Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit H_Referral Agency CommentsExhibit H Referral Agency Comments Gorsuch Haus – DRC Comments Aspen Sanitation District (Tom Bracewell) ACSD Review Requirements 5-11-2016 A “Collection System Agreement” will be required for this development, which is an ACSD Board of Director’s action item. Once detailed plans for this application are made available and approved by the district, we can initiate these agreements. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. A wastewater study flow will be required for this project to be funded by the applicant. The applicant’s engineer will be required to give the district an estimate of anticipated daily average and peak flows from the project. All clear water connections are prohibited (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) including trench drains for the entrances to underground parking garages. On-site drainage and landscaping plans require approval by the district, must accommodate ACSD service requirements and comply with rules, regulations and specifications. On-site sanitary sewer utility plans require approval by ACSD. 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. 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. Below grade development will require installation of a pumping system. 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. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments Permanent improvements are prohibited in areas covered by sewer easements or right of ways to the lot line of each development. All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of any permits. Peg in our office can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line). The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. The Ski Company’s on mountain sewer line shall be shown on the utility plans. This sanitary sewer service line may need to be relocated to accommodate the proposed building. The applicant will need to work with the South Aspen Street Condo project to determine the location of the applicant’s proposed sanitary sewer line. That service connection and stub into the property line can then be installed with the new utility lines and re-built Aspen Street corridor. Environmental Health (Liz O’Connell) 1- This space is subject to the requirements of a Lodge with over 60 rooms and food service will need to provide 400 square feet of space to the storage of trash and recycling. The standard configuration is 20’l x 20’d x 10’ h (Municipal Code 12.10.0 A (a)). 2- The current submission does not show the exact dimensions of the trash and recycling space (pg A101) a. Applicant met with Environmental Health staff and brought drawings of the trash and recycling space measuring 43.6’ l x 9.5’d x +10’h. This meets the square footage requirement, but this configuration of space requires Special Review from the Environmental Health department prior to approval. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments b. Applicant was advised that because of the unusual configuration and the shared space with the receiving area that approval would be contingent upon plans which indicated this space was for the exclusive storage of trash and recycling and written commitment that the floor and walls would be painted to ensure this space was reserved for trash and recycling and not used for other purposes. 3- The original plans showed an overhead door and a man door to enter into this area. Applicant was advised to use a double-overhead door in order to allow access to the waste containers Pitkin County (Suzanne Wolff) Thanks for the opportunity given us to review the Gorsuch Haus proposal. All the development is proposed within the City so our comments are not extensive. I have attached the comments we submitted to the Forest Service regarding the Lift 1A replacement. Several of these comments are relevant to the Gorsuch proposal, especially those concerning the need to ensure that a new Lift 1A remains readily accessible to the general public, and that it not be perceived as a private portal to the Mountain. The Gorsuch proposal provides a public path to the lift, but it may not be something that will be readily apparent to visitors, and it does not appear to make an "open, welcoming" statement. What is referred to in the application as "Parcel 4" is partially in the City and partially in the County. All development is proposed in the City portion of the parcel. The proposed plat, especially "page 2 of 4" , should have a note to make clear that the City/County boundary line shown on the plat is not a subdivision line or parcel line. It should be clarified that this parcel extends on in to the County and the parcel is not "divided" by virtue of this plat. The application on page 45 says that Parcel 3 is the parcel that is divided by the City/ County line. It is parcel 4 that is split Engineering (Hailey Guglielmo) These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting. ROW Vacation: 1. The Engineering Department does not support the ROW vacation due to potential utility and access issues both current and future. 