordable housing and the other is being restored to house the museum. Staff finds the proposal meets the goals and intent of this section of the AACP. The community goals listed in the AACP includes: • "Retain and encourage an eclectic mix of design styles to maintain and enhance the special character to Aspen." The proposal integrates a traditional chalet style of architecture with the skiing museum and the former Chalet Steakhouse. The site plan and architecture represents a high quality design that will work with and enhance Aspen's unique character. There are multiple buildings and the mass is broken up through facade fenestration and the use of different materials. This helps the project relate to Aspen's historic development pattern. Staff finds the proposal meets the goals and intent of this section of the AACP. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 5/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The existing character of the surrounding area is a mix of short-term lodging, commercial accessory to lodging uses, full -time free - market housing, full -time affordable housing, part-time free - market housing, recreational facilities, and ski area operations. While there has been some building refurbishment activity in the vicinity, the South Aspen Street area has not seen significant reinvestment in many years. The proposal provides a similar mix of uses — lodging, accessory commercial, free - market and affordable residential — with the addition of a non - profit operation of the ski museum. Staff believes the addition of the ski museum is compatible with the neighborhood as Lift 1 is the birthplace of skiing in Aspen. A museum celebrating skiing fits with this theme. In addition, the museum at this location was the subject of a successful public vote in 1991 indicating public acceptance of the concept. Staff believes the proposed uses are consistent and compatible with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Staff believes that this development will not adversely affect the ability for surrounding properties to develop in the future. In fact, this project may actually enhance the opportunities for redevelopment by dramatically improving the appearance and vitality of this area of town. Additionally, the project will upgrade wet and dry utilities throughout the development allowing for easier connection by future users. The Project is proposing to improve the storm water mediation that presently is unchecked on South Aspen Street. The project will reconstruct South Aspen Street improving safety, function, and access to surrounding properties. The Project will also create an improved open space through the connection of Lift One and Willoughby parks as well as public useable public parking. These improvements to basic infrastructure will positively affect the developability of the area and not hamper or adversely affect future development possibilities of surrounding properties. Staff believes this proposal meets this criterion. 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The proposal requires allotments for lodging, affordable housing, and commercial space. The allotments have been requested and are available. Staff supports the allotment requests finding the proposal in compliance with the growth management criteria. If all of the requested growth management actions are approved, this criterion is met. If the growth allotments are not granted, the project does not meet this criterion. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 6/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. 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 sues and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the . subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Generally, Staff finds that the proposed dimensional standards are appropriate for the site for the above characteristics, as follows: a.) See discussion from 1.A. above. b.) The project's proposed massing and height responds the slopes of the site by stepping up the hillside and placing larger portions of the buildings to the center of the project so as to minimize the visual effects. Maximum allowable floor area on Lot 1 is 47,760 after slope reduction and subtraction of proposed vacated right -of -way. Subtracting the vacated right -of -way substantially reduces the lot area and the proposed of 77,010 represents nearly a 4:1 FAR. Assuming the vacated right -of -way as a part of the parcel, the proposed of 77,010 represents a 2:1 FAR, well under the limitations of the Lodge zone. c.) Most of the proposed building site has already been impacted by existing or prior development. One large tree will be affected to accommodate a portion of a building. This change was requested by the City during conceptual review to accommodate a ski corridor and staff believes this is a reasonable trade -off. Staff believes this criterion is met. d.) Any development on this property would likely increase the above impacts; however, Staff is comfortable that all of these impacts are adequately mitigated. Noise is regulated by city ordinance; trips are expected to increase, but stay within the existing road capacity. Many visitors will arrive to town by airplane and be brought to the lodges by shuttle where the convenient location will allow walking to downtown and to the ski area. If guests do drive, all parking is internal to the site underground. Regarding Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 7/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council impacts to historical resources, the Skiers Chalet Steakhouse is listed as an historic property is proposed for rehabilitation with HPC approvals. The Skier's Chalet Lodge was an "ordinance 48" building (the Ord 48 regulations no longer apply) and is proposed to be relocated, rehabilitated as a ski museum and historically designated, voluntarily. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The scale and massing of the proposed lodge is compatible with that of the neighborhood. In fact, many of the hotels (St. Regis, Grand Hyatt, Little Nell) in this neighborhood are larger. There are several condo buildings in the surrounding area that are smaller than the proposal. While the proposal is higher and covers a larger land area, staff does not consider this to be incompatible with the neighborhood character. The project is broken into several structures, providing useable open space between buildings and an appropriate level of site coverage for the area. The proposal is appropriate for a lodge located on the south side of Durant Avenue and in -line with the character of this area. Staff finds this criterion met. 3. The appropriate number of off - street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non - residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Staff finds the proposed amount of parking to be adequate to serve the needs of the development. The proposal satisfies the underlying zone district's parking requirements and provides additional parking for guests, day skiers, and the public. Given the proximity of the site to the commercial core, the ski area and transit connections and considering that many guests of facilities such as this arrive without a car, staff believes that the parking will be sufficient to meet the demand. Staff finds the proposal meets this review criterion. 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 Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 8/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Adequate public facilities either already exist or will be upgraded at the owner's sole expense in order to meet the expected demand. South Aspen Street is a steeply pitched street with wintertime challenges. The City Engineer and the Fire Marshall are confident that the enhanced aggregate surface and winter maintenance will provide adequate and safe access to this project and for fire protection. To enhance fire protection, the structures will contain complete fire sprinkler systems. Staff believes that no density reductions are necessary. 5. 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 mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY Staff believes the site is suitable for development. Improvements the area's drainage are necessary and are part of the development proposal. A requirement to monitor the slope u stability of the area to detect significant movement is recommended as an approval + condition with ongoing monitoring before and during construction as necessary. The ' `�� y. - City Engineer is recommending 3 feet of freeboard at the base of the south facade structure to mitigate mudflow impacts. Staff believes that the proposal satisfies this criterion, with this condition of approval. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 9/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 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 area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal serves more than one goal of the AACP — affordable housing, economic diversity, historic preservation, and open space and recreation goals. No increase in the amount of density is proposed. Staff finds this criterion met. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The site is located near the base of Shadow Mountain, but is not proposing to impact the mountainside in any way. There are unique historic ski lift apparatus proposed for preservation and enhancement along with a museum focused on Aspen ski heritage. This aspect of the project is a significant public benefit. Staff feels that the redevelopment of the site with lodging, residences, a restaurant, and underground parking will be an enhancement to the neighborhood. Staff finds this criterion met. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The structures on the site have been planned and organized around open space, significant vistas, and the "ski- back" corridor. This provide the potential for a future ski lift along the previous lift one alignment. The ski -back corridor also provides a significant public benefit and benefit to surrounding properties. The site plan permits an important view up Aspen Mountain along the original lift alignment. The site planning for the ski museum purposefully allows for event space for formal or informal gatherings and passive and active recreation. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 10/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The structures are oriented to public streets, the ski corridor, the base of Lift 1A, or to small outdoor gathering or restaurant seating areas. There are multiple points to engage pedestrians, skiers, and provide for interesting streetscapes. The buildings include orientation to the sidewalk and the street, providing what staff believes will be a enjoyable pedestrian experience. Staff finds this criterion met. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The Fire Marshal has reviewed the plans and has stated that there are no major concerns with the proposal. The Fire Marshal did suggest a series of minor changes and the applicant has accommodated those requests (condition). A final review by the Fire Marshal is required prior to issuance of a permit. Emergency and service vehicle access to Aspen Mountain is maintained with this plan. Four parking spaces within the proposed turn- around (June 7th amended site plan). These spaces are proposed to replace existing spaces in the ROW predominantly used by the Shadow Mountain Condominiums. Given the operational demands at the base of the ski area, staff believes these spaces should be reserved for emergency vehicles, ambulance, etc. as well as vehicles associated with ski area operations or special events. Staff suggests these spaces be signed for emergency and official vehicles only (condition). All structures will be fire sprinkled for further safety. With two conditions of approval, staff finds this criterion met. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The Building Department has reviewed the proposal and believes the project complies , - with all applicable accessibility requirements. A detailed review is required prior to h 1 issuance of a permit. Adequate pedestrian access is being provided with the addition of ` 1 . 3 9 detached sidewalks. This should greatly increase access and safety for pedestrians who currently walk in the street. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 11/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council Site drainage from the properties is proposed to be handled by directing drainage into an extension of the existing storm drain facilities located in Durant Avenue and to the City's storm drainage system. This plan will accommodate the City's desire to 4.b , minimize sedimentation -laden drainage from leaving the site and significantly improve the existing condition which allows sediment -laden • surface drainage from the mountainside to sheet drain across the road and into the downtown. A drainage plan will be required to be filed with the final plat and a detailed drainage plan review is required prior to issuance of a permit. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. 7. For non- residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The plan allows a "ski- back" corridor along the original Lift One alignment. This is a significant public benefit of the project as this corridor is partially on private land and has been compromised with various physical intrusions over the years, including a street through one section. The plan also provides funds for a potential future surface lift within this corridor, further enhancing skier access to Aspen Mountain. The entrances to the lodges are well designed and allow for off - street loading/unloading as well as valet service. The ski museum incorporates an outdoor space which can be used for programmed events or informal gathering. Apres ski opportunity exists with this plan, allowing locals and guests to get their party on. Staff finds this criterion met. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 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 area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposed lodge will be extensively landscaped with vegetation appropriate to the climate. Several trees will need to be removed to allow for return skiing to Willoughby Park. Only one tree is significant and this tree must be removed to accommodate the building footprint changes made during the conceptual review to permit a ski -back corridor. All removed trees will be mitigated per Code requirements. Staff believes this is an acceptable trade -off. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 12/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less- intensive mechanical systems. 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Staff finds that the proposed architectural character will be an enhancement to the visual character of the neighborhood. This project will dramatically update the design quality of the neighborhood, reflecting an appropriate ski -resort style in an established neighborhood context. The design of the lodge clearly represents the lodge use, while the two chalet buildings provide historic context compatible with their respective affordable housing and museum uses. The lodge will be designed to LEED Gold standards, which is very significant given the rigorous design and operating requirements. This will be Aspen's first LEED -rated lodge and one of only a few in the country. Staff finds this criterion met. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access way's is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up- lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 13/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The project is committed to meeting the City's outdoor lighting standards. Staff and the applicant believe this is achievable and expect no major issues. The proposed lighting pan appears to meet the City's requirements. An exterior lighting plan will need to be `` recorded with the final PUD plan set, which is typical for PUD projects, and a final check occurs during building permit review and site inspections. With a proposed condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, 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 park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, WITH A CONDITION PI Willoughby Park and Lift One Park are already owned by the City. A portion of Lot #1 — Lift One Lodge — is proposed as a public ski and pedestrian easement, more than E -; meeting this standard. Staff has proposed a condition of approval that an operations agreement be submitted as part of the final development agreement. With a condition of approval, staff believes this criterion is met. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 14/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY Public infrastructure exists in the area. With improvements made to the infrastructure by the developers, adequate facilities are available to accommodate the development ' Some oversizing to accommodate future needs is being planned addressing street profile t i improvements, utilities and drainage. A recoupment strategy will need to be part of the *.;;;.- development agreement. With a condition, staff finds this criterion met. I. Access and Circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, WITH A CONDITION All structures and all of the units and associated uses have access from public rights -of- way. A surface easement for skiers, park users, and park maintenance over the portion of Lot //1 directly south of lift one park is recommended as a condition of approval. This condition is not necessary for accessing a public way, as the standard requires, but F ., will be important for maintaining a continuous skiing corridor through the property. Because this ski -back corridor and potential for a lift has been a central theme of the ' I proposal, staff believes a condition of approval is important. Staff will also suggest Council require these easements as part of the street vacation action. If additional portions of Gilbert Street are vacated (more than proposed by the applicant) staff will suggest a similar access easement over portions of Gilbert. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The transportation study indicates that the area's streets and intersections are currently operating below capacity and will continue to do so even after the lodge has been built and are open for business. The report includes other projects that could affect the overall transportation patterns and found `no perceptible difference' from current traffic conditions. All parking will be below the buildings. In addition, South Aspen Street will be reconstructed and use a rougher surface for enhanced winter traction. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 15/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY There are no historic trails through the subject property which would require dedication - ,t,: - :, -- • 1,--',:: • or improvement and the AACP does not recommend any additional trails on the 4? property. Portions of the private property will require surface easements allowing the.' ski -back corridor and pedestrian access during the summer. This is proposed as a / : '-' " °— condition and can be incorporated into the final plat. No security gates, guard posts are proposed. With a proposed condition, staff finds these criterion met. