Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit D_Growth Management ReviewExhibit D Growth Management Reviews 26.470.050. General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Findings: Sufficient growth management allotments are available for the project with regard to affordable housing, commercial, and free market allotments. There are not enough lodging pillows for the 2016 growth management year; however, the applicant is requesting multi-year allotments for the lodge component which “shall not be required to meet this standard.” Staff finds this criterion met. 2. The proposed development is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, as well as with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan. Staff Findings: The land uses proposed for the project: lodging, multi-family residential and commercial uses (restaurant and Aspen Ski Co. operations) are compatible with the uses located within the neighborhood which includes an approved lodge and multi-family development, some of which is used for short term rentals. The property is not subject to any city adopted, regulatory plans. Staff finds this criterion met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Findings: The Ski Area Base (SKI) zone district is proposed as the zone district for the redevelopment which does not have any underlying dimensional requirement, since the dimensions of the project are set in a site specific approval via the Planned Development process. Staff finds this criterion met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable. Staff Findings: The Growth Management reviews are being combined with the design review and the Planned Development review, so no approvals have been granted that need to be reviewed for consistency. Staff finds this review not applicable. Exhibit D Growth Management Reviews 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Staff Findings: As a lodge project, mitigation requirements are outlined under lodge development. Refer to the lodge development growth management review, below. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee/Square Footage Conversion. Staff Findings: As a lodge project, mitigation requirements are outlined under lodge development. Refer to the lodge development growth management review, below. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 7. 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 Findings: The applicant has agreed to make any necessary improvements to the public infrastructure as required by the city which will be outlined in any approvals and agreements. Staff finds this criterion conditionally met. 1. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: Exhibit D Growth Management Reviews a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Staff Findings: The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) Guidelines have minimum standards associated with the development of affordable housing units including the minimum net livable area of a unit. The board’s recommendation is included as Exhibit I; however, it does not follow income category requirements. APCHA recommends: • The one unit on site be a rental unit. • The off-site mitigation be a mix of housing credits and physical units and that any physical units contain a mix of income categories. The Land Use code permits mitigation at a Category 4 income level. • Any units are approved as rental units. Staff finds this criterion can be conditionally met, with appropriate conditions included in a resolution or ordinance that outline the type and amount of mitigation recommended. b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy-down units. Off-site units shall be provided within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.2. If the mitigation requirement is less than one (1) full unit, a cash- in-lieu payment may be accepted by the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. If the mitigation requirement is one (1) or more units, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3. A Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit may be used to satisfy mitigation requirements by approval of the Community Development Department Director, pursuant to Section 26.540.080 Extinguishment of the Certificate. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. Staff Findings: The affordable housing mitigation requirement for the lodge proposal is 53.17 (minus any credits) employees. Three (3) employees are proposed to be housed on site. While the balance is proposed to be mitigated via off-site units or through the purchase of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit. Staff finds this criterion met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. Staff Findings: The design of the on-site unit appears to meet this standard. Staff finds this criterion met. d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed Exhibit D Growth Management Reviews restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. Staff Findings: The one, on-site affordable housing unit is a three bedroom unit housing 3 employees. The applicant is requesting that unit be rental unit associated with the lodge operations. APCHA supports the units as a rental and staff finds this criterion met. e. Non-Mitigation Affordable Housing. Affordable housing units that are not required for mitigation, but meet the requirements of Section 26.470.070.4(a-d). The owner of such non-mitigation affordable housing is eligible to receive a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540. Staff Findings: The applicant is not proposing any affordable units that are not required for mitigation. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 6. Expansion or new commercial development. The expansion of an existing commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building or the development of a new commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050. Staff Findings: As a lodge project, mitigation requirements are outlined under lodge development. Refer to the lodge development growth management review, below. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 7. New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The development of new free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050 above. Staff Findings: As a lodge project, mitigation requirements are outlined under lodge development. Refer to the lodge development growth management review, below. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 8. Lodge development. The expansion of an existing lodge or the development of a new lodge shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: Exhibit D Growth Management Reviews b. If the project contains less than one (1) lodge unit per five hundred (500) square feet of lot area, the following affordable housing mitigation standards shall apply: 1) Affordable housing net livable area equaling thirty percent (30%) of the additional free- market residential net livable area shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. 2) Sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional lodge, timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units and associated commercial development, according to Paragraph 26.470.050.A.1, Employee generation, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. Staff Findings: The proposed lodge includes 81 keys on a proposed lot of 45,550 sq. ft. so the lodge density is 1 lodge unit per 550 sq. ft. of lot area 1, requiring 30 % of the free-market residential net livable area to be mitigated and 60% of the employees generated by the lodge and commercial uses to be mitigated. • The six free-market residential units include a total of 10,943 sq. ft. of net livable area for mitigation purposes. The following calculation shows that 3,282 sq. ft. or 8.21 employees are generated by the new residential development. 10,943 sq. ft. x .3 = 3,282 sq. ft. required for mitigation 1 FTE = 400 sq. ft. 3,282 sq. ft. / 400 = 8.21 FTEs • The SKI zone district employee generation rate is .6 employees generated per lodging bedroom. The following calculation shows that 29.16 employees are generated with the development of 81 lodging bedrooms. 81 lodge bedrooms x .6 employees generated = 48.6 employees generated 48.6 employees x .6 required mitigation = 29.16 employees • Commercial uses located on the site generate 4.7 employees per 1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable in the SKI zone district for Lot 1. The applicant represents that 6,810 sq. ft. of net leasable area is programmed into the lodge and that the existing ski lift area contains 2,117 sq. ft. of net leasable area. A total of 15,81 FTEs are generated by the 6,810 sq. ft. of commercial area propsed. Exhibit D Growth Management Reviews 1. Multi-year development allotment. The City Council, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall approve, approve with conditions or deny a multi-year development allotment request based on the following criteria: a. The proposed development is considered "exceptional" considering the following criteria: (Note: A project need not meet all of the following criteria, only enough to be sufficiently considered "exceptional.") 1) The proposal exceeds the minimum affordable housing required for a standard project. Staff Findings: The applicant is not proposing to exceed its mitigation requirements. Staff does not find this criterion met. 2) The proposed project represents an excellent historic preservation accomplishment. A recommendation from the Historic Preservation Officer shall be considered for this standard. Staff Findings: This property is not a historically designated property. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 3) The proposal furthers affordable housing goals by providing units established as priority through the current Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and provides a desirable mix of affordable unit types, economic levels and lifestyles (e.g., singles, seniors, families, etc.). A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. Staff Findings: APCHA has requested that mitigation for the project be provided by a mix of off-site units and affordable housing credits, which is what the applicant has suggested in the application. Applicant should clarify the number, types and income categories proposed for physical units to meet this criterion. 4) The proposal minimizes impacts on public infrastructure by incorporating innovative, energy-saving techniques. Staff Findings: The applicant proposes to use low flow fixtures, native landscaping, efficient HVAC systems and other techniques to minimize its impact on public infrastructure. Staff finds this criterion met. 5) The proposal minimizes construction impacts to the extent practicable both during and after construction. Staff Findings: The applicant represents that construction impacts will be minimized by incorporating best management practices by monitoring air quality and incorporating a construction worker carpool plan. 6) The proposal maximizes potential public transit usage and minimizes reliance on the automobile. Staff Findings: The applicant represents that a transit solution will be worked on with neighbors for this area; however, no solid proposal has been proposed or vetted by the city. The city is looking to study a variety of options in 2017; however, the applicant is currently proposing infrastructure improvements such as a bus stop at the site and the Exhibit D Growth Management Reviews addition of a shuttle. More information is needed to determine if the shuttle is a viable option. Staff finds this criterion not met. 7) The proposal exceeds minimum requirements of the Efficient Building Code or for LEEDS certification, as applicable. A recommendation from the Building Department shall be considered for this standard. Staff Findings: The applicant represents that the building will be certified for a Leeds Silver rating. A condition to this effect will be included in any ordinance. Staff finds this criterion conditionally met. 8) The proposal promotes sustainability of the local economy. Staff Findings: The proposal offers a new vision for the original portal to the ski area by proposing a lodge with a restaurant that would provide an additional option for lodging in an area where lodging is expected. The need to increase the lodging bed base has been a topic of much discussion and a new lodge would contribute to the sustainability of the local economy. Staff finds this criterion met. 9) The proposal represents a desirable site plan and an architectural design solution. Staff Findings: The site plan closes off the ski lift from the public and limits skier access by building on the S. Aspen Street right-of way and creating a narrow skier return on the eastern side of the site. Staff does not find this criterion met. 10) The proposed development is compatible with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area and the purpose of the underlying zone district. Staff Findings: Staff finds that the uses proposed are compatible with the neighborhood and the zone district proposed; however, the proposal limits access to the ski lift and inhibits the skier return that is needed for this site. Staff finds this criterion not met. b. The project complies with all other provisions of the Land Use Code and has obtained all necessary approvals from the Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, as applicable. Staff Findings: As proposed, the project does not comply with all provisions of the land use code, additional design consideration is needed on some of the site improvements. Staff finds this criterion not met. c. The Community Development Director shall be directed to reduce the applicable annual development allotments, as provided in Subsection 26.470.030.D, in subsequent years as determined appropriate by the City Council. Staff Findings: The applicant is requesting 50 lodge pillows (25 lodging bedrooms) from the 2017 Growth Management year.