2. Abandoning the southern end of South Aspen St cuts off public access to Eames Addition Block 12. The vacation would cut off City boundary limits. 3. Aspen streets serve as view corridors to the mountain. By vacating the Aspen St ROW the property would cut off this view plane. Transportation: 4. The drop off area on Dean St that is a part of the Lift One Lodge PUD will be greatly underutilized with the proposed Gorsuch Haus Development. The Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments majority of drop off stops will occur at the cul-de-sac which is undersized and unable to accommodate the amounts of traffic that is foreseen with the proposed development. Cul-de-sac: 5. The minimum cul-de-sac diameter is 100’. The 100’ diameter needs to remain clear and free of stopped vehicles at all times for fire access and vehicle turn around. 6. A loading/unloading width of 11’ is required for public use not just hotel use. Demonstrate shuttles can fit within that width. How many vehicles could be stationed at once? 7. An 8’ passenger loading/unloading area needs to be incorporated in addition to the vehicle loading area. 8. An 8’ walkway shall be maintained around the entire width of the cul-de-sac including the west side along Shadow Mountain Condos property frontage. 9. What is the proposed slope of the cul-de-sac? Design standard maximum for street cross slope is 4%. 10. An ADA accessible drop off area is required. 11. The bus stop requires a bus pull out. 12. Lift One Lodge has requirements to maintain four parking spots at the end of South Aspen St. These parking areas shall not be removed by Gorsuch Haus PUD. 13. Ambulance parking needs to be accounted for in the area. 14. An exhibit shall be submitted of the cul-de-sac area which shows the number of loading spots available to vehicles and shuttles. 15. What encroachments from Shadow Mountain Condominiums would need to be removed to accommodate the proposed cul-de-sac? Pedestrian Facilities: 16. The Engineering Department is not in support of minimal pedestrian accommodations around South Aspen St and through the site. As use in this area increases, there needs to be sufficient pedestrian facilities. Public Improvements: 17. The proposed ADA public access to the lift involves two elevators and an indirect path. This route needs to be improved. Drainage: 18. Lift One Lodge PUD shows drainage passing through the center skier access easement. Gorsuch Haus proposes to divert all mountain runoff to the South Aspen St storm system. The drainage report needs to coincide with both the Lift One Lodge and One Aspen drainage plans. Any alterations need to be specifically called out and all downstream impacts analyzed. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments Easements: 19. The Engineering Department supports an increase in public access easements through the site. The proposed Development cuts off public access corridors. 20. The 15’ water pipeline easement located on the NE corner of the property needs to be extended to 30’ to accommodate the steep slopes. 21. The private access easements and recreational use easements are described as private, solely for the use of the owners of Lots 1,2,3,4. What public amenity space, with public easements and public access is being proposed? 22. A 5’ easement to the Summit St corridor is not sufficient. A larger width and proposed walkway shall be recorded with the PUD. This easement shall be open to all public pedestrian and bicycle access. 23. Follow the utility easements dimensions found in section 2.5.2 of the Engineering Design Standards. All rear and side lot lines shall have a 5’ utility easement. 24. The water and storm sewer easements on the northeast corner of the property shall be wider than minimum to accommodate future maintenance in the area with steeper slopes. 25. Provide easements for any required mud or debris walls. 26. Drainage easements need to incorporate channel flow, not just areas where stormwater infrastructure is proposed. 27. Gorsuch Haus will need permission from Mountain Queen to change their drainage and access easement. Maintenance of an open channel is very different than maintenance of a road with pipe TIA: 28. A full TIA review cannot take place until the following comments are addressed. 29. The project is taking credit for improvements that are proposed to South Aspen St under Lift One Lodge PUD. The improvements need to be specific to Gorsuch Haus. 30. A transportation option needs to be proposed and agreed upon to address the traffic congestion that will occur at the cul-de-sac. 31. With the proposed improvements, the Dean St drop off loop will be greatly underutilized. This has a negative impact on the transportation in the area. 32. Points shall be deducted for all negative impacts. For example, the attached sidewalk, and placing a driveway through a pedestrian area. 33. A plan drawing which shows all MMLOS improvements is needed. 