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (Note: this criteria 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 surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The project is not proposed in phases. The City will require the development agreement t , (done after approvals and prior to actual development) secure the landowner's x x performance and possible site remediation costs. This will ensure the public interest is protected against possible financial burdens of completing public infrastructure, public amenities, project amenities where a significant public interest exists, and costs for safety and aesthetic remediation of an incomplete or abandoned development site. With as a proposed condition, staff believe this criterion is met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 16/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: TIMESHARE LODGE DEVELOPMENT An applicant for timeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of the following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision applications. A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge development shall be required to demonstrate that the proposed conversion will not have a negative tax consequence for the City. In order to demonstrate the tax consequences of the proposed conversion, the applicant shall prepare a detailed fiscal impact study as part of the final PUD application. The fiscal impact study shall contain at least the following comparisons between the existing lodge operation and the proposed timeshare lodge development: 1. A summary of the sales taxes paid to the City for rental of lodge rooms during the prior five years of its operation. If the lodge has stopped renting rooms prior to the time of submission of the application, then the summary shall reflect the final five years the lodge was in operation. The summary of past taxes paid shall be compared to a projection of the sales taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. As part of this projection, the applicant shall specify the number of nights the applicant anticipates each timeshare lodge unit will be available for daily rental to visitors (that is, the annual number of nights when the unit will not be occupied by the owner or the owner's guests), the expected visitor occupancy rate for these units, the expected average daily cost to rent the unit, and the resulting amount of sales tax that will be paid to the City. 2. An estimation of the real estate transfer taxes that would be paid to the City if the existing lodge were to be sold. If an actual sale of the property has occurred within the last 12 months, then the real estate taxes paid for that sale shall be used. This estimation shall be compared to a projection of the real estate transfer taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. This projection shall include a statement of the expected sales prices for the timeshare estates, and the applicable tax rate that will be applied to each sale. 3. A summary of the City- portion of the property taxes paid for the lodge for the prior five years of its operation, and a projection of the property taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. This projection shall include a statement of the expected value that will be assigned to the property by the Tax Assessor, and the applicable tax rate. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 17/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The fiscal impact study may also contain such other information that the applicant believes is relevant to understanding the tax consequences of the proposed development. For example, the applicant may provide information demonstrating there will be "secondary", or "indirect" tax benefits to the City from the occupancy of the timeshare units, in terms of increased retail sales and other economic activity in the community as compared to the existing lodge development. The applicant shall be expected to prove definitively why the timeshare units would cause such economic advantages that would not be achieved by a traditional lodge development. Any such additional information provided shall compare the taxes paid during the prior five years of the lodge's operation to the first five years of the proposed timeshare lodge's operation. If the fiscal impact study demonstrates there will be an annual tax loss to the City from the conversion of an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge, then the applicant shall be required to propose a mitigation program that resolves the problem, to the satisfaction of the Aspen City Council. The accepted mitigation program shall be documented in the PUD Agreement for the project that is entered into between the applicant and the Aspen City Council. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The proposal does not include a conversion of existing lodging into a timeshare lodge development. The redevelopment contemplates development of entirely new lodge buildings and the former lodging buildings on the site are intended to be relocated and used as a ski museum and an affordable housing building. These properties are not in current lodging use. The Holland House has been demolished and the Skier's Chalet buildings are not being used for nightly rentals. Neither has been in active lodging operation in close to 10 years. During the initial conceptual review (2007) staff reviewed the proposal, the recent activity of the lodging uses, the City's tax information for the operations, the re -use concepts for the actual lodging buildings, and decided the project should be handled as a new project, not a `conversion.' Staff believes this criterion applies to the conversion of existing buildings from traditional lodging operations to fractional ownership and believes this criterion is not applicable in this case. B. Upgrading of Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The extent of the upgrading that is to be accomplished shall be determined as part of the PUD review, considering the condition of the existing facilities, with the intent being to make the development compatible in character with surrounding properties and to extend the useful life of the building. 1. To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures shall be brought into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and building codes. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 18/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare lodge development shall be closed until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The Applicant is proposing an entirely new project - not a conversion of an existing project to a timeshare lodge development. This criterion is not applicable. The new development shall be required to meet the City's adopted fire, health, and building codes and compliance will be checked at the time of building permit review. This criterion is not applicable. C. Preservation of Existing Lodging Inventory. An express purpose of these regulations is to preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any proposal to convert an existing lodge or other property that provides short term accommodations to a timeshare lodge should, at a minimum, replace the existing number of units on the property in the planned timeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number of units, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms on the property, or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the purposes of these regulations, even though the planned timeshare lodge will not replace either the existing number of units or bedrooms. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The Applicant is proposing an entirely new project - not a conversion of an existing project to a timeshare lodge development. This criterion is not applicable. The project does, however, propose to add additional beds and rooms which will add to the City's lodging stock. This criterion is not applicable. D. Affordable Housing Requirements. 1. Whenever a timeshare lodge development is required to provide affordable housing, mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the standards of the City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable housing requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development, and shall also take into account any retail, restaurant, conference, or other functions proposed in the lodge. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The development is providing housing mitigation for 100% of the additional employees generated by this development. This exceeds the City's requirement more than achieves compliance with this criterion. 2. The conversion of any multi - family dwelling unit that meets the definition of residential multi - family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi - Family Replacement Program, even when there is no demolition of the existing multi - family dwelling unit. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 19/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The RMF replacement requirement of 1.25 employees is more than met with the provision of approximately 16 employees to be housed in the Skier Chalet Steakhouse building. Staff finds this criterion met. E. Parking Requirements. 1. The parking requirement for timeshare lodge development shall be calculated by applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses. The parking requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal provides off - street parking for all of the uses according to the City's requirements, plus an additional 50 spaces for public parking. The lodge parking calculation complies with the maximum number of rentable divisions or "keys," as required in this standard. Staff finds this criterion met. 2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer an altemative to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen. 3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in a parking space on -site when the owner is not using that estate. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The applicant has committed to van/shuttle service and on -site storage of vehicles will prohibited in the development agreement and timeshare instruments. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. F. Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of timeshare estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S., as may be amended from time to time. The applicant and licensed marketing entity shall present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare development. 1. The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall not be permitted: a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare units on any street, mall, or other public property or facility; and b. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to mislead potential purchasers. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 20/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation or to visit a timeshare development is permitted, provided the gift reflects the local Aspen economy. For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in Aspen, restaurants in Aspen, and local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets, rafting trips, etc.) are permitted. Gifts that have no relationship to the local Aspen economy are not permitted. The following gifts are also not permitted: a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given; b. Any gift package for which notice is not given to the prospective purchaser that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales presentation as a condition of receiving the gifts; and c. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the requirement to attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than the information on the gift being offered. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The application commits to incorporate these limitations on gifts into the development *, agreement and timeshare instruments. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. G. Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will be appropriately managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and continuous. This shall include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided, and shall also address the following requirements: 1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and approve any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the timeshare development, to provide assurance and protection to timeshare owners that management/assessment fees will be applied and used appropriately. 2. The applicant shall also demonstrate that there will be a reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be properly maintained throughout its lifetime. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The application commits to incorporate these maintenance provisions into then development agreement and timeshare instruments. With a condition of approval, staff ::" finds this criterion met. >. H. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed timeshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.; including the requirements concerning the five (5) day period for rescission of a sales contract, and the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 21/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The application commits to comply with State requirements. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. I. Approval By Condominium Owners. If the development that is proposed to be timeshared is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the condominium declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the owners of the condominium units have approved the timeshare development, including any improvements to the common elements that the applicant may propose, that all mortgagees of the condominium have approved the proposed timeshare development, and that all condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the same sales and marketing program. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The project is not currently a condominium and does not proposed a conversion of an existing condominium. This criterion is not applicable to this project. J. Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained in this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any of the following practices: 1. The creation, operation or sale of a right -to -use interest or any other timeshare concept which is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant to the requirements of this section. Right -to -use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease -holds and vacation clubs) are considered inappropriate in Aspen and are not permitted. 2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare approval, timeshare development instruments, or disclosure statement. 3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for timesharing or misrepresenting the substance of any such application to another who may be a prospective purchaser of a timeshare interest. 4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a timeshare estate or interest therein in violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval granted pursuant hereto, or cause or aid and abet another to violate any requirement of this Chapter, or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The application states that the timeshare operation will comply with these prohibitions. With a condition of approval, staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 22/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Please see Staff's response to PUD Review Standard A(1). Staff finds this criterion met. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Please see Staff's response to PUD review standard A(2). Staff finds this criterion met. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Please see Staff's response to PUD review standard A(3). Staff finds this criterion met. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The project is being reviewed for the necessary approvals. If those approvals are granted, this criterion is met. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. 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 hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY This property is suitable for development with a few technical considerations; particular v - attention needs to be paid to drainage and mudflow hazards. The preliminary drainage recommendations have been reviewed by the City Engineer and accepted. More specific t drainage designs will need to be reviewed and approved and made part of the final plat. This is proposed as a condition of approval. Likewise, the mudflow analysis has been Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 23/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council reviewed by the City Engineer. Specific recommendations for the design of the buildings have been made and have been proposed as conditions of approval. No other known natural hazards exist and staff believes, with proposed conditions, that this criterion is met. b. 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 unnecessary public costs. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES This proposed subdivision does not represent a potential for inefficient public services or unnecessary public costs. Staff finds this criterion met. 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. 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The applicant has detailed the improvements this project is providing, as required in Chapter 26.580, and is not requesting any variations. Therefore, the above standards for reviewing variations are not applicable and staff find this standard met. 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposed development complies with both requirements of replacement housing and of new housing. Affordable housing in excess of the City's requirement is being provided and staff finds this criterion met. (Note: the requirements of Chapter 26.520 were recodified within Chapter 26.470.) Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 24/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The residential development within this project requires school land dedication. The • application commits to providing a cash -in -lieu of land dedication. Staff supports the , e cash -in -lieu as this site and the amount of land dedication would be an inappropriate method of meeting the standard. Staff has included a condition of approval that requires the school land dedication fees be paid prior to building permit issuance. The applicable schedule will be that in effect at the time of building permit submission. With this condition, staff believes this standard is met. 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. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The proposal requires allotments for lodging, affordable housing, and commercial space.fi r; The allotments have been requested and are available. The request for allotments is 44 being reviewed concurrently. Staff supports the allotment requests finding the proposal in compliance with the growth management criteria. If all of the requested growth management actions are approved, this criterion is met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 25/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT — AFFORDABLE HOUSING The development of affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the APCHA Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria (2005 Land Use Code printing): a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the new units, pursuant to Section 26.470.030.C, Development Ceiling Levels. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal requires allotments for lodging, affordable housing, and commercial space. The affordable housing allotments have been requested and are available. The allotments are from the 2010 growth year as the application for final review was accepted in December 2010. Staff finds this criterion is met. b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Please see Staff's response to PUD Review Standard A(1). Staff finds this criterion met. c) 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, WITH CONDITIONS. 7 le The proposed affordable housing units have been reviewed by APCHA staff and the 'r ; ; board for compliance with the Guidelines. A recommendation of approval with a series of conditions has been forwarded to the P &Z. Staff has included these as conditions within the draft resolution and believes this standard is met. ir s,, t d) Affordable Housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy -down units. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent of more of the unit's net livable square footage is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher. Off -site units shall be provided within the City of Aspen city limits. Units outside the city limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to 26.470.040.D.2. Provision of affordable housing through a cash -in -lieu payment shall be at the discretion of the Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 26/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from APCHA. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The on -site affordable housing is being provided in the Skier's Chalet Steakhouse building. This is an ideal re -use of an historic resource. The units, which are in a dormitory configuration, have been designed to meet this standard. All units are at grade or on the second and third floors. The subgrade space of this building is proposed for mechanical and storage uses. All mitigation is proposed through on -site units or actual units within the City. This may include use of housing credits, which is a new program for off -site housing. The applicant has committed to providing housing mitigation in excess of the requirements. Mitigation through cash -in -lieu is not a precluded option with the proposed Ordinance. Staff finds this criterion met. e) 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 qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City of Aspen 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 Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, or its Board of Directors, at its sole discretion, may authorize affordable housing units owned and associated with a lodging or commercial operation to be rental units if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures permanent affordability of the units. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, or other similar governmental or quasi - municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for- sale" provision. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, WITH A CONDITION The affordable housing is proposed to be owned and operated by the applicant (or i t successor). This is appropriate and desirable for both dormitory units and units associated with a lodging operation. A legal instrument ensuring the permanent affordability of the units is necessary and staff is proposing a condition of approval. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 27/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT — ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY Pursuant to Section 26.470.040.D.3. of the Regulations, the City Council may approve the development of an essential public facility upon the recommendation of the planning and Zoning Commission subject to compliance with the following criteria (2005 Land Use Code): a) The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and /or structure to be an Essential Public Facility. Accessory uses may also be part of an Essential Public Facility project. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The City defines an Essential Public Facility as "a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use or benefit of the general public and serves the needs of the community." The Aspen Historic Society is a not - for -profit organization with a mission of enriching the community through preserving and communicating Aspen's remarkable history. They are supported through donations, limited fee services, and the Aspen Historic Park and Recreation District property tax. The facility is proposed to serve a needs of the community and a public purpose — education — and will be for the use and benefit of the general public. The Director finds the facility meets the definition. Staff finds this criterion met. b) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the uses, pursuant to Section 26.470.030.C, Development Ceiling Levels and Section 26.470.030.D, Annual Development Allotments. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal requires allotments for lodging, affordable housing, and commercial space. No specific allocation is required for essential public facilities and no growth ceiling exists for this type of use. All necessary allotments for the project have been requested and are available. The allotments are from the 2010 growth year as the application for final review was accepted in December 2010. Staff finds this criterion is met. c) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Please see Staffs response to PUD review standard A(1). Staff finds this criterion met. d) A sufficient percentage of the employees expected to be generated by the project are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof in a manner acceptable to the City Council. The Employee Generation Rates may be Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 28/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council used as a guideline but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs. The City Council may waive, or partially waive, affordable housing mitigation requirements as it deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The applicant is requesting the housing mitigation for the museum be waived in light of the extensive preservation and rehabilitation work proposed — the relocation and rehabilitation of two historically significant structures, the rehabilitation of the original lift one terminal (a National Historic resource), and the redevelopment of Willoughby Park as park space complimentary of the historic resources. Staff believes this is an adequate trade -off. The investment in the historic resources serves a significant community goal — preserving and enhancing the Aspen's skiing legacy. The employee needs for the museum are expected to be handled through existing staffing with minimal additional demands (probably 1.5 to 2.5 total additional employees) and within the operational plan of the Historic Society. In additional, the project as a whole is exceeding the City's requirements for affordable housing mitigation. Staff is recommending this waiver be granted. Staff finds this criterion met e) Free - Market residential floor area on the parcel is accompanied by affordable housing units or mitigation pursuant to 26.470.040.C.6, unless otherwise restricted in the zone district. The City Council may waive, partially waive, or establish a different limitation as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE No free - market residential space is proposed for the museum parcel. This standard is not applicable. f) The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and transit services. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The project can be accommodated with existing public infrastructure. Some services are being upgraded by the applicant to address direct needs. No disproportionate public service burdens are expected. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 29/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW - REMODELING OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL OR LODGE DEVELOPMENT. Remodeling or replacement after demolition of existing commercial or hotel /lodge building and portions thereof shall be exempt from the provisions of growth management, provided that no additional net leasable square footage or lodge units are created and there is no change -in -use. If redevelopment involves an expansion of net leasable square footage or lodge units, only the replacement of existing development shall be exempt and the expansion shall be subject to Section 26.470.040.C.2 or 3. Existing, prior to demolition, net leasable square footage and lodge units shall be documented by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer prior to demolition. Also see Reconstruction Limitations, Section 26.470.070, and definition of Net Leasable Commercial and Office Space, Section 26.104.100 (2005 Land Use Code): STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The project involves some replacement of existing development and some new expansion. Replacement of 20 lodge rooms from the Holland House lodge, 10 lodge rooms from the Skier's Chalet Lodge, and 8 rooms from the Skier's Chalet Steakhouse lodging (lodging was upstairs from the steakhouse) is exempt from growth management while the remaining 46 room (keys) are subject to the requirements for new growth. Likewise, 2,429 square feet of replacement commercial space is exempt from growth management while the remaining 3,560 square feet are subject to the requirements for new commercial space. Staff finds this criterion met. Compliance with requirements for new lodging units and commercial space are addressed in other sections of staff findings. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 30/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW - REPLACEMENT OF DEMOLISHED MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS The replacement of demolished multi - family residential units shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter if the requirements of the Multi - Family Housing Replacement Program are met. (See Chapter 26.530 — Multi - Family Housing Replacement Program.) Replacement units shall not be deducted from the respective Annual Development Allotments of Development Ceiling Levels established pursuant to Section 26.470.030. The development of additional residential units, beyond those merely being replaced, shall be subject to this Chapter. Also see Reconstruction Limitations, Section 26.470.070 (taken from the 2005 printing of the Land Use Code). STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The applicable code (2005 code) requires 50% of the demolished units, bedrooms, and net livable square footage of free - market residential portion of a building be replaced with on -site deed restricted affordable housing. The replacement units can be off -site or provide through a cash -in -lieu if certain conditions exist. The application proposes the replacement of the one affected unit (a managers apartment within the former Holland House Lodge) by housing 1.25 employees within the redeveloped Skier Chalet Steakhouse. Staff considers this on -site replacement as the Steakhouse is part of the overall project, being relocated and rehabilitated as part of the proposal, and will be located on a newly created parcel to be known as lot 2 of the Lift One Lodge subdivision. The amount of replacement housing meets the 50% requirement, which translates to .5 units, .5 bedrooms, and 489 square feet. The reconstruction credit was established as part of the Conceptual PUD review. Staff finds the project in conformance with the Residential Multi - Family Replacement Requirements. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 31/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT — INCENTIVE LODGE DEVELOPMENT The development of new or expansion of existing free- market residential units within a mixed -use project shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria (2005 Land Use Code): a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the expansion, pursuant to Section 26.470.030.D, Annual Development Allotments. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal requires allotments for lodging, affordable housing, free- market housing, and commercial space. All necessary allotments for the project have been requested and are available. The allotments are from the 2010 growth year as the application for final review was accepted in December 2010. Staff finds this criterion is met. b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Please see Staff's response to PUD review standard Al. Staff finds this criterion is met. c) The project contains a minimum of one lodge unit per five hundred (500) square feet of Lot Area and these lodge units average five hundred (500) square feet or less per unit. These two standards (the density standard and the unit -size standard) may be varied in some cases according to the limitations of the zone district in which the project is developed and still meet this criterion. (See zone district requirements.) Units developed in excess of those necessary to meet the Lot Area standard shall not be required to meet the average -size standard. For the expansion of a lodge which is not being demolished/redeveloped and which does not currently meet the Lot Area standard, only the average unit -size standard of the new units shall be required in order to meet this criterion. Projects not meeting the density or unit -size standard shall be reviewed pursuant to 26.470.040.C.2 — Expansion/New Commercial, Lodge, or Mixed Use Development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal meets the "density" standard with one lodge key for each 230 s.f. of lot area and is in compliance with this criterion. The average size of the lodge rooms is 537 s.f., exceeding the 500 s.f. standard. This zone allows for an up to 10% increase in the average unit size (to 550 s.£) through Special Review. The application seeks special review approval. Assuming the special review is approved, staff finds this criterion met. Please see staff comments under Special Review. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 32/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council d) Associated free - market residential development, as permitted pursuant to the zone district in which the lodge is developed, shall be allocated on a unit basis and attributed to the annual development allotment. Each unit shall require the provision of affordable housing mitigation by one of the following methods: i) Providing an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) or a Carriage House for each residential unit pursuant to Section 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The unit need not be detached or entirely above grade to meet this criterion. ii) Providing on -site or off -site Affordable Housing Units equal to 30% of the free - market residential units (on a unit basis). The affordable housing units shall be one - bedroom or larger and be provided as actual units (not as a cash - in -lieu payment). Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. Provision of affordable housing mitigation via units outside of the City of Aspen shall require approval from City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.D.2. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. iii) Paying an affordable housing cash -in -lieu fee normally associated with exempt single - family and duplex development, pursuant to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Notes: The City encourages the affordable housing units required for the free - market residential development to be associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long -term viability of the lodge. An efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for a lodge component of a Incentive Lodge project may be approved as a credit towards the mitigation requirement for the free - market component of the project, pursuant to Section 26.470.050.A.1 — Employee Generation. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The applicant has committed to meeting this criterion through option ii and the provision of affordable housing. The applicable requirement translates as a need to provide 1.2 one - bedroom units with each one - bedroom unit housing 1.75 employees. (1.2 one- bedroom units required x 1.75 FTEs housed per one - bedroom unit = 2.1 FTEs to be housed.) The proposal exceeds this requirement. The application has committed to exceeding the 30% affordable housing standard. A portion of the mitigation may be provided by affordable housing credits. This is a new program not in effect at the time the application was originally submitted. The credit program is equivalent to a developer providing built units and is preferred over cash -in -lieu. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 33/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council e) Thirty (30) percent of the employees generated by the additional lodge, timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units, and associated commercial development, according Section 26.470.050.A, Employee Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof. On -site affordable housing units shall be one - bedroom or larger units. Employee mitigation shall only be required for additional development and shall not be required for replacement development. The Planning and Zoning Commission may consider unique characteristics or efficiencies of the proposed operation and lower the mitigation requirements pursuant to Section 26.470.050.A.1 — Employee Generation. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. Provision of affordable housing mitigation via units outside of the City of Aspen shall require approval from City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.D.2. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The additional 46 lodging keys (84 total minus 38 existing) requires the mitigation of 6.9 employees. The 3,560 additional commercial square feet (5,989 s.f. total minus 2,429 s.f. existing) requires mitigation of 3.38 employees. Together, the additional lodge and commercial space requires the mitigation of 10.28 employees. The project has committed to house 100% of the additional employees generated by the development or 34.27 employees, at a Category 4 or lower rate, some of which may utilize the City's affordable housing credit program. Considering the requirements for free - market residential development and the replacement of the Holland House residential unit, the total mitigation is 37.62 employees. The applicant's proposal for 100% mitigation far exceeds the requirements of the City and the requirements of this criterion. Staff finds this criterion met. f) The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage • treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and transit services. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The project can be accommodated with existing public infrastructure. Some services are being upgraded by the applicant to address direct needs. No disproportionate public service burdens are expected. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 34/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: CONDITIONAL USE FOR RESTAURANT/BAR, DORMITORY UNITS, AND COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY When considering a development application for a conditional use, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable (the City Council is the final review authority for this Application): 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 is proposed to be located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this title. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The restaurant and bar within the lodge, the dormitory affordable housing units, and the commercial parking facility are conditional uses in the Lodge zone. The purpose of the Lodge (L) Zone District is to encourage construction, renovation and operation of lodges, tourist- oriented multi - family buildings, high occupancy timeshare facilities and ancillary uses compatible with lodging to support and enhance the City's resort economy. Free -market residential units within this Zone District shall be permitted, but not required, to be used as short-term tourist accommodations. The City encourages high - occupancy lodging development in this zone district. Therefore, certain dimensional incentives are provided in this zone district, as well as other development incentives in Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS). [Land Use Code section 26.710.190.A.] The restaurant is a typical amenity of a hotel in this area. It is expected to serve guests of the lodge as well as the general public, especially during ski season. Staff expects this amenity of the lodge will enhance the viability of the lodge and Aspen's resort economy. In evaluating the potential to lease parking spaces to the general public, Staff feels that the commercial parking use will alleviate some of the on- street parking pressure in the area that has been building over the years due to the lack of off - street parking that has been provided in many of the older condo developments in the vicinity. Dormitory accommodations are appropriate for housing employees of the lodge on -site. It has been the City's experience that on -site employee housing, especially for hotel employees, are typically small units able to accommodate singles or roommate style living (as opposed to family units). Staff believes dormitory units are compatible with lodging operations and appropriate for this project. Staff believes this element of the project supports the resort economy. Regarding compliance with the AACP, please see Staff's response to PUD review standard Al. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 35/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council b) The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel 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. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The base of lift 1 has been used for lodging operations since the inception of skiing in Aspen. Many of these facilities have had restaurants and /or dormitory housing for employees within the lodge or in an adjacent building. The restaurant and dormitory units will enhance the mix of uses in the neighborhood and compliment the existing lodging, multi - family housing and recreation activities in the neighborhood. Staff finds this criterion met. c) The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The lodge is designed to accommodate service needs and deliveries from within the lodge's subgrade parking. This will minimize or eliminate any adverse effects of the restaurant use. The restaurant will be required to have modern venting and is not expected to create any undue smoke, odors, vibration or other adverse impacts on surrounding properties. Staff believes that the potential commercial parking that is proposed within the parking garage will not be visible or impact the circulation in the immediate area. The dormitory units are not expected to create undue adverse impacts such as vibration, odor, deliveries, etc.) on surrounding properties. Parking for the dorm units is within the proposed parking garage. Staff finds this criterion met. d) There are 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 STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The project can be accommodated with existing public infrastructure. Some services are being upgraded by the applicant to address direct needs. No disproportionate public service burdens are expected. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 36/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council e) The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The employee housing demands for the restaurant have been factored into the overall project's housing mitigation requirement. No employee generation is expected from the dormitory units or the parking. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 37/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: AMENDMENT TO THE ZONE DISTRICT MAP (REZONING) In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider (26.310.040): Note: There are several rezonings covered in this section. Portions of vacated streets are proposed for rezoning (Aspen zones property to the midpoint of streets). Those are Hill Street from Park Historic to Lodge, South Aspen Street adjacent to proposed Lot 2 from Park Historic to Affordable Housing Historic. The two parks are proposed for rezoning from Park to Public to accommodate the ski museum and underground parking. Finally, a PUD overlay on the entire project to reflect the PUD approval for the project. a) Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. None of the proposed rezoning conflict with the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion met. b) Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Please see Staff's response to PUD review standard Al . Staff finds this criterion is met. c) Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering the existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The surrounding area provides a mix of lodging, multi - family housing most of which is used for short-term accommodations, affordable housing, recreation uses and facilities, and active parks use. Most of the area is zoned Lodge. The two parks are zoned Park. The area south of this site is zoned Conservation, allowing a range of uses including residential. And, some Affordable Housing zoned land is in the vicinity. About half of the surrounding land is zoned with a PUD overlay. The proposed zoning will allow development similar in use and intensity as the surrounding development. Staff considers the proposed zoning compatible with the surrounding zone districts and existing land uses. Also see PUD review standard A.2. staff finds this criterion met. d) The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 38/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council This rezoning standard is also covered under PUD review standards. A transportation study for the project was submitted with the application. The transportation study indicates that the area's streets and intersections are currently operating below capacity and will continue to do so even after the lodge has been built and are open for business. The report includes other projects that could affect the overall transportation patterns and found `no perceptible difference' from current traffic conditions. All parking will be below the buildings. In addition, South Aspen Street will be reconstructed and use a rougher surface for enhanced winter traction. Staff finds this criterion met. 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, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The project can be accommodated with existing public infrastructure. Some services are being upgraded by the applicant to address direct needs. The project proposes significant improvements to the area's pedestrian access and parking. Significant upgrades of the areas storm water system are proposed. No disproportionate public service burdens are expected. Staff finds this criterion met. 0 Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. No adverse effects on the natural environment as a result of this rezoning have been identified by staff or referral agencies. Upgrades to storm water drainage systems are expected to minimize adverse effects on the natural environment. Locating lodging facilities within walking distance of typical tourist attractions (downtown, skiing) and within walking distance to existing transit makes better use of existing resources and minimize adverse effects on the natural environment. The project itself is proposed as a LEEDs Gold project, significantly minimizing energy requirements. Staff finds this criterion met. g) Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 39/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The rezoning and the project will enhance the neighborhood's short-term accommodation history and character. The area has long been a place for tourist accommodations and this rezoning will allow development consistent with the character of the community. The area is the original base of Aspen Mountain and contains a nationally recognized historic resource related to the emergence of skiing in North America. The area has been planned for a skiing museum for two decades to celebrate the emergence of Aspen as an international ski resort and this plan will assist in that vision. Staff believes this criterion is met. h) Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 40/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council This criterion does not require a change of condition for a rezoning to be approved; it requires that changes in condition be acknowledged. A public vote in 1991 supported a ski museum within Willoughby Park. To accomplish this, the zoning should be changed to a zone permitting museum use. Staff is recommending the Public zone as it reflects the public ownership and usage of the parcel and permits the museum to exist, as directed in the vote. The zone change from Park to Public for the Lift One Park will support underground development of parking. The applicant was directed by the City to relocate the existing public parking along South Aspen Street into the project to improve aesthetics and functionality of the street. This change is reflected in the Conceptual approval of the project. The addition of historic overlays to lots 2, 3 and 4 acknowledge the historic resources on these parcels. Until recently, buildings from the post war era were not recognized as potential historic resources. In the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and through the adoptions of Ordinance 30 and 48, Series 2007, and Ordinance 28, Series 2010, post war buildings such as the Skier Chalet Steak House and the Skier Chalet Lodge are recognized as potential historic resources. The applicant is rehabilitating these structures according to the City's historic guidelines and the direction of the HPC. The Historic overlay will protect these resources. Finally, the PUD overlay across all parcels recognizes the relationship of each parcel within this subdivision from a use and dimensional perspective. For example, housing mitigation for development on Lot 1 is being provided on Lot 2, which the dimensions for Lot 1 reflect the adjacency and open space use of Lot 3. The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan depicted this area as lodging. This use is supported with the current lodging zoning and assisted with the PUD overlay. A PUD overlay allows variation in zoning allowances in response to unique conditions of the site and the goals of the neighborhood and the community. Prior to this application, the parcels were not part of a subdivision and had no need to be connected through a PUD. The addition of the PUD overlay reflects the unique connection and interrelatedness of the parcels. 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: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Staff does not foresee any conflict with the public interest and believes the requested zoning changes are in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 41/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW All development with a commercial or lodging component is subject to the Commercial Design Standards of Chapter 26.412. The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for Commercial design Review based on the following review criteria. A summary of the design standards and staff responses is also included. (taken from the 2005 printing of the Land Use Code, and City Council is the final review authority for this application): Review Criteria: 1. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a more - appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the Standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the Standards. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Staff believes the project complies with the Design Standards of Commercial Design Review with some deviation to provide architectural interest and to address the slope of the parcel. A detailed analysis of each design standard is provided below. 2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to the facade of the building may be required to comply with this section. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. This standard applies to the museum building only. This building is being relocated and converted from a lodge use to a public use. Staff finds the museum building in Willoughby Park in compliance with the Design Standards. 3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located within a Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual Development Plan approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.415. This criterion shall not apply if the development activity does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The two historic buildings — Skier Chalet Steakhouse and the Skier Chalet Lodge — have received conceptual (and final) approval from the HPC. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 42/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council Design Standards: A. Building Relationship to Primary Street A street wall is comprised of buildings facing principal streets and public pedestrian spaces. Consistent street walls provide a sense of a coherent district and frame an outdoor room. Interruptions in this enclosure can lessen the quality of a commercial street. Corner buildings are especially important, in that they are more visible and their scale and proportion affects the street walls of two streets. Well- designed and located pedestrian open spaces can positively affect the quality of the district, while remnant or leftover spaces can detract from the downtown. A building's relationship to the street is entirely important to the quality of the downtown pedestrian environment. Split -level retail and large vertical separations from the sidewalk can disrupt the coherence of a retail district. The following standards shall apply: 1. Building facades shall be parallel to the adjoining primary streets. Minor elements of the building facade may be developed at irregular angles. 2. Building facades along primary streets shall be setback no more than the average setback of the adjoining buildings and no less than the minimum requirement of the particular zone district. Exempt from this provision are building setbacks accommodating On -Site Pedestrian Amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030. 3. Building facades along primary streets shall maintain a consistent setback on the first and second story. 4. Commercial buildings shall be developed with the first floor at, or within two (2) feet above, the level of the adjoining sidewalk, or right -of -way if no sidewalk exists. "Split- level" retail frontage is prohibited. 5. Commercial buildings incorporating a setback from a primary street shall not incorporate a substantial grade change between the building facade and the public right -of -way. "Moats" surrounding buildings are prohibited. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Building facades have been designed to meet the street. Facades are parallel to the street and provide a setback no more than the average for the neighborhood and within the zoning parameters, as varied through the PUD process. Some areas of larger setback have been provided to break -up the massing and provide architectural interest. First and second stories are generally aligned with some minor variations providing architectural interest. Entrances for ground floors are at the grade of the surrounding terrain, while the sloping site necessitates some partially sub -grade floors. A split -level entrance or retail space is not being provided and no "moats" have been designed into the project. Staff considers these variations to be minor and necessary to address the unique site conditions — the sloped site — and to benefit of the design by breaking -up the massing of the building and providing architectural interest. B. Pedestrian Amenity Space. Creative, well- designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting, and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 43/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council atmosphere. Pedestrian amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights -of -way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide pedestrian amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030 — Pedestrian Amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the Pedestrian Amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on -site pedestrian amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. 2. The pedestrian amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation, and simple at -grade relationships with adjacent rights -of -way are encouraged. 3. The pedestrian amenity, and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights -of -way, and uses, contributes to an inviting pedestrian environment. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. 5. Any variation to the Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity, Section 26.575.030(F) promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity requirements. 6. The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, may reduce the pedestrian amenity requirement by any amount, such that no more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for well - designed projects having a positive contribution to the pedestrian environment. The resulting requirement may not be less than 10 %. On -site provision shall not be required for a reduction in the requirement. A mix of uses within the proposed building that enliven the surrounding pedestrian environment may be considered. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The project is located outside of the area of the City where pedestrian amenity is required. The standard is not applicable. C. Street -Level Building Elements. The "storefront," or street -level portion of a commercial building is perhaps the single most important element of a commercial district building. Effective storefront design can make an entire district inviting and pedestrian friendly. Unappealing storefront design can become a detriment to the vitality of a commercial district. In order to be an effective facility for the sale of goods and services, the storefront has traditionally been used as a tool to present those goods and services to the passing pedestrian (potential customer). Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 44/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council Because of this function, the storefront has traditionally been as transparent as possible to allow maximum visibility to the interior. The following standards shall apply: 1. Unarticulated, blank walls are prohibited. Fenestration, or an alternate means of facade articulation, is required on all exterior walls. 2. Retail buildings shall incorporate, at a minimum, a 60% fenestration ratio on exterior street -level walls facing primary streets. (For example: each street -level wall of a retail building that faces a primary street must be comprised of at least 60% fenestration penetrations and no more than 40% solid materials.) This provision may be reduced or waived for lodging properties with no, or limited, street -level retail, office buildings with no retail component, and for Service /Commercial /Industrial buildings. 3. Building entrances shall be well- defined and apparent. 4. Building entrances shall be designed to accommodate an internal airlock such that temporary seasonal airlocks on the exterior of the building are unnecessary. 5. Non - traditional storefronts, such as along an alleyway, are encouraged. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The design includes windows and facade articulation on all facades and does not proposed blank walls. The building does not contain street -level retail. The lodge entrance is well designed and is expected to be apparent to guests and the entrance to the restaurant is readily apparent from the ski slope and skier drop -off area in the cul -de -sac. D. Parking. Parking is a necessary component of a successful commercial district. The manner in which parking is physically accommodated has a larger impact upon the quality of the district that the amount of parking. Surface parking separating storefronts from the street creates a cluttered, inhospitable pedestrian environment. A downtown retail district shaped by buildings, well- designed storefronts, and a continuous street wall is highly preferred over a district shaped by parking lots. Well- placed and well- designed access points to parking garages can allow convenient parking without disrupting the retail district. The following standards shall apply: 1. Parking shall only be accessed from alleyways, unless such access is unavailable or an unreasonable design solution in which case access from a primary street shall be designed in a mariner that minimizes disruption of the pedestrian environment. 2. Surface parking shall not be located between the Street right -of -way and the building facade. 3. Above grade parking garages in commercial districts shall incorporate ground - floor commercial uses and be designed in a manner compatible with surrounding buildings and uses. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 45/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 4. Above grade parking garages shall not reveal internal ramping on the exterior facade of the building. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Parking along South Aspen Street is being relocated to the underground parking garage within the project. This is expected to significantly improve the aesthetics of the area and the functionality of the parking. The entrance to the parking garage has been located and designed to minimize the disruptions to the pedestrian environment along South Aspen. No surface parking is proposed; neither is an above - ground parking garage. E. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A utility, trash, and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060 Utility /Trash/Recycle Service Areas, unless otherwise established according to said section. 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as a historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. 3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as practical. 5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right -of -way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The utility, trash, and recycling needs of the project are being provided for in the parking garage and all required utility pedestals are being provided on -site with the appropriate easements. All delivery functions have been designed into the parking garage and the mechanical ducting and ventilation are located on the roof and away from South Aspen Street. Much of the mechanical equipment will be within the building, but the application notes that any additional equipment will be screened from view. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 46/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: SPECIAL REVIEW The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve an adjustment of the "density standard" and the "unit -size standard" and the project shall remain qualified for the height, Floor Area, and Growth Management incentives associated with these standards. The review shall be pursuant to the review procedures for Special Review, Chapter 26.430, and the following criteria (taken from the 2005 printing of the Land Use Code, and City Council is the final review authority for this application): a) The density standard may be amended by a maximum of 10% to one lodge unit per 550 square feet of Lot Area. The average unit -size standard may be amended by a maximum of 10% to permit an average unit size of 550 square feet. An adjustment in excess of these increases may be approved through adoption of a PUD plan, but the project shall no longer be qualified for associated incentives. b) The project includes a generous amount of non -unit spaces, amenities, and services for guests of the lodging operation. This can include both internal and external amenities.. c) The project provides a range of unit sizes and configurations to be attractive to a broad segment of potential guests. Flexible units are encouraged. d) There exists a system or strategy for the project to maximize short-term occupancies. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal meets the density standard with one lodge unit per 230 square feet of lot area and requests amendment to the unit size standard to permit the average unit size of 537 square feet. The project does include a generous amount of on -site amenity and services, with a restaurant/bar, fitness facility, business center, public ski lockers, and a rooftop pool and deck. The project includes a wide range of unit sizes and configurations, making it more resilient or sustainable through economic and market changes. The project is proposed as a fractional ownership providing an operational plan to maximize usage by owners and the general public. Staff believes the project is very responsive to the standards and finds the project in compliance with these criteria. The Applicant is also requested an increase to the amount of floor area within the lodge which is devoted to the individual lodge units and commercial uses. This increase must receive a Special Review approval based upon the criteria listed in Section 26.430.040.A, Special Review. Whenever the dimensional requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met: Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 47/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council e) The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Staff does believe the project has been designed appropriately with respect to mass, scale, height, open space, view planes, and landscape treatment. The project provides a physical presence that will enhance the character of the surrounding land uses consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. Also see staff findings under Planned Unit Development. Staff finds this criterion met. f) The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts including, but not limited to, the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking in the neighborhood, or blocking of a designated view plane. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES • The project is being reviewed concurrently for compliance with the Wheeler View Plane restrictions. Staff believes the project is in compliance with the view plane. Traffic impacts are apparent as the existing neighborhood has several large parcels sitting fallow, but those impacts are expected to be negligible according to the traffic report. Parking availability is addressed through the provision of public parking within the project. Massing and scale issues of the project are addressed through the Planned Unit development criteria and staff is supportive of the proposed dimensions. Staff finds the project in compliance with this criterion. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 48/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE The Lift 1 Lodge site is impacted by one of the City of Aspen Mountain View Planes - the Wheeler Opera House View Plane. This view plane intersects the site at Gilbert Street. No development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below (the City Council is the final review authority for this application): a) No mountain view plane is infringed upon, except as provided in Section.435.050. C.2. When any mountain view plane projects at such an angle so as to reduce the maximum allowable building height otherwise provided for in this title, development shall proceed according to the provisions of Chapter 26.445 as a planned unit development, so as to provide for maximum flexibility in building design with special consideration to bulk and height, open space and pedestrian space, and similarly to permit variations in lot area, lot width, yard and building height requirements, view plane height limitations. The Planning and Zoning Commission may exempt any developer from the above enumerated requirements whenever it is determined that the view plan does not so effect the parcel as to require application of PUD or that the effects of the view plane may be otherwise accommodated. When any proposed development infringes upon a designated view plane, but is located in front of another development which already blocks the same view plane, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether or not the proposed development will further infringe upon the view plane, and the likelihood that the redevelopment of the adjacent structure will occur to reopen the view plane. In the event the proposed development does not further infringe upon the view plane, and re- redevelopment to re -open the view plane cannot be anticipated, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve the development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 49/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The view plane intersects the ground just north of the project site. Development within designated mountain view planes is subject to heightened review, not expressly prohibited. This particular view plane was arguably created to regulate development in the foreground so as to preserve views from the Wheeler to the mountain. In this instance, the code requires development to proceed through a PUD review. This allows flexibility in the design to minimize the effects on the view plane while recognizing the rights of the property owner. The project is being reviewed as a PUD, which permits variation in the dimensions of the building as well as relief from the restrictions of the view plane. In ever other similar situation where development has been proposed in the neighborhood above the view plane line, the development has been reviewed as a PUD and approved after discussing trade -offs of design, program, visual and other neighborhood or community impacts, and the value of the particular view being affected. In many of those case, the resulting impact on the view plane has been more substantial than is proposed in this case. Intrusions into the view plane considered insignificant have been permitted. Lastly, the actual impact of the proposal is minimized by intervening development and vegetation such that the project may not actually be seen from the sidewalk in front of the Wheeler. The following pictures were taken on a site visit during conceptual review after height flags and construction equipment were erected demonstrating heights of the proposed development. The height representations were of the larger conceptual project (using the upper SkiCo property). The project has been reduced in scope and scale and staff believes the affects on the view plane have diminished since conceptual review. v. -jr Considering the history of administering this view plane and the minimal or no actual affect on the view from the Wheeler sidewalk, staff believes this standard is met. 1 Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 50/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council • STAFF FINDINGS: CONDOMINIUMIZATION Section 26.480.090.A of the City Land Use Code provides technical criteria for development applications including condiminiumization for the sale of fractional ownership interests. The criteria in this Section address technical standards and provisions that must be incorporated on the subdivision plat. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES, CONDITIONALLY The plats and submissions for Condominiumization require a substantial portion of the Ord. project be completed. The Applicant will be required submit these documents once this 20 level of construction has been achieved. Staff is recommending the approval grant the right to condominiumize the project subject to a condo plat being reviewed and recorded. With a condition of approval, staff fmds this standard met. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 51/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council STAFF FINDINGS: RIGHT -OF -WAY VACATION Vacating public rights -of -way is regulated by State Statute, which details the logistics of filing a plat and describes division and allocation of property to adjacent owners. The City's Land Use Code does not include criteria for street vacations. The City does have a 1993 policy regarding street vacations, but it is unclear if this was a staff policy or if it was adopted by City Council. Following is a review of the points in the 1993 policy: 1. Is it consistent with and further the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Please see Staff's response to PUD review standard Al. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. Circulation — Does the proposed vacation cause a potential problem with regard to accessing property in the area? Council the request hinder area circulation or prevent service vehicles or utilit companies from accessing facilities or other structures? STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The streets and alleys being vacated extend from South Aspen, but do no connect with South Monarch Street. In addition, these streets and alleys have not been opened or used for access. The one exception is Gilbert Street, which does continue through to Monarch. The remaining portion of this street will continue to serve the two properties that rely on Gilbert fro access. The vacations are not expected to hinder circulation or cause problems. Staff finds this criterion met. 3. Streets Maintenance — Does the proposed vacation create a possible problem for street maintenance or snow removal operations? STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The remaining rights -of -way provide adequate room and turning areas for snow removal. Snow within the remaining portion of Gilbert Street may need to be "pulled" instead of "pushed" on occasion but this is not expected to be a significant operational issue. Staff believes this standard is met. 4. Utilities — Could the proposed vacation interfere with existing of future utility needs in the area? STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. South Aspen Street is being completely rebuilt with this proposal, including rebuilding the utilities within the right -of -way. The remaining streets and alleys either have no utilities within them or the vacation area does not affect the utility or ability to serve the utility. Staff finds this standard met. 5. Enforcement — Could the proposed vacation create or compound an existing problem for traffic control, City Police, or fire department personnel? STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 52/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council Servicing this area during wintertime emergencies has been and will continue to be a concern. The development of a turn- around at the top of the street, the elimination of parking within the right -of -way, and the enhanced plowing/sanding regime alleviates this concern to the satisfaction of the Fire District and the City Engineer. No traffic control issues exist today or with the new plan. Staff finds this standard met. 6. Income Space — Is the vacated area intended for net leasable commercial area or other income - producing space? If so, it may require a rental agreement with the City. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The affected area will become private land and is intended to support business operations. No rental agreement is proposed as the affected areas will be owned by the applicant and not the City. Staff believes the proposal compiles with this criterion. 7. Adopted Plans — Consider whether the proposed vacation is consistent with any adopted plan (i.e. trails, malls, improvement district, etc.) STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The proposal is a direct result of the conceptual approval. This plan acknowledged the public benefit of vacating portions of the existing street network for enhanced ski access through the applicant's property. Staff believes this request is consistent with the adopted conceptual plan and in compliance with this criterion. 8. Benefit — Consider whether the vacation is beneficial to the City of Aspen. As a general policy, it is not in the City's interest too vacate public rights -of -way, thereby giving public property to private use. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposal is a direct result of the conceptual approval. The conceptual plan acknowledged the public benefit of vacating portions of the existing street network for enhanced ski access through the applicant's property. Staff believes this request is consistent with the adopted conceptual plan and in compliance with this criterion. 9. Precedence — The reviewing agencies shall consider what effect if any precedence may have on the current and possible future applications. Will the current application lead to additional requests from other property owners for vacating other portions of public right -of -way? STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. The proposed vacations have been review by the appropriate agencies. Like with any request, approval may lead to subsequent requests. However, this and any other request, is being be reviewed on its own merits and is not being considered according to prior actions. Based on the circumstances of this request, staff is recommending approval. 10. Closure — Could the applicant's interests be addressed by a "closure" of rights -of -way in lieu of vacation? STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 53/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council The closure option would not convey ownership to the subject lands and would not permit the proposed development to proceed. In addition, many of the affected streets and alleyways are not currently open. There does not appear to be any benefit of "closing" the streets rather than vacating. Staff is recommending vacation of the streets in order to accomplish the proposed development. Exhibit C — Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 54/54 Lift One Lodge Final Review, City Council 4 1o/11/2o11 Honoring Aspen's Past Embracing Aspen's Future Lift One Lodge Final PUD 10.11.11 poss 1 Meeting Goals Meeting Two: How do you get there? What do you do there? How does it fit there? -- -- - -.. 10.1 pOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUP 2 1 10/11/2011 - How Do You Get There ? Connectivity 10.1; _ift One Lodge Final PUr' 3 Walkability: the extent to which the built environment is friendly to the presence of people walking, biking, living, shopping, visiting, enjoying or spending time in an area. Dan Burden 4e I l if 1 E f ° ,, it , et* t F 1 t 1 r • '}s. 'L ` 4s 'A Mile fiadiu5: - "* fir' Walking distance from regional transit: q TO Gondola' 855 ft 1 To Willoughby Park: 733 ft 1 To IA IA l 540 It Y • r _ . 1 V ... 10.11.1 pOSS 77 Lift One Lodge Final PUD 4 2 10/11/2011 Connectivity: Pedestrian 4 *. • -a m1 [ : i i is i C as �...- l ^o ta - Ei v . , ir,: i , • _ .... ....._ _,_ 1 L _ A MI _ -Mundt R Ott, , y. ��' r ' t ,N .�..-�� S� +�n� ' 7/ Tx .� / , 'p ' , t 3 rig ll ' �_ �• , > � C t . ll ' r e r _.� i i s 1 A . i-- . - 'lam ,; � � ' .: * ' al ; + -41 - �� : 1 / a Mile Radius' • , % t �, . LoAs1c 10 I FOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 5 Connectivity: Proposed Pedestrian Improvements 7 ;fi ,� '" s - n •.. .., Build sidewalks on Deane f a^ t aoc , and S. Aspen Sts. Snowmelt Aspen St. ., �_,,� = sidewalk • Safe crossings ' Connect to transit center Pavement treatments ' F.vi✓E sTRE0r /EGfrr ?R!/N w,4'7- create pedestrian feel 10.. Puss ar Lift One Lodge Final PU". 6 3 10/11/2011 - Connectivity: Quality of Service Level of Service Considerations Existing Proposed . Automobile A & B A & B Pedestrian E A - Bicycle C B lriJ Transit E B No change in LOS at affected intersections 10.11.11 P Ogg Lift One Lodge Final PUD Connectivity: Transportation Demand Management Employees Lodge Members / Guests Pedestrian Pedestrian Improvements Improvements lh Price Bus Passes Regular Shuttle Ve/0C Service FAST. FUN FREQUENT. 7am -10 pm Carpool On Call Other Times CAR to Emergency Rides I On Site Bike Fleet • GO • Home Car Sharing Bike Fleet Corporate Membership 10.11.1 Lift One Lodge Final PUD +8 4 10/11/2011 Parking: Service, Lodge, and Public Access ..t. ' , . — ('-i''‘.0- .t-tIll6-4,.- _1 . _ z : r t 2 , - th _. 4_ ,.. ,.,":„ , -,,,---_-_l_--,.,.,-,4, ---4,- it, i pass En Lift One Lodge Final PUL 9 Guest Entry r; r r --- "'" x , i - r•-•-• - '1 ' C 1 i -- , i '\• ! —1 Fir'l ' , — ,-, , 1!.. •------.. , L,......- AP :a ' J--- ■` .g ;41:10gL --- ' -. j .- 7 • ' — !!''''!- l .'!", ' -r! 1 ” - ■ -----s; i.,--A.. -"---, .... ,..... - ,_ .a- - - . . 10 11 11 Irl Lift One Lodge Final PUD 1.0 5 10/11/2011 - Street: Safety Focus • Narrower road with sidewalks increases pedestrian safety • Removing street parking improves vehicle safety and snow removal • Turn - around at top for emergency vehicles and mountain event r 4 access 10.11.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD () Safety: Winter Treatment • Sidewalks: .4 • Snowmelt N. =- "' 1 i • ■ Streets: ,�,. jam, � � '' ' I.. , di • Salt 3 V _ a • ,�,, e - Deicer r r � j y l • Result: YYYY 1 _wl - , ..' i'' r • Rougher Surface 4 - ia• * • Larger Sand t O I h -. ! 1� • Vaults to Collect Material ..- ,:-.._,,,„-:wA, ' .. ''. 'ow, '. 4 . , 10.11.11 JOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD it 6 10/11/2011 What Do You Do There ? Vitality 1c pOSS it Lift One Lodge Final PUD 13 Interpretive Museum and Park AHS museum & � l gathering place ;�� +4 ° : f 1 Stabilized historic � ,a . '! � ' r ^ ! . � , .,,, assets with - - interpretation s More park like \i ` f" M,..oN,C.L,oC,... setting Deane St. Corridor Master Plan '' . t , h a1 - ` ,. : 10. 11 Lift One Lodge Final PUD 14 7 10/11/2011- • Restaurant & Apres Ski —- mo 1 • . - , 'n ASPEY 4 asPEa ` 4� ■ — _ ■ i " r „ • 5,950 sf public dining & bar facility T t,./ i • 2,680 sf outdoor decks • " _ rt , ,a 4.4' • Benefits racing users .174011 ' ' _ - ,. • Ajax & Little Cloud trails ' . -, .. - 10.11.11 pOSS 1 ft n.'- Lodge Final PUD 15 Public Ski Amenities 11 191 SKI LOCKERS _ ,,,,, ,,,,,...r.m.',,-rfoTCV7415621EM , • 900+ sf free public lockers ....