34. The project takes credit for a full bus stop, as well as individual bus stop amenities. This is doubling points for the same MMLOS measure. Stability: 35. An agreement shall be in place that should a slope stability Improvement District be created for the Strawpile slope, Gorsuch Haus will join the district. Earth Retention: Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments 36. Inclinometers will be required prior to and during construction to monitor ground movement. Below is wording from South Aspen St PUD that shall be included in the Gorsuch Haus PUD. a. Ground Stability Monitoring. In order to ensure that development of the Project does not exacerbate naturally occurring ground movement, an inclinometer shall be installed and maintained by Gorsuch Haus or its successors or assigns with bi-annual readings taken through the time of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The first Building Permit application for the Project shall include a report on the initial readings and a subsequent report is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Utilities: 37. The location of the 16” waterline main does not coincide with the final alignment of the waterline as proposed by One Aspen. The One Aspen plans have the waterline located further west. The water alignment on the One Aspen plans may affect the proposed Gorsuch retaining walls and stairways, and elevator. This area needs to be reworked to ensure it functions and proper separation distances are maintained. 38. It is highly recommended the Gorsuch Haus project coordinate with One Aspen on the water main alignment. 39. All trees shall be planted a minimum of 10’ away from existing and proposed utilities. 40. Fire flow calculations shall be submitted at building permit to demonstrate an 8” line is necessary. Calculations for a 6” line shall also be submitted which show the 6” line does not supply adequate fire sprinkler protection. Additional Comments: 41. The property needs to accommodate snow storage, both onsite and for the cul- de-sac. A minimum functional area equaling 30% of the paved area shall be provided contiguous to the paved area and designed to accommodate snow storage (unheated areas). For heated areas, the functional area can be reduced to 10%. Streets and Sidewalks/Cost Recovery: 1. The property is required to reimburse One Aspen for a pro-rata share of costs associated with the reconstruction of South Aspen St and associated sidewalks, public utilities, and drainage facilities. Reimbursement shall take place prior to issuance of a building permit per Lift One Lodge Subdivision Agreement Sections 3.3-3.5. Redline Comments from the Attached pdf: Page: 5 Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments 1. How tall is this retaining wall? 2. Pedestrian area all the way around. 3. ADA unloading area 4. 100 ft diameter plus 11 loading unloading lane. Demonstrate shuttles can fit in that loading unloading lane. Plus 8' passenger unloading and 8' pedestrian walkway. 100' must stay clear for vehicle turn around and fire access. 5. What mechanism will keep vehicles out of pedestrian area except for those with rights to use private maintenance and access road? Page: 6 6. Streets are view corridors to the mountain - by vacating the row you are taking away that view. Cutting off city boundary limits. 7. Directness factor needs to be measured from the furthest point on the site. i.e. the upper patio. 8. A bus stop needs to have a bus pull out. Page: 28 9. This easement needs to be extended to 30' width to accommodate the slopes in the area. Page: 29 10. What encroachments would need to be removed to accommodate proposed cul- de-sac? Page: 32 11. Trail easement needs to be more than 5 ft. 12. Public trail easement shall be built to fit within the easement, not altered at as built. 13. The Engineering Department supports pedestrian and bicycle public access to Summer Road. 14. It needs to be better laid out what constitutes Hotel Amenities and improvements. Furniture? Snowmelt? Food services? What constitutes landscaping? Is this easement for hotel guests only? Public easement? Public amenity space? 15. Sheet 4 shows three different arrows for this easement. It is not defined the extents of these easements. Needs to be clearly shown and width called out. Built within easement, not amended at time of as built. 16. This should not be a private access easement solely for use by Lots 1, 2, and 4. It should be a public access easement for access to Lift 1A and pedestrian walkways to the mountain and Summit St corridor. Improve the public ADA access. 17. This needs to be more legible. 18. This recreational easement needs to coincide with access easements described in paragraph 7. What easements shall be private and what easements need to be public? 19. Drainage easements need to include drainage pathways where runoff sheet flows. Not just areas where there are drainage improvements. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments 20. This paragraph is vague about where the drainage easements are located. Blanket easement around all drainage improvements. Drainage