` . / ; )fr • 50 seasonal lockers, 40 day lockers, 40 shoe - � , Aw • Direct access to ski corridor, street, and ' ° ;' . garage .. • 50 space public garage 10.11. pOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD I133 8 10/11/2011 Ski-In / Ski-Out Living II � . �� - ,, `� 1--«; _I `�� . ' � .. � j w Free Morket � 5 Un�s J � = ' �� ( . . '--_—� , � i | _..i . �� / � | 16 �' '� Affordable . Employees ��� ~~~- �r�� ` _~ ----------8 il ' 4/11011r Al !ID 10.11.11 10.11.11 poss � Lift One Lodge Final poo Ski-In / Ski-Out Living / / ` Free Market 5 Units Project Element Housing Mitigation Affordable � 16 Affordable |7ota| Code Required Employees � Mitigation 13.63 Employees ---- ~� Total Mitigation ^ '6� ' Provided 37.62 Employees . � � � ', ^_ e \ �� +�p __� On-Site Housing . 16 Employees 1| � � . 'l . / ` / 1/ | ' - - �{ 'i � \ i — — ,, — -- � *�—� -° �F|U) r— `~� - 0 II)) poss En Lift One Lodge Final PUD 18 9 10/11/2011 Flexible Lodge: Suite Configuration `_ 1 r.,--------Irr — —1`l 1. Key 1 1 Key 2` I Key 3 Key 4 Studio LBedroom ` Bedroom 1 Bedroom 0 r7 L f < i F 1 — 1 ti `� r i r �-, , 4 f l � r, � � Ins .r �,�r �I LA 1 1 JOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUL 19 Flexible Lodging: Lock -Offs t i I N L 1 l; I L V I` I _ n " y:_ a_I L , - --k— ___FA I 11--- -i I 1 , -,,=-p----L____, ,_____,- ___ I I I 1 1 • 10,11.11 Lift One Lodge Final Rif 20 10 10/11/2011 Flexible Lodging: Internal Corridors 1 1 Li I 1 1 1 I 9 tr.--4.1 L rcL_ �4_ - _I__ A Corridor L orridor1 IIIIIII Ii II r '' -� n 11 1 1 d = . 1 =1 I r i i. 1111 Lift Or Lo,..,„. Final PUD 21 Flexible Lodging: Key Size vs. Room Size I -- -=e - - r- s — -1 r -1 I M Gross Area 484 s.f. pOSS 0 Lift One Lodge Final PUD I] 11 10/11/2011 - Flexible Lodging: Room Size Breakdown I I � Structure & Mechanical 59 s.f. J J Circulation 46 s.f. _J — Closet 10 s.f. • Bathroom 104 s.f. Bed room Gross Area 484 s.f. 10.11.11 pDSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 19 Flexible Lodging: Diverse Room Sizes • • Average Suite Average Studio Average Room 10.11,11 pDSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 12 10/11/2011 Flexible Lodging: 1 Key Suites J-11 M. E i � 1 r C _J I J _ Average Suite 1,840 s.f. 4 Keys Average Studio Average Room 10 POSS I ® ^ ' , Lift One Lodge Final PUL 25 Flexible Lodging: Studios 1 Average Suite 1,840 s.f. 4 Keys Average Studio 734 s.f. 18 Keys Average Room 10.1 POSS I® Lift One Lodge Final PUD 26 13 10/11/2011. Flexible Lodging: Standard Rooms Average Suite 1,840 s.f. 4 Keys Average Studio 734 s.f. 18 Keys Average Room 396 s.f. 62 Keys 101 POSS Lift One Lodge Final PU( 27 Flexible Lodging: Average of All Keys .1 Average Suite 1,840 s.f. 4 Keys Average Studio 734 s.f. 18 Keys Average Room 396 s.f. 62 Keys Average Key 537 s.f. 84 Keys pOSS 1" Lift One Lodge Final PU. 28 14 • 10/11/2011 Flexible Lodging: Bedroom size • Average Bedroom: 202 s.f. Average Suite 1,840 s.f. 4 Keys Average Studio 734 s.f. 18 Keys Average Room 396 s.f. 62 Keys Average Key 537 s.f. 84 Keys 1L.. JOSS e!Y Lift One Lodge Final PUG 29 High Occupancy Lodging Lodge Membership: • 8 interests per suite= 176 �� 1, • 21 nights in summer (5/1 - 10/31) 1 182 nights • 21 nights in winter (11/1 - 4/30; —.N 183 nights) • Rent unoccupied keys and unused nights r1 -44 f t ff +;a'ia r t 10.11.11 DOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD i3D 15 10/11/2011 - High Occupancy Lodging Public Availability: f l r s .....--11 Key- nights not reserved by owners � - L -- r I I + Key nights not used by owners I l Total key- nights available to public U J 1 1 ri1 -,- . ., t 44 It ri ' ; r 10.11.11 pOss Lift One Lodge Final PUD I High Occupancy Lodging Public Availability: • Use Plan means 17.5 keys will be Ell �l 1 _1- - ,1 available for public rental on a typical r night during winter and summer _. season • 30 day notice from owners regarding utilization •Will be listed with Stay Aspen N- _ _ ' Snowmass, etc. — . 1 = - •All parties have a financial interest in renting unused rooms i � � f •Lobby, front desk, concierge, bellhop, •` • .► . 4 . —. and other typical lodge amenities. c - ' .1311 Ode , d • 10.11 .11 Lift One Lodge Final PUD 32 16 10/11/2011 Flexible Lodging: Suite ASPEN SNOWMASS e r V — r , ' 'r C I M 1 A l t R r t E A Y 1 t 1 6 M S -� I I I Standard Room Show Rate Calendar Mountain View Room :::::: Calendar p , ..I 2 Room Suite Calendar L I 1 eta 15 , C r— v .. n 1 r I It 1-1 rl- '''' g a l to .ii ,, POSS E LIft One Lodge Final PUC 33 Lodging That Fits Life: Suite Configuration — ASPEN SNOWMASS 1 C I M A R A l R I S E R 1 A: I e M Mountain View Room Show Rat= I I i I r- p 1 _ _ f t , ............ -. iqpi _ ,w..,..,„,, Oom .,_ „,, ft- k p f ii,-- _mo 10.11.11 Lift One Lodge Final PUD 3 17 10/11/2011= Lodging That Fits Life: Suite Configuration I i ii ' i e I I 11 I l I - -- 4100 - 1.,,, - ,,,':- . .- C II Fill ,r = n' � el * 1 i _L / ,,i t killit lo. JOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 35 Lodging That Fits Life: Suite Configuration I �_ ASPEN SN0 6YMASS �- C E N T R A L ![ 5[ A , A l I 0 M 5 4 Standard Room show sate • I I '^' Standard Room Mountain View Room Studio i r n i j 2 Bedroom Suite JI 2 Bedroom Suite show Rate calenc. �� � 3 Bedroom Suite n II II II I� ,r --9-F- tr—i L , I 1 10.11.11 JOSS ri Lift One Lodge Final PUD 13 18 10/11/2011 How Does it Fit There? Character in Response to Site Skiing, Mountain, Community, and the Future 1 Sustainability 10 FOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 87 Character: Honoring Aspen's Past I 1 immisonii 0,..-- d en """ r �� HISTORICAL SOCIETY 4), y ' 10.11.11 FOSS °, iiw Lift One Lodge Final PUD IS , 19 10/11/2011 Skiing 111- • *o ' IL. 4: _:-.• I ta ■ - , ' 7:7 „ te/ .4 . • 1 • t i N • i 11 I, .f . - 4411 1 . , A - , .... - _ - -___ jp,r ....— _ , - fill ,4 ' i l . I 1 i gitigrit M -ielf -.-W _ T . 2 Mb" 1 Al.. . .1. 1 ar ' AIN MI • edit ■Iim 1 , -- -4-1 0 • -, ii II • t 1 -• ii;% pi , . 4. A' • ..- IP , .., - . ... , . : i - f. . ... 11 3 ilf '.-- ,. ---, . - --4.. 1... II, A ■litl ,, - .. ..40. _ . _ ... $1 - A .. 1 • _ i .._ Ap . ki !lir 1 ' • 11• ""•••••■■••.97. -- _ . T ..liormr.r.,.... __ _ miimi l I 1 10 11 11 1 FOSS Inl Lift One Lodge Final PUD 0 Skiing: Existing Conditions 1 : 1:- j ' ' - •:i) .4 -■ --., { ....._,...b. 1 e.. 1.1.... 1,........ i 1 ' ?. i • ---1___ ' I 1 +9, • " i No _. _ • - __ -•- - ...091...."1 , , 1 qt::.' - . -. ...—...... 4........ /// , ,._ .1F . i - " ' W ' IOW ; ' - -- ,41015.... ...4.: . ., , , 4 , ... - . __ V' 1.• ., ..: ' ASP . ..- - ,....-- -.1 _ . ._ , •• 9 f)..,.. - .., , . ..„. .7— . • .., - e. • • ... f • ■ . , JOSS rim Lift One Lodge Final PUF 40 20 ice. * 10/11/2011 Skiing: Proposed Dedicated Ski Corridor : ; ,..., 17- , „ i . ... 11 c ,.... , ..._.. ,, ...,.,,,! • ,, i ,41. '— •-- . . , filii 1 a r : , 1 J ::, 1 .. ...,.. . ,,,, i 1. , - ! r...„......0 ... 1,:,0_,,,,- 4 ■,4 ,_ ifAte, , ...,:_-__,„ _____-_-„.._ _ ifi ._ ______ ,_ ,, ts .. , , i _ ,.,,,,,,) _ , , n . • ..,,,, ,.„__.„____ , . ,..., _ . ,._._.. _ . . it , ____ r-----,-, r = , r . q !! r s - . �° a , i i . - d , _ _ 'it (n r 10.11.11 POSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD I t Skiing: Existing Zoning E F C, CONSERV/ j w L, LODGE j cc w , N I w P, ( H) PARK, HISTORIC I w w I w cc w • Y ti H J P, (H) PARK, HISTORIC I Et wm 1 ¢ 5 Q zui I J 1. I I N I - - - - - • - • - • - - - - - - I • I - - - • - - - -� SOUTH ASPEN STREET E 10.11.11 pOSS El Lift One Lodge Final PUD 42 21 10/11/2011 Skiing: Proposed Zoning r — — r 1 1 - C, CONSERV/ L, LODGE I 1 1 I PUEI. (HL (PUD) 1 L — J PUBLIC, HISTORIC. I PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I I I PUB, (H), (PUD) I 1 — LOT 3 — J PUBLIC. HISTORIC. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I L. (PUD) LODGE, i LOT 4 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT — i — — — • LOT 1 L — I LOT 2 I — I I - - - -- — L, (PUD) LODGE, LANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 10. _ FOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 43 Setbacks: Greater than Required by Code i — 1 I Li 1 i______ _, L_L_.., DOLINSEK - '- - 1 RESIDENCE I i i MIN a H I I I i r L.. �..�.. _.. �.. �.. �..� .�.. �.. __ _ LIFT ONE PARK . ':. I I 1 n :i i _ L l LIFT ONE LODGE ' LIFT ONE LODGE 1 SKIERS O USE _ J , 1� / i STEAK HOUSE I \ ) • • ^" -- SOUTH ASPEN STREET _..... - .. ■.. ■.. ■.. .. .. -.. .. .. . ..........- ..- ..- ..- ............. .... .........- .. - .. .. - ..- .. .. -- ..- .. -..- .._..m..0,.._.. 10.11 " pOSS El Lift One Lodge Final PUD 44 22 7 10/11/2011 Setbacks: Less than Required by Code 1— 1 ) u I I LI. DOLINSEN - ..- •. -..- RESIOENCE 1.1 I l UFT ONE LODGE I fZJ I • • 1 l 1 R .._.. _.. _.. _.. _.. _.._ ._.._ -. ..�.. _, LIFT ONE PARK N ' LIFT ONE LODGE LIFT ONE LODGE SKIERS CHALET STEAK HOUSE SOUTH ASPEN STREET _.. ..-..-..-. .- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..�..�.. -.. �..- ..- ..- .. -.. -.. _.._.._.._.. _.. -.. _.._.. -.. _.._.. _.. _.. _.. _.. ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- .. -.. -.. -.. 1 -.. lU.11.l l poss Lift One Lodge Final PUD 45 Skiing: Proposed ROW Vacations r — L, LODGE C, CONSERV/ PUB, (H), (PUD) PUBLIC, HISTORIC, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I • PUB, (H), (PUD) 1 — LOT 3 PUBLIC. HISTORIC. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I L. (PUD) LODGE, LOT 4 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I 1 1 - — — LOT 1 • • L — I — LOT 2 - — — — — — — — I I (PUD) LODGE, LANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 10 PO SS ^^ Lift One Lodge Final PUD 23 10/11/2011 Skiing: Proposed ROW Vacations r — ._ r- -' crusE V; L , LODGE I I I I- PUB, (H), (PUD) L_ PUBLIC, HISTOC, PLANNED UNIT DEVE I I PUB, (H), (PUD) 1 — LOT 3 — PUBLIC, HISTORIC, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT L. (PUD) LODGE. LOT 4 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1 , — — — • L OT 1 • L— I LOT 1 I I - - - - -- L. IPUD) LODGE, . LAMED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 10: POSS ® Lift One Lodge Final PUD 47 Skiing: Proposed ROW Vacations r r I I L, LODGE I 1 C, CONSERV! I 1 I I PUB, IH), (PUDI I I I L -- — I PLANNED LOT DEVELOPMENT I I I PUB, H. IPUD) 1 — — — — J PUBLIC, HISTORIC, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I L. IPUD) LODGE. i LOT 4 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT . IIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I L (PUDI • — LODGE, . LANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT • 10.11 I POSS ® Lift One Lodge Final PUD 48 24 10/11/2011 Skiing: Proposed Dedicated Ski Corridor /" - r — — — - 'r C. CONSERVE L, LODGE I 1 I • PUB. CFO, IPUDI _ PUBLIC. HISTORIC. 1 I PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENt L, (BUD) LOT 4 PUNNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1 I I LOT 1 1 ' LOT 2 - I --- - -- --- • L, (PUD) LODGE, . LANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 10.11.11 pOSS im Lift One Lodge Final PUD illa 1 Skiing: Proposed Dedicated Ski Corridor F : 1 i l * ...,-"- - '--- \ , 3 _ . ,r_ , ,11.1.. ±- -.. ..� '41:11111 IIIIIM'1 /I /1li - 4t I ' • ` 4 S 7. • : i s T r , � 1: i'' 1 l I - r l 1 i 1 • Frli + - -F. jh to E. Ala -I 10.11.11 • pOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD i ■ 25 10/11/2011 Street: Typical S. of Durant - Mill Street v �-- 414 -- '10 - g*i , „ -' . , ,. 0 2 6.5' . , , i; 49' Lit Onc Lodge Final PUS 51 Street: Precedent - Monarch Street 4. . .0161521111 • _I , 'SiOVI _.. , 43' - -- 49' 10 . , Lift One Lodge Final PUD 52 26 10/11/2011 Street: Existing South Aspen Street . 111t,...t.4 ,, 911 91derik t '‘.‘ . R , , - • ## r ' F — � ,0.x. _ �. _ Y ! y . � i_ °r v f � * ' '� 32 ' w, RR ' v mR . Yi 52' i i t _ 5 2.5' ,�_ Litt One Lodge Final PUD 53 Street: Proposed South Aspen Street 4.- s . x f ? fir _ .� a z ' .1 . i F, I.r NINN I 1 • • j. .8 1 ' .g 'x y li Yr d�p� .:L4.... f a4 .�' 2 _ ( `P`i • e o R s-, r x u Y y 52.5' =.:... 10.11.1, Lift One Lodge Final PUD 4 27 10/11/2011 , The Community Outreach & Input: • COWOP • Neighbor Outreach THE CITY OF ASPEN • Aspen Historical Society Lift One Neighborhood 1 • ACRA Master Plan • Historic Preservation Commission r • Planning and Zoning Commission _, a _ • City Council vev•Ky 10 OM law en0 F. 11.11 pOss Lift One Lodge Final PUD 55 The Community: Response • West Building 47% reduction from 497' to 264' �. r ' c `�,. kk '. - . ^�� ma c_ • � �t -. r u et i 10 pOSS Lift One Lodge Final NI 56 28 r 10/11/2011 The Community: Response • East Building 54% reduction from 335' to 155' • l r _ • 1 7-,„,.,,,,„ - --",,,-- —Ft 6■1 - } _ r-e . 10 11.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 57 The Community: Accessible to Publ% L _ ¢ I _ _ • No lift relocation • • - 1 1 • Public restaurant /bar J • y Z I • Public ski lockers 1 CO - "� " � ` a : • Public parking • ;* 414 a; • Improved skiing 1 . • - _ - "IMMEMON•iir - t •--- - -i ; 1 4 ' 1 t ''' s a i l c , ) a 4.. ,1 , • Funding for Town Lift " I c _. - j � -- • - 1 r I 0 .. a7 ' 4 , • AHS museum A dit i o — — �� sn to '; 10.11. 05S Lift One Lodge Final PUD ra 29 10/11/2011 The Mountain ,w _ __ . _ .�. IV, r,.9. 10.1..11 Lift One Lodge Final PUD 59 The Mountain: Slope •,,..w.., . - , .....S. . k i! 4 ill! __ .. __ . ,i_ f iirt____,Ir:rir.:.., -- 'I IF .10: 44 4.1, 7 Aril II t , 4 , 1 1 , re r,, .,,, .., . +4 1 J� U 4'J' s • I, _ , L - ._ �4.' f . G - -i..0 y.�F III ,‘, : e t . : :, ::::. 11 'N ` rot ;. b tee, + was -._ .r_, _. 10.1 pOSS 1."• Lift One Lodge Final PUD 60 30 10/11/2011 The Mountain: Slope I .. , 4 1 /1 1 Stories I .. ,.. 11 VII U .... .5-' • 1111 r 4 ''.. ' ' -- tt,• • li cfr f 5 Sories -,*- r,- 1 ■ ' i -- - 3 Stories . . Irv' 4 3 4 Stori:il 11 Ill .„. - „,,,.. 10.11 ii Lift One Lodge Final PUD 61 The Mountain: Slope ,., j L40.2_,_,..,..,..,...,,..,, • - , _ _A — L 1 _. ------ , % • - 0; - n- .,-#-i ,.._ .... _ . .. ,, _ .,•,,____/_ , i z : .. 75 FeeWat . ..,.... . _ - ,•!... . WI vol.! _ -- -- -- — _ _, ,,, ,, . , ilemlwanuvrion it, _ t . .7,,,, . , . r., ...1 ..• . — " - .- • ...e ... -c. . :;” - - - ,.„, 1 :,_ , . f * Feet Ofikisf0 - i - /---- ..,,, ( ____,1 1 • i l: " '"l i : ' ',-,,,: ,'‘: : ''''\-:------ ___1 I i `'; Af / ill , It, ill - 10 _, ,-...._,... . 10 .11.11 poss Lift One Lodge Final PUD 62 31 10/11/2011 The Mountain: Slope O O p" n () i • t it i pOSS L fe One LL Fi,a POI 63 Heights 42.00 ft 51.70 ft ir 45.50 ft 43.90 ft 50 10 ft Y I i_ i� ai 47.75 f t '� �' ..„, — - I l i _ ,/.._, - - II al , Att4 .4p.i,gii IN loiiir: - 4 - 0" = , - ,,,,, .— a J i i2l fSli TJ ill 111 i •+..•S� 1 1 e i r posy _ _ - 64 32 10/11/2011 Model Review ry i -_ fYa� % V ,- W it e..,}P=' ill - ----- ''' 1 410 ig d i�i� ) a i p f4 . 1 10.11._ Lift One Lodge Final PUD 65 The Future 0 . , ' ' i - ,. , . _., 4., comm \ 4 J You can't see the future by only looking in your rear view mirror 10.11.1 p nsc Lift One Lodge Final PUD 66 1 ■ 33 10/11/2011, The Future: Sustainability °�, s ht, d o • \ �� • Redevelopment of infill site , r "' c. p yQ rt gcr a c.� • Repurposing existing structures SKIING • Ground Source Heat Pump System • LEED Gold • Commissioning, Measurement & Verification Economic — • Green Roofs 1.11.11 FOSS Lift One Lodge Anal PUD 67 Realization of Goals Get There Do There Fit There Pedestrian Apres Ski Gathering Adaptive Reuse Improvements Place Connect to Transit Public Restaurant Sustainable Design Street Improvements Public Ski Lockers Character Honors Past & Looks to Future Safe Public Parking Lodging: Hot Beds Massing Follows Slope Dedicated Ski Access Historical Society View & Ski Corridor Museum Deane Street Ski Walk On -Site Affordable Onsite AH Housing Improved Emergency Park Improvements Pedestrian Access Access 10.11.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge Final PUD 68 34 10/11/2011 Next Steps Questions & information Requests? Next Meeting- Standards, Staff Recommendations, Responses to Requests a - . I R b s ql- �� Vt! ' 1 P Lift One Lodge Final PUD 69 Honoring Aspen's Past Embracing Aspen's Future Lift One Lodge Final PUD 10.10.11 poss 70 35 /0,0_7 Lift One Lodge Final PUD Site Tour / Context 10.05.11 PO55 Lift One Lodge Z cn e ' St 2 emainst az z u Mi Si k c%s A►,n 1 i 0 4- r Av S " ' Ave 6 A 1 4iwD B E h i 0, � . , c., 0 -....v. s, .t ,.. 1 E +r an , Ave t h co S C, F"e a t., Si y , tr 1 i . 0 4444 St cq ,, , t2r 1 6{ G O F E°' A — City Hall ,; B — The Elks Building C — Hyman Ave. Mall D — Wheeler Opera House E — Mountain Chalet ._ F — St. Regis G — Willoughby Park / Lift One Park / Lift One Lodge 10.05.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge • 3, ; 43 ""... 1 "9 0 1 4. . 4444 t; A 0 E f i u•nsr .. ! i „„.,... 4 • , "G. A t , A.,..„. . 0 i Ft i a i' s al . .. . , ... , . • , ._ ,... , , • t . ; A + 1_, _4, ?, 1 - r-... . _ I . 4. ... t N. f- 16 +1 1 1 ...... V_ L ' I , * , • -- , - • .. rt s • '.- __ ....o..• I -.+4 4- , purisol ,, 1 _ . _ ........„.. ....,,.. . _ A — City Hal 10.05.11 poss Lift One Lodge , 9 ? 45 1 ,, E 4,..„ S. ® I ....., 6 0 1 g I i , 3 0 - 4, •■••,..,... ,,, B i, -- I . I . I a 1 a i ..,.... ! ,,,, i , _.. r .,. 0 c.: -, Amn 3, ' 1 0 / j ... '" , , Se - , t . , 7 4 ., „..... • ..... ... ••. .. .. . ......_______ _.......,, .,. • ,,_ ...., ,. ,, ,.... .,... • _... ._. +1- 49 ' ! • _.. . a r . ILL ., ... • il . 1 C it ilip kill -7. 1 . . . ..TZ, * • - 7: 4 IV A ; ,i 1 i ,. N 4 1 .44101116•H - VP 4 .,,,.,, ''''''.• -; tilliii0111 « iiIIIM 11111111*. - . . III • . , Nth: r ■ i . 4 4 ....gis t'; 4 ••• i . Man. ... ff ..- — - q.; to - -■ .. A fit . .....___ ...__ . ' . . . ' . . • . - . B — The Elks Building 10.05.11 poss Lift One Lodge Y z s. Ep,...eg i 'x , E4 . , S, ® I r O Er T s. I f -, pp ; E n,,,, • '• .i a ff fy Ta.. C a . , . L 0. i . , ,,,, _ h 4 Ear * 1 E � O Ea, °•E,. 1 0 E4 �s a w j� 3 a E 4.nm3, 4 S T" 1 _ :,„,..—"" r N t .l • wr. ' , .. > �' 1 . P ' * ... 1,46 ) r IV , / , 1 4. ,;.;-4,,, - 4 6 . , . . .• , .- .. • gm , .., .... A _ , ... . . . " ,„, • • r . + . • 7 . , Of a S ` .!. , . . pit itir , , , - - :.1.' vJ ' I • , , i � � "" ' ' t " '.� r 3 4 ? "' i, 1�, , , ye, y . ? .. - N C — Hyman Ave. Mall u.u.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge ,• E- y ; a " ‘"••ar 1 ''' • , E ' ® Z $ ....,,, fi a ® e 1 •• ..... , . „.„ - -.4,•,,, t .,. i I , 'i 1 • ... A '"' d . I 1 1 4 „,,” -- ..,..--,...."' ; ...6. t . 7244i7p.41, e it t ,, , " ' . t f • • ' ' ' ' . . -- .... ,....., .; If +1 11 i..... ..... . . ....., ....- li•p• • ▪ 4 ... • • . I .1111 ar. ........r _... , •ft. -"1.• -- " ....„ ...' PPM ,.... ......,„/"... 4.7 ..■ ill . • • .... - .- NAM f • • ••■-• . - .. . IFIllgillii _ .. i fri . . . . . . . . . ..,), . .t. V $ t . . - . " t . . , . sagadelOMIIIMIC VANItallialrallIN1 . D — Wheeler Opera House - 10.05.11 JOSS Lift One Lodge E a., A E g_•, 1 `b,q E *,5 O +. ! Q Fw^� f E a 3"...... I 1 a E 1 3 ( 41111. v; ..' E C r. � a a a E 3 . ,,,t Era, F E A s A E4 .a.r. m n I E ,„ �A 5Gf %._,, J III 4t1111111111 4 i +fir Ili +/ 3' INA al _.,., _,:......„.. .. . . , ._ m. ill vilie -+ r t • E — Mountain Chalet 10.05.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge • • ®r • • F { x pySa •i ' - !— l ti' Y _ , .1...k...!..... :,. , ' " ' 1.-‘..,:,:..i 6 - -::,-...1' W., , k .. 1/4' -' A 1 I . .„..:. .. : ., . .,,.. . „..,._, kak . ' r -":"' - I. y • • ` Lif . .01. i /14 ' ." .. -- itk r --- ar ,D III lir ,t _ ... •0 i l 4 . INNE 1 . ,,1I g11! 11 ° r • F(1) — The St. Regis 10.05.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge • •.• 1..' ,, '5.... 1 ,.., 6 44 k , s, 0 / ®t I 4.2.. S. i I 1 J I -A, - ..., -a a ... ,,..,... 0, 4.3 g a i ---,, a / --..., i a .---- . ei■ 4. ''%_*,' ' t ' . r l e , , . "..".... . r -4- -, :. • lif . - . I ,.... • 1 4.. 1 . I .■` • 4 1% 1, ,L. i 11 ., 1. . 'r.1 • • :, • , ...,., . ,, • '..,' _ . '. . . .II ‘1.".'..-.........'' I i'N 1 Ildidt i ' -..... 1 t _.., ail 1 \ ILI 4, . ET, 1 914 ,,,,_-, / 1 • r ., ..,., _....0A mi,..„sir........_._ F(2) — The St. Regis 10.05.11 poss Lift One Lodge i �9 x $ St E sr ■• JE E. OP2 fy� +.. E Gx°4 a w EP.w� E F $ F f & 5 Ae l OF +/= 5 3 ' • F(3) — The St. Regis 10.05.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge •J r e� Ebbwr� i ' O F f f ,�, s f ' ," L a . 1 , k G 4 1 r*.** .: ' ' s ,.„..,::. - - N............)f.f.agg R I k ~ } ..- � � ly � i P► Wt.I 1 i F - 1 r a.,, s 3 .» ONE _ w G » aL jl -.-� - I: , --- 1 - L/f � 1 Slithir' i . i \ f II I CS P. .. -, I I1 ii\ I '1".0. 1,1 f I- ' la I —4 I, i' L/rr ti coy/D; --- _,i,,t L.. ___ , J i ' ` .. S ' it ' \ ‘‘s, • h.q. • 1 — %. .`. / 0 I 1r N / era ' .� R ., . � - N pr #Mf 4 f II a / i n se ; , p sl SNeM urr ) ) J, nsl II , 0 i .....,/ tr �r �. _ x 1 l [ `. :i C IS' . _—; I • t, 1 Li loo e .i.c.__. ILL D is Se I G - Lift One Lodge L 10.05.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge ,. f .. , ,,, • 1 spec., MoV, A.e.04. as . ,.. 4 l , .. € .. s .... ., 1 ,,„ 1 ,,,,.. lg. Pt t. 5 Pt. 6 a. i ' ---\ ,,, , .. r ....„. Pt 2 I 1 . , G s 1....1' , . ? Pt. 7 a i ::, - • teDilr it P , - :' . a..,,,,„ a 1. ■ f I 14. E ■ = ' 1 sc./ Pt. 3 . /..$4,.... ' • i 1.-- 511 _ 4' e Pt 8 • , ....:-.,..- . .1, r " . Pt. 4 • „ .,., . , ,- r.-_,..,.___. •. -, '7 Pt. 9 ... L 4 . ,. ------ --.; . Pt.12 ill -•,,,,..„,_ • . - -.\ Pt. 10 - 1 . Pt: 1 ..,. ., Se. "■•. A ...-••• -- 4.- q '• ‘ • i. 1 A '. + ....:" ) If' ' ° ' kill : ' t 14 Pt. 16 ,• I 1 - / , t •,.. 13 - ----7---- ,.. , ■ ... ; PL Pt. 18 • Sewn? A/SP,E.A . _ 61-2‘eirr ' , -- '' ■ ' •, , : V ' ■ L\ 17 _ A C • e r t / 7 7 c r o t - r w i - - I i 1 L I Si ILL Se{ G — Lift One Lodge 10.05.11 poss Lift One Lodge Y = f 1 ..9 a 4,.� y { 5 .4.„„,,, a' f j ., a £rtir� ° `T f E6ar.r�� a 6b� Fo,,, r L t0 '.., y 6S E°"y.. G Em's, 3 t5 a 3 3 E %., s, el i f s h ■ tillt ■ ■ } 1 /1 4 iS �f $ I • !' / I ) . +1 32's • SK a ` CHALET I ,� • li I Y _ ..yY._r.. _ . —a, .6.-:....... ^\ • r , . ..... , , .. 4 , , _... , ____...3.„,' 3 - 3.......1/4. _ . _ : _ • • G(2) — Skiers Chalet Steakhouse 10.05.11 pOSS Lift One Lodge I "111111■1■1 • f..• `i' a ' % '" , s, i *. i C.) a I . - i A ct e"0-,...... . I E..„.„,.., a -a : 4 I a 1 a I . '"'..) .. t A.... a ■ t -•• . I • ---. _ a I •.:. .. el 1 ,.... ....... --................ 4'ci- . ' '. L r 'AINigu --- 4L, K. I E Ft s CHALE i ...; . .. i oil.. r..................:....._________..._ • ' — - 4 . 4 4 .--......—........----„, -----•------,... 1 o • II 6 , " • .,...---, -....... orr a la I) i lit" 1 ri e . - 4 ,.,..,, , 44, i _r , _ • - ,_ —„, 00 ,.....t . . 64 .• I , __. 1 , - - - 0 ,40;i 8 k• •.• ) ' - " laas. II •• , O g we} i , t•-iir. : 1 ,..... . , r i ..,., ) - • ... . i „ta - - . ,... a t - , , s ..._6_: - - ...0-- - - Ili 4 .14 ..•••••940111110fK"2 • G(3) — Skiers Chalet Lodge 10.05.11 pass Lift One Lodge J E 5 ^'..v s rq � z G S F N ^ s} ® s G s ®Evers ' E b s a g a d E f 'ti ,•,,. G Z fa h M b E e. I G Ea.yv,,, $ E`a,, E a.,y I I I y EW. '�'n si G . .. G 2 o Ee ' ^nrS a 5 CA ... v i • i.� 1 y `t... y' a. 4- A . 1 _ ;y. a .' r ... N. { ♦ 1. I ..,. ..„. �' .. ._:„._ ,.., .... .40i .......__,.....- .. , . . .... . _. .., t:„......., . . ...____ .......0- Mill - �S..„. ;Is it _ ..r ;ob. s - �.aA '• — _ N • ' • . • e y G(4) — Caribou Condominiums 10.05.11 ill pO SS Lift One Lodge a J z _ Esw_ 1 -9 • µ.,, ® i i . b ®e 1 a f "." ,, f I * � 1 1 a 3 * E ,T "'.. 4K EG4y.,.. & i ta E 1 tl A '1'n <4►~ 1 E f ,, b I Ea G 1 E� � a y 3 si yam` loti.- A k31 it T i 1 — 1- i i . • i - rr r 1V 1 i I G(5) — Historic Lift Tower 10.05.11 I pOSS Lift One Lodge • ;.• • F .s.. a • ° E., ^ E • • E -- s , s 1 1 4105 ,• ••+ies.. + • - ; +/- G(6) - Lift 1A 10.05.11 poss Lift One Lodge' /44 , !9.1(.11 As a long time Aspen resident I have seen many projects come and go and I support the Lift One Lodge for three reasons: 1. I observed first hand, as the recording secretary for the COWOP, the contributions a�scussions of the task force, experts, along with the developer, made to meet the desires and wishes of the community 2. this project has taken great care to address mass and scale, a _' _' _s *_'- as well as shown respect for the historical elements of the area; 3. this plan offers 100% affordable housing mitigation. it is my belief that the Lift One Lodge meets or exceeds the goals that were established for the master plan and holds the promise of good energy and vitality for that area as well as the community of Aspen. Page 1 of 1 Chris Bendon From: Chuck Frias [Chuck @friasproperties.com] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 2:09 PM To: Chris Bendon; Adam Frisch; Derek Johnson; Mick Ireland; Steve Skadron; Torre Cc: Bob Daniel Subject: Lift One Lodge support Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Red I want to voice my support for the proposed Lift One Lodge. Our company manages and rents many Aspen core properties as well as hundreds of fractional condominiums. We have a unique perspective on the use of fractional core properties and their value to the local economy. We have found that the fractional condominiums on average have a higher occupancy than other core free market rental condominiums. The value of fractional condominiums to the local economy is far greater than free market condominiums that do not rent. The community gains from the ongoing tax revenues that the resort guests generate in lodging tax and retail sales. The typical fractional owner is a young professional with family buying their first resort property. Our resorts future depends on attracting this type of customer. I know the GM's of the local fractional properties, Ritz, Hyatt and St Regis. I think they would be happy to share macro details of their properties occupancies and customers. This will be invaluable to you in assessing the merits of this project. We possibly have lost the opportunity to create more quality tourist housing at the base of Lift One A. The community can not afford the loss of another. We should support a quality developer creating a first class property in the right location with the most beneficial property type. The Aspen Ski Co ownership is one of the most important assets this community shares. Creating hot beds that support our resort business community is in everyone's best interest. Please place my support in the public records. Thanks. Chuck Frias Managing Partner / Broker 730 E. Durant Aspen, CO 81611 970.948.7979 cell 970.429.2411 direct 970.920.2000 main 970.920.2020 fax W w W. FR IAS PROPERTI ES.CO M 10/11/2011 October 11, 2011 City Council Aspen, Colorado Mayor and Council: Unfortunately, I am out of town for tonight's council meeting. However, I would like to offer my support for the application for the Lift One Lodge. The Lift One Lodge has been in a continually evolving approval process, which has included multiple years of community input. While it has been productive on some levels, it has taken an unbelievable amount of time. So much time, the economic conditions for building the project have gone through two economic cycles, at least. This current application, with its stream -lined version of the project, takes into account as many of the community and council preferences as possible. It conforms to our community plans and is economically viable today. As the city of Aspen continues to change with the addition of new buildings; the Lift One Lodge at the base of the mountain, on the southwest side of town, adds vitality throughout our historic ski town. May I encourage you to support and approve the application for the Lift One Lodge. Thank you, } Penney Evans CUrruth % % MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Kocli, City Clerk FROM: Tom Rubel, Parks Operations Superintendent FROM: Stephen Ellsperman, Parks and Open Space Director DATE: October 3, 2011 RE: Appeal of Decision by Special Event Committee — World Snow Polo REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Review official decision of the Special Events Committee denying application by World Snow Polo for use of Wagner Park as a special event venue in December, 2011. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved a Special Event Matrix in September 2009 to assist in identifying when and where to hold certain types of special events. Wagner Park and Rio Grande Park are identified on this matrix as not being available during the December time period based upon carrying capacity of the system. During a May, 2011, City Council work session the current declined condition of Wagner Park and the circumstances leading to this decline, including the World Snow Polo Event was discussed. City Council gave direction supporting staff's recommendation to not utilize Wagner Park for this type of special event in 2011/2012. DISCUSSION: The Municipal Code, Section 14.20 et. seq. addresses special events. Section 14.20.130 outlines the appeal process for any one dissatisfied with the decision of the Special Events Committee. 14.20.130 Appeals. Any person not satisfied with the action taken by a person designated by the city manager to perform the duties of the city manager set forth at sections 14.20.040 and 14.20.050, by the special events coordinator, or any other city staff person with regard to an application pursuant to this chapter shall have the right to take successive appeals, first to the city manager, and then to the city council. An appeal to the city manager shall be taken by filing with the city clerk a signed statement that the applicant desires to appeal to the city manager, along with a copy of the application and the written denial or the permit objected to. An appeal of a decision by the city manager to the city council shall be taken by filing with the city clerk copies of the application, denial or permit, and the written decision issued by the city manager, along with a signed statement that the applicant desires to appeal to the city council. Each appeal shall be filed within two (2) days, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, of the decision appealed from. A hearing shall precede a decision by either the city manager or city council and advance notice of the hearing shall be provided to the applicant and the city official whose decision is being appealed as soon as is practicable. The right to appeal an adverse decision by the city manager to city council shall be contingent upon city council's regular meeting schedule. If city council does not meet prior to the time of the scheduled special event, the city manager's decision shall be final. The Special Event Committee met September 29 with the applicant for World Snow Polo. The applicant is requesting to hold snow polo in Wagner Park December 17 and 18, 2011 (application attached Exhibit A). After hearing from the applicant, Barry Stout/World Snow Polo, the Parks Department, stated they would not approve use of either Wagner or Rio Grande Parks for winter use. The committee agreed without a venue it could not approve a special event permit. Parks staff is recommending no special events on athletic fields this winter due to damage from snow compaction the past two years, which led to anaerobic conditions that killed over 50% of the grass on Wagner Park (Exhibit B Report from Larry Musser, PRZ turf consultant). Staff decision to deny the snow polo special event was based on direction from City Council received at a May 24, 2011 work session and the special Event matrix approved by City Council in September of 2009. (Exhibit C) During the May 24 work session, the condition of the turf in Wagner Park and some of the circumstances leading to the deteriorated turf were discussed. Shortly after that meeting, a letter was sent to the snow polo organizer stating that Wagner and Rio Grande Parks would not be available for event use in December 2011. The special event Matrix was created to facilitate decisions for event venues and times of year that growing /turf conditions allowed certain types of events. Late fall and early winter are the least ideal conditions for turf to withstand stress from events. Events during fluctuating temperatures, dormant turf and little to no snow cover could potentially cause severe damage up to complete loss of turf. In the matrix, November and December were designated as closed to events to allow for more events during better conditions. Staff has offered the availability of event venues to the snow polo organizers in February during a low impact event designation, even though it is a medium to high impact event. At this time staff continues to recommend to Council no events in December. The Parks Department presented the complications from winter events with the functionality and viability of the resource at a City Council work session on May 24 2011. City Council provided direction and agreed with staff recommendations to not allow winter special events on Wagner Park in 2011/2012. With the die off of the grass and less than ideal growing conditions the past two springs, the turf in Wagner has needed constant attention that required area closures in much of the park all summer long. In addition, costs for this turf restoration were very significant and not covered by the special event fees for the event. If we have similar winter and spring conditions again this year, it is likely that Wagner will need the constant closures next year as well. Staff feels that it is not worth the risk to the community to hold an event for a small number of people that limits the use of a Park for the entire summer. Please see attached photographs displaying conditions of field spring 2011, compaction of field surface /ice 2010, field conditions/horse damage 2010, field conditions/horse damage 2010, photos representative of crowd size 2011 (Exhibit D). Staff has offered resources to assist the World Snow Polo Organization with finding alternative venues to hold the special event in 2011. In addition, staff has worked very hard over the past decade to assist the event organizer to explore best management practices to protect the turf during the World Snow Polo Event. Despite these attempts, the turf at Wagner Park has suffered greatly the last two years (as well as in years before at other venues such as Rio Grande Park). Barry Stout filed an appeal with the city manager Thursday, September 29 within the two days outlined in 14.20.130. (Exhibit E). Attachments Exhibit A - World Snow Polo Application Exhibit B — Larry Musser e -mail Exhibit C — Special Event Opportunities Matrix September 9, 2009 Exhibit D — Photographs Exhibit E — Request for Appeal Barry Stout Page 1 of 5 12th Annual 12th Annual USPA World Snow Polo Championship USPA World Snow Polo Championship Click HERE for a printer friendly view. Saturday, December 17, 2011 Primary Jurisdiction: City of Aspen Overall Status: Need More Info Event Category: City of Aspen - Town of Snowmass Village - Pitkin County Special Event On -line Application Click HERE if you'd like to view the entire on -line application. Specific location(s): Wagner Park DATES/TIMES: Set -up: 12/13/2011 08:00 AM Start: 12/17/2011 08:00 AM End: 12/18/2011 04:00 PM Dismantle: 12/18/2011 05:00 PM PRIMARY CONTACT: SECONDARY CONTACT: Barry Stout Send e -mail Don Sheeley Send e -mail Roaring Fork Polo Club Aspen Activities Center 2000 Baldy Creek Road 500 W. Main New Castle, CO 81647 Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: (970) 566 -0818 Phone: (970) 379 -1800 Work: (970) 566 -0818 Fax: (970) 923 -3460 Work: (970) 925 -6025 x.1 OTHER CONTACTS: During event - contact names & phone numbers Primary: Barry Stout (970) 566 -0818 Secondary: Don Sheeley (970) 379 -1800 Medical: Aspen Valley Hospital (970) 925 -1120 Parking: none (000) 000-0000 Safety: Barry Stout (970) 566 -0818 Security: First Line Security (970) 379 -4486 Transportation: none (000) 000 -0000 atiliNer k httn:/ /snecialevents.asnennitkin.com/ details .cfm ?printviewflag= l &eventid =674 9/29/2011 Page 2 of 5 DETAILS & DOCUMENTS: Event Summary: *The World Snow Polo Championships has been staged in Aspen for many years and is open and free to the public. Historically, there have been approximately 500 attendees per day. 30 fully trained staff, 10 volunteers, 5 independant contractors and 3 security will be used to run the event. Participants will be limited to Players on four to six teams with three persons per team plus referees. Amplified announcing and music will be used from 10;OOam to 3:OOPM, December 17th and 18th. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Polo - Zgreen checklist.pdf 130.52 k Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Site Plan (and maps): Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Communication Plan: Staff Contact list: 1. MICHELLE HUBER; Horse Manager, (435)790 -3867. 2. ERIC WARNER; Field Setup /maintenance (970)485 -4460. 3. FIRST LINE SECURITY; Robert Ficks,(970) 379 -4486. 4. MRI- Portable Restrooms (970) 876 -5900 1800 Medicine Bow Rd., Silt, CO 81652. 5. TRANS CARE AMBULANCE; (970) 876 -4018. 6. L'HOSTARIA; food; Tiziano Gortan (970)925 -9022. 7. ASPEN CATERERS; Tents and Supplies - 925 -1207. Security, Ambulance will use UHF radios on channel #1. All other staff will use channel #2. Barry Stout (event chair) will switch back and forth as needed. 911 will be used if additional ambulance is required. Any changes in the event shall be announced in the Aspen Times and /or KSPN radio. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Security Plan: Security will be provided by FIRST LINE SECURITY. There will be a minimum of three security personnel on site during the event. Contact: Robert Fickes, C.A.S. PO BOX 212, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (970)379 -4486/ frstline @rofnet Medical Plan: TRANS CARE AMBULANCE SERVICE -Alan hughes (719)469 -5680, dispatch;(970) 456 -9036, fax:(970)876.4018, (www.tcambulance.com) will be at the event (see map). Safety Plan: Spectators will be separated from the field by a fence surrounding the field. see attached site plan. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k httn:// snecialevents .aspenpitkin.com/details.cfm ?printviewflag =1 &eventid =674 9/29/2011 Page 3 of 5 Transportation/Traffic Plan: the event is in a public park and attendees will arrive on foot. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Parking Plan: none - see site plan. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Sanitation/Recycling Plan: See attached ZGREEN EVENTS CHECKLIST. MRI, (Mountain Roll Offs) 1800 Medicine Bow Rd., Silt, CO 81652 (970)876.5900 will provide two portable restrooms and 1 hand wash facilities. There is also a public restroom at the park. FIRSTLINE SECURITY - contact; Robert Fickes, CSF, PO BOX 212, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602, (970)379 -4486. Polo - Zgreen checklist.pdf 130.52 k Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Alcohol Mitigation Plan: See attached site map. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Polo - Zgreen checklist.pdf 130.52 k Accessibility Plan: Travel paths shall be available throughout the event. No transportation plan has been established. Accesable restrooms are currently available at the park. The tent shall have a ply -wood floor for easier wheelchair access. All events shall occur during daylight hours. Polo -site plan.pdf 49.88 k Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Alcohol Permit & License: An alcohol permit/license application may be submitted prior to 30 days before the event. Food Permit: Health, food and/or beverage permits shall be acquired prior to to the event. L'Hostaria Restaurant will be serving food. Contact: Tiziano Gortan @ 925 -9022. Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Polo -tent set up.pdf 85.88 k Polo - Zgreen checklist.pdf 130.52 k httn:// snecialevents. aspenpitkin. com/ details .cfm ?printviewflag =l &eventid =674 9/29/2011 Page 4 of 5 Sales Tax & Bus. License: Hats, t -shirts and sweatshirts may be sold at the event. Reviewed and accepted: NO Liability Insurance: proof of Insurance shall be supplied within 30 days prior to the event. References: This will be the 12th Annual Snow Polo Event held in Aspen. REVIEWING AGENCY COMMENTS /STATUS:Overall Status: Need More Info Aspen Community Relations /Communication Send Status: Not Yet Reviewed an email Aspen Community Safety Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Environmental Health Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Finance Department Send an email Status: Need More Info Approval Agency Request [09/16/2011 11:36 AM] Any food or merchandise sold at the event requires vendors to charge the 9.0% sales tax rate for Aspen. 2.1% is remitted directly to the City. 6.9% is remitted to the State of Colorado. Aspen Fire District Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Parking Send an email Status: Approve Approval Agency Request [08/31/2011 11:19 AM] Parking and Transportation info not available. Aspen Police Department Send an email Status: Approve Aspen Recreation Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Risk Management Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Special Events Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Streets Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Transportation Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen ZGreen Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Aspen Zoning Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed RFTA Send an email Status: Not Yet Reviewed Wheeler Opera House Send an email Status: Approve Approval Agency Request [08/23/2011 03:52 PM] I believe that we've always worked well together in the past, but just want to make the organizers aware that we will be having a family event both days, most likely with matinee performances. Shouldn't be a problem so long as we're all aware of our schedules. Thanks. httn:/ /snecialevents.asnenpitkin.com/ details .cfm ?printviewflag =l &eventid =674 9/29/2011 Page 5 of 5 • = Not Yet Reviewed J = Need More Info • = Declined • = Approve httn:// snecialevents. asnennitkin .com/details.cfm ?printviewflag =l &eventid =674 9/29/2011 5. a $ 5.; • ' -r G �' :1 Li o Ca d Q- \ yP t/ i P - 1 s a li . i p� a A ` d am e i ty) L e A ci et Nn c. ) -- , E a PH - ge £ g ,Q1 co . 1 (`f 094 . c ", n { o �, Le as p a 1 r J T1 Q r t .,y i S ID. l ANIL 4 i i N m 1 � 9_ N c y E ` ° m W N as O. " c . c to c co o a. O d > O d L. C O u > Ey E mc .:. - U'�o m ,ada c gc = c a+�� ag m O w o. = c 0 2 J 81 22 L N• S w ZZ _� 3�b .m u T — a � m .. • ; Qa Q d =FaN ` —I m I l � o I 0 N 1 i S 4111! Ij W/ To I .mD do > w V` i 4 R o ' I ' tj 'h+ — .P.Ot— • _ a ! 813 { y !_ i O L C a m si < y__ m ` m m g 12 to 4 0 ao 9 <: c 1. cp "�" n.A{ : s e_ off > --. d sa z a ' i 5 o. `s 4 .0-.0z-5— V o N > G - Z an d 4 co R c F _ w S w oo.� sr t • dre w z _ be 0 1 - wztr 0 ▪ ZIw v I • P ,. I < m 0 0 w. Tom Rubel From: Larry Musser [tarry©przseminars.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 1:45 PM To: Tom Rubel Subject: RE: anaeroobic conditions causing turf damage Attachments: 3larrybuscard master.doc Toni, I work all over the US and in the colder climates my clients have major problem when snow is groomed or compacted over dormant turf areas because these areas hold the water during freeze thaw cycles and are the last to thaw. The soils under these areas become anaerobic which kills the grass roots. Once these areas dry out, you are looking at dead turf and are starting all over again in the spring. At higher altitudes the growing season is so short that you rarely have time to grow these areas back in that season. Larry Musser President -PRZ Consulting 719 - 265 -6003 Original Message From: Tom Rubel [ mailto :Tom.Rubel(dci.aspen.co.us Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 1:37 PM To: Larry Musser Subject: anaeroobic conditions causing turf damage Larry, Thanks for your help. 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Rubel; Operations Manager, Parks Dept. THRU: Jeff Woods; Manager, Parks and Recreation DATE: September 9, 2009 MEETING DATE: September 15, 2009 RE: Special Event Opportunities Matrix CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Due to the renewed interest in Special Events within the City of Aspen, Staff created a matrix that shows which venues within the core are available during various months. This matrix is designed to help Staff, the outside event coordinator, the Special Events Committee, and even Council with guidelines to ensure that Parks, Streets and other named venues are not over -used, or to highlight those that are underused. Staff would like Council to approve this Matrix to be used to balance event impact with sustainability of the Parks. BACKGROUND: Presently, Wagner and Rio Grande are near capacity for event and athletic use as shown by former studies from turf consultants. (Attached with list of current uses.) Staff continually receives requests for the use of Wagner Park for special events. The perception from the event coordinators is that Rio Grande is too far removed from the core, and their event will suffer from the distance. Staff works with every event request, through direct contact, or during the Special Events Committee reviews, to accommodate all needs and requests; but it is not possible to have every event in Wagner Park. As Staff has mentioned to Council on numerous occasions, turf is more susceptible to damage during certain times of the year, which could result in the need for significant closure periods. DISCUSSION: After considerable review, Staff has created the attached Special Event Matrix. Wagner and Rio Grande are especially popular venues, and we reserve these parks for revenue-generating events that serve the community. As Council will note, there is room for one or two more low -to- EXitt€elo medium impact events in both Rio Grande and Wagner Parks, as well as Paepcke, with the caveat that weather could cause maximum damage if elements were extreme. Winter months of January and February might possibly be open to another one or two low impact events at each of these parks as well. Staff has father identified some alternate sites that would open up more opportunities for events to be held elsewhere, which would in turn allow increased use by the general public in both Wagner and Rio Grande. As with all sites, there are elements that need to be worked with. For example, using a street for an event will present challenges and concerns for the Fire Marshall and the public safety sector that need to be addressed. These are not insurmountable, as we have closed streets on previous occasions with various events. The goal of the matrix is to prevent the current trend of every event requesting Wagner Park for their event location. We could entertain perhaps one high impact event at Rio Grande or even Paepcke, but certainly not Wagner. Mid -March to late April and November/December are critical months where events cannot be scheduled in these parks as any activity could cause severe or irreparable damage to turf, resulting in long closures of these parks during high season. Staffs intention is that the Matrix would provide a positive experience for those hoping to schedule a new event in Aspen, allowing them to suggest a specific site that the Special Events Committee could approve. There are several locations where fewer events are held, such as Cozy Point and Koch Park. These could easily accommodate increased use. Again, Staff hopes to give new and existing events options that may not have been realized by the event coordinator. Staff feels it is appropriate to have a standard policy to easily distinguish site availability and types of events allowed during specific times of the year. Therefore, this matrix shows available time slots for additional events. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: No budget increase expected. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Any increase in events will cause an increase in environmental impacts from vehicle and ' equipment emissions for set up, take down, and increased field maintenance. These all have to be considered in conjunction with increased tax revenues from events. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approving the Special Events Matrix to encourage additional events in Aspen through opportunities in numerous venues at appropriate times. ALTERNATIVES: Continue reviewing events on a case by case basis to determine appropriate venues and times. PROPOSED MOTION: This should be a brief statement for a Council member to read such as "I move to approve Ordinance # ..." Page2of3 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: Opportunities for Special Events Matrix, Turf Report, Wagner/Rio Grande activity list. Page 3of3 fv C i -a -a -a -a -a -a Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q -0 -0 -a -0 -0 -a Q a) at a) a) a) at 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) Cl.) a) a) a) a) Y Y Y Y Y Y 4- 4- 4 +' 4-' 4- 4-' +' - Y t' Y 4-' 4-' Y Y Y Y Y Y O 0 0 0 0 0 c c c c c c c c c c c c c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) a) a) a) a a a) at a) a) a a a) a) 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CU -J C a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a L ▪ te te C a) a) CU G -CS a, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) a) a1 a) a) 61 a f Y Y Y. Y N +' 4-' L' 4 4-' +' - 4..' 4 +' +' 4-' 4- +' Y Y Y Y Y Y 0 io 0 0 0 0 0 c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c 0 0 0 0 r^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v V - -0 . .0 .0 O a O 0. 0 . 0. 0 . a . a . o . 0. a a . o. a . .0 -0 .0 .a .0 .0 a CD V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - RS N u u u u v v u u u 0 u u u 0 v 0 0 u 0 u u u u u v v L CU CO ft CO IS fa f0 CO CO CO M f0 CO CO f0 f0 no ro (a f0 CO CO RI CO CO r0 f0 CO 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. a s 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. a a 0. 0. a a a a a a 0 O. EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE £ £ E ,o L' 7 a 7 7 7 7 a 7 a 7 7 7 _ 3 7 a 7 7 3 3 7 7 3 7 _ 3 3 41 i - ' " ' "0 '� " ' ' ' " ' " " ' . " ' ' .a "a ' . ' " "0 a.' at 0) at a) 0) 0) 0) a1 a) a at a) a) a) a1 a1 a) 0) a) a1 a a) a) a a) 0) a J 49 a) 4-' 4' 4- +' 4-+ 4-' +' 4- +' 4' +' 4 4- ' 4 ' .0 u u u u 0 u u u u u u 0 u u 0 f0 f0 f0 f0 CO (0 0 f0 f0 f0 f0 f f0 CO CO - - - - 0 U1 a s o. o. Q a Q Q a Q Q a a a a a a a a a a Q Q Q Q CU ._ ._ ._ ._ o O o o O o o .� 0 0 0 0 v 0. QJ E E E E c c c c c c c E E E E E E E E E E c c c c 0 4,) te 1 7 7 a 7 a) a) as a) a) a) a) 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 7 3 7 a) a) 0) a1 4- a a a a a a a a a a 0. u a 16 Lel ii " Ili CD a) aJ a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v a1 a, a) a) a) a) a) a) a) O O O O Ch a) L .. L S.T.. L a1 a) 4.' +' �' J..' Y +' i' L a L a r 0. O o y a1 v u v u v u u v ) a 0 4-' +' a' .0 .0 S a) a 4-, +' C C at r0 as f0 f0 co f0 r0 CO f0 s .0 • = , C u u u 4- 4- 4' > > u U > > > a a a a a a a +' +' a ,G a a o a f.) ) (4 (0 0 u 0 0 O. ' c. 3 5 g ' c $ E E E E E E E al v -a o a • a, o 0 E E E 3 3 3 v w E 4 ) E 0 D °_' L ._ ; ._ •- __- 3 3 c cc c ����� 0 � u-. E E E E E E E �� o .. a 'i a) N 3 3 3 - c - a -0 - 0 3 u 3 o r I c 3 c c 7 - o -o 0 ?, a a f0 O o O u vi a) v, ) 0 0 0 v Ii ti 0 .o v O d ▪ J J O O O O O J O L a 0 v Cu z 0. A' L L L u ' G> >• L 115 Iti • a ' a 4Y CU v v M M M C w .0 s y a• VI 1:3 u u u a + � -' a a a j v 3 O h a) tn Z 0 co 0. 0. 0. a) a � i a 0 i oo a Op E , E , E L) a u ) o a u ) v, o 't re a' 0 Cu at W 0 s- E E E z E E E >• , co .c c a) a o . . 0 a E - - - 'c o 'a 06 eZ 06 06 06 o6 3 7 3 a, Y +' on a) -a u H h u 3 3 3 a1 a) a) L L L L L L S 1 u N 7 V a) 0 W O 0 0 0 'n o of a) v a) a1 a1 a) 'O '5 '5 crs Q 0 L CC 0 'n lei --- air a 0 Cr CC J J J V U U u u 0 u V u U 4 3 a 0 c v) t� t° t � V � 1 c n O ‘..I c V - c a a L � W « L L C CCU �" 'n 1_ '^ 11 CU at V I a Y V a.' .0 .c .0 a a! a1 a1 C C +' Y a) 0) a . .' a t >' r- Q) L u 0 0 +' ++ 4 > > > > L V 0 > V1 7 +- a N 01 G) 3 3 cz m ca fa fo fo (0 0 0 0 0 E C a a a a) a) a) u u U u 4a CO u 0 . Q Q � O 4.- 'Y a) v ° C a `^ _ eN E E E 3 3 3 CU CD i c c a L E E I' a, a o 3 3 °�+' o O 0 O 3 3 3 0 - -a � a Ts to CO 3 � 3 3 o ao a c a) al a) a) a a) a1 -a -a -, Q a) a) 0 7 a) a) W ? � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 °C L al VI VI _ 0 _ 0 aa) u a) a c u u u u u u u '� " v u o u u • a Z L. v a' 0 E o V) +' E E 3 0 a, ti 0 E L @ L a L .c ft > T C C a1 T T T 7 M CD y a L f6 v � fa 2 ro a Q a 2 fa 2 7 , 3 Q Q Q , v ia) _61,a) E E W CI- 0 CO i > T Q T T . _' T?-. > T O 0 > • u v) c .Q 7. "a .0 i_ : "0 7 0 r_ : 'a L 70 "O 7- : 10 L U O a) L 0 0 -, LL W G W W G W W G W W G W W G W W G W W J O Z U Z Roaring Fork Polo Club 2000 Baldy Creek New Castle CO 81647 September 29 2011 Mr. Steve Barwick City Manager Aspen CO 81611 (by hand) Dear Mr Barwick, Please be informed that we disagree with the parks decision to decline the 12 Annual World Snow Polo Championship in Wagner Park. The Parks Department did not show that the event caused any damage to the parks and in fact they said that the horses do no damage to the Park. We appreciate your review and would request an appearance before City Council on this matter. Sincerely, Roaring Fork Polo Club, Barry Stout, President (970) 566 0818 Others present: _ Geneve Kashnig (Sales & Marketing) (970) 355 -9811 Susan Redstone (Press & Publicity) (917) 816 -7474 Tim Mitchell (Client Liaison) (970) 404 -7206 / 1X. 1 /,, 4-, Kendra Gros (Horse Manager) (970) 379 -6974 : do EXkt6LV E MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager October 5, 2011 RE: Winter Snow Polo Appeal of Special Event Decision Barry Stout, Winter Snow Polo, filed an appeal with the City Manager's Office Thursday, September 29 of the decision of the special event committee not to approve snow polo in Wagner Park December 17 and 18, 2011. The City Manager's Office upholds the decision of the special event committee and forwards this appeal to the City Council pursuant to the City of Aspen Municipal Code 14.20.130. o1yt it V fit Jifl • girt�i x+ssr riig ii r •i*g `i y f +. E Peias rP ■*f y„ _,,. ... a) 3 1 '. I t .N • it. t iillip :ill \ , . „, I . . i .,. , . ... ,..,„. , .., a - 1 0 ic y r , .. k 6 i•1 �I 6. ,.. , Ir _t vrM 0 f di ri � F ` - O 011 < f E rit a r • y lila T k , `i o i . ... I ,R- I : t 1*.. ''' ,.. 1 t . t ), .:: t .. . .. . I .. 1 s . , : a) N . V 0 ... .. 0 . C) C) CNI ... L_ a3 . a. . " . a) c il t . I4 ,-.01.6.7.4. - .• 0 . 0 ,.I • (I) I .e a.ils• , i . .....:f::.k. ' . . . 0 .■>1 I. . NUN. .411.11.. .williNINIIIMIlftb ...WM.& addiMMIlls. AM •;1,y •c4. :11, i ,, ,,,,, F ' ! 6( I „ 1 c) - ! 3.iii , -.1, J • ii. k.- 1 ! N-- ...#: ...•.. C\1 •.1 4 0 N.. r 4 . '. • 11 .... L.■ V ' 1114 ' i/1,4; ' ,• q • . s (t, 1.1.1 l'..14-114.., :,..* • , CI Ca. 44,...... .,., •,.. ,.. 4 , a.) , 1 iti)r.A. a - CY) eCR CO %Li 4 4 01 I.," . A r q ‘,. — 0 , .. _ , .. ,. 0 •—I )4, ' 1 .. 0 Cl) .0 ' .1111°' it i 1 i` ■ . ( * i ,t,t 14 ' . Ili 1 -is t* 1 ir • " • 7 , NIR .‘• • . •..i 4 - itti' i 1 . t• - : . • ' to 06 i I • $ .. , . • , *4 i 4 , ., . , . ... . ,1 f 4,• 1 : i , T V AZIfo. ...i.,,...4 ' :It:‘ - • :.. .•1 . , • 4 . ,..• ' ,- . v. • 4 ' . • 1 1 • s . filt4' s 14;i • I $ i * 4 , i 0 $z• , ' r -, t. 70,, S 4111 k • ` 1 1 • . . - • , & , sit%Ix , ilk , 11 ,41 't.:4114,, IN ., :.. , . ....„ ._ , . .. .._. 1 I i • .- ,,,., . ..,.... t•--;:, ,,. -1..A.-4: . ... r.,7f, i ••' - . .. .. :;.0- • .-'-''--.---'. . , --. • C/3 0) '''• .7..:-; - 14 '• . , . „ . 1._ co , - .,• a) C\1 . ....., .._ C 0 „..: ; 1 . 0 .. • : . . ...-: -._‘' , • ,,._ ., CO r . .. :_____I Hi :' : ., .• . . _ 0., -- • IMIMIIIIIII Y, •7' .4.' .•.., ,2,12., . 0 - .. . • A J . . . , i J . . • 4'.mom: n j 1 . • 0.. ., - ..•.•..1.7.".j.". ,,.., - '■' , . ..,•,. • • i ... ! . a • -A- - ' __ -, A• - . . . . . . . , .. .. ..._ , s. i 10 , '....,1 „.. ..:,',.• -• • . . 1 . Cr. ' , -,c• 1 • '' :. ' '': .1.' '' , ., ...1 ... • •A • . , .. . .. ... --, • x • i, '• • • q....,,,. k----,i.,....,---..-:. • ''' ! ,,..:-. ,'• . * - -_..4... . . ., ,t1),. t• ki .. •.. .. " ••• .• ... • - . . . ., •.,,, 1,-._,,, •;‘,. i .,.,.. , . ., . b . . . . . . , ..., • • .. . , . .. , . ; . . ....... ... ,.. .. , ...? . , ' . • . .201.1111211211124 ...i- , 't . i ,,..• , `—'• • - • • .2. . l• . . .4. • '4 ' f"''• iilJ . . . 1 , •''lil- L.,. 7, .!''''• ''''-'.. . . . .. .• ;. 'I i • .,•.. 4, ,_ ..., .. .. . . : . -• .. . ,444*-*"!_.' ' 4 .•' ' j. • -..,' ... . . . , - . • • -J-- •.. . J. J ,---. •, •, 4 . - • '' ., —I ,1 • - .• , A. 1.. .. 7' . 1 1 •„72-• .., . 7 . , • • • 4110221k - .. • ,••2. . .' " j•'---.7.-1.:-''''''\•,i At'4.''•" •-• ' *if' 1 :2.•''•• i•;•'.: . • ' ...... . ••••:.,=•.‘ '.. --•ii••-; •...`••• •.•'2:: . ••... ..,_ 2... •■ •• .'"•,, -f.....2 ; . _• •, .. , .... : -• , ...k. . ... .• . .-,iAL, fr. - . .,, • :. • '1111/9 :,. .1.., ..-....,. . _ ... . . ,. . ,. . iv --..,:-....... .:•-•„:. ,,4•• ., I • ,,,i, ). :: „ . •, • . .., . . . . . . . -• .•4 i• . ... ' • 4 . ,....•- • , V- v . .- - - • - . II ar- ' :01,..• . ,c , . . . - ,- -.,,- •\..., .\ f , 1 . .. . / '.• "''' ... . -..m. ' .•" ' 2, ---, • -\ '. )1.• ••- • IC..., _::,... isi. , 2,,,:2‘,1, .. ' •• •' ' " 2 .2. i . ' ' . \'' . .•ii.-.'!:.." ..,.•'• •:. '. ..- •,. ' ..-T, .,.. ..;.*-\ ,,.._ 1 -9' V.11 .V i igt4 . 5',' , t A:i ''''bt.i'r -si' f , 4) '' '• ' .(''' i't • 1 i , : '. - ° f 7 . . e 4 , 0 . Alli ."'" . P '' . , , • . . ':!''.. .4t.• 4'.'• i 4 t ' . ' ,,,0 14 ' 0 • ti.N. 1 '''''4 4' r'it 11 IL i ., ' / • ' . " '-'--. 'il .. , ra' r.-, , t , . ' , /Ii.,..4(V ' 'P'.' t . , ..., ,,, , . , .., / - s r 'it ' C) /& .4 4 . 4 . a i 0 di .4. dog 0 " 'r I A r. . ' . ' -. .. e vs i ; / • ,I (f., • . i • Qrs . , 4i' • . 1/ .• , . ? • 0 • • i . . , r,I016, .1 .r, . i 4 ..: 4 1 .f .i .1 , . IIIP°• .1 ,Pt . ■1.', .! 1- ' , Ai," V ■:' t ;• VI: #4!. ' , , v 4., , .i. ..,•Ap, , 4 ii,„ . t , , I' ' ; . , . , '.•. 7,:. ,!•: L.:,......:1.1.1:.. p• 1 1 . ". (VS- r i ),, ' f * 4 •1 • ':, Ir'' .,r,..4 f; * 4.:: #4' . . ... 4• . ..,.' ,,.j''. 1 : , .(t. '*4:-Ili , . IIIT. . ( • ‘.••#. -,,, ., ,,,,. .; ., i 0: .,. • i. dr) 11/.41 Ts, r • if * . It I' - A 0 i r. , . ., .4 .„ 1 . . i . , , , ,.. . , , i ‘, 1 ?. a ' ' ..i': . , j: .4.: 11 .:;1*4;i: lo *i lilt' , ,... . •, 4 A 1, .4 . 4 •• j 4 .,,„,r !tip: -...1.,. ...- ,, jr ill es,..,r .. • ,41(• „ itr.. . • -, ft., ,„ .. . . , , . • 4 i'lr.i., ' ,. . *',..I .;• 1. . 't'' ' " *' ' ...'"'• .' !;f. , ", 'st. .3 . '- 1 k • I get .. .v -...hl! .r; ri .4f.. ,,, - .• re • A I.4, .,.4 - . s 1 ' , . 1 , . f f V i'.'.. . • • , I i.—irr- ... A • I .‘41,'1. , .---• • • .., ltr i•,,_,,t, . , •- c r .'_. i..', , . •,;...-i4 r. ii, 4,,,444,. ,# ,,.. •i , , ,. , i . i 4 , ,oil .40111...l.,... fi , dr..'.., •. ... : . . ‘,. .• , - - . 0 ■41..... . ...,. , ss,i,,, ii..... 41' " . * .,:si ' ,,:' r 01. • —ilr•' t # 4r,01'•- .r t- .{44 1 . ..• (1:1° I. • ... • . .. V.014"" . . 4. '• '. 4 iiii- t if 'F ' , jthri .. , • t• .,...„,.. , •,,.. ... • . .. ... ,„,. . -.7 ... . ..ik.: 41....4 .. •(1., .:". .. 1.4. 4 : ,*t 1,, • • , •i,-- ,•,,,X; i 40- :• , . 11r'5. ,, -'-• i -6 t/ . y ' .* y ,. 4: '''' i , - , r • 1 .."-• • i• A • ' 101,, r. • f: . -r .. - 1,1, -It,,,,. • . „ ..N t •r - t`.., , oh.• 11•4 , ,!- r ..., ' ,eli _„,ror _ .-, •r i • . . g ■•■i‘• .4., • • •44.4.....!! . , . '4 , er' " ' '' L, 141.',':.-4. '...,,,EA • 4 .-:' -i , i ,x • . ' k tf 'Si * %C. \.•...‘ ., N'.‘,.;: 4 • . ' ..: .04. • .7 444 . *, . ,:slt ' ,.. - .-., • ■ it ■ *.1 1 , ,4 (, ,, • - ',I. E• A N7.I 1' •....• .....4,,,. • _ ,f1t4„ .k. •-t, r i i.1.1 -. • 7 , • . •■• piOa : , ).• . 444- 44 44' A:' 4...•,54,,,,,g, F ,„ . .' ti . .. ,. i 4 II. 4 , • 'Iss ' . ' ' f i.% • . . . / . • .1,- ••••• • 4,- . 4• iv '” - ,., 4 11$1 - . , „• , i "e .''..1 IP ,s . ort. . • v. . 1 a_l: •.,.- .j op- rt, *l' ' • '•': S 1P-141.7 - . ,. ' . - " ' • 1 10 ' ' • 'T 1- . t , • ' .- . . s . - .'• • •• ' . I. • , * -7' t , • f... , ti . .4. c . .. . 11 ■ ' -'• ' . . , t..., •.4. :'.44., fr b. . ,_ . • . .,, , ok44 - to.- • VP" '''',,,g• , ,: ' -- _ . , k , . . . .,. 4. ' f. , •f".. if k il, ift' r 4b . tt • . ' 4 167 do' Mt' 41' /44,4 i..•, ,.,. T.t^ • ' .. •• . 4 i fl' ' , '.....' # 44," t;Ills( - . ° -"' • • ,.. , 1 ; ft, i: ' l p F A •,, ,4 o' ) , . . . • : • "' •. , % 111111'* ) f• • ,' ...w,. ' .,'..--e4, $ , .,,, ' •.:1;" 1 i . A , ' ' 4‘44 . ' ... 3. • 4 4 " - 4 V .• ll it . 1191 k , t • • t . i ., , „A a ° - i 14• .• • ,.. , . ..:, ■.. • 4 ill'• A IC, .T - -•- t films .. - r N �1F V0 .:. a) .;„--- to.., A - ,., , -.•-..k. . - ';ire 5 +i, R r OK' �y s f ae f r':.--'1 t,• i s ' - h"• 4 f. 7a jM• ` ,� YZ 7 P S ,� E a 't 5v. = � � , ? , ` \ . ..•1 r ��yj S� s • t �1 r e_ , s 1 4".'. I i +. ( q t a R J; L Yf �.. , ,- = ,,,`',5...,-,i..-..%, ,..i,Jr....- •1-,0;1.;.- ,''•,, --.---1!-.--- L. 1,-, *:-- --i,r,". ',.• ..:0-.1-0i-.- .. -----.i- _-r•-- .PY-,.' , ' . . -rt . - ..t.L r y CO`V _ '- i +� � :: ,1� '� e� +� � �szrt�l���d' ,rte i '� , rr 1'. y l-- f ' R' ' a i IZ 1 ,. • t ',e r •■Z t x L ♦. A r 11 ... Y{i ":t '1 aI ^ - +`, -•■ ' 4-� 1 . F 4 f.. �-_;.,' VIII } t.' j I . max, r., r # ,1 4. ' -� " ry Y 7 ,t r` i z kt' n! 4 1l. e ti t3 f . }• ,...... , . •-, . • • , ,„ok . • ,, . % • •'S... ,4 - . 4 'y k, • %At , • .. ., - _ . • 1111 • ' *' *4 4 * •- • • ' IC ,, 410, e414)1 i : . b .. • .:: . . I p I) .. , 44 .1 t .'t 1 N-- ..• CD ..,, 016— CD 4•4 . 1 . . 1. ••■• , ''' 11.4.:-' , . 0 ••••■• , • I : n•41....;k It ,bd...... , 4 . p • e : 4. :. ..., ••• • ... I, • U) (1.) : illt .. CO C ... - Q t . ' ■•• OW , A — - v.."1 I• 1 IP- 0 ......, . n irk _ ,.... • — - . . .... • CIF - • P ' . •., • -,.• . .. C II ...• . • ilea 1 ' . . WI" • ?I 111 - I . le - ' .._ .**. _ .A ...., IP 44- . , 4.• , . , • '•,. A I.,,.. . .7"`:::,..- -..'-' ' MP. ■ . .• .. . • ii I. .: 4 4 , '.• ' t . *, • 4 . ..., • •- i.11, . IP . 11111110 ..A., Vi t. ...L. . . • _ 411111A alf.*,40, .3, f ,.. . *Ili . .4.,- ' • . • I 1k 1:0 • :. ir, 11116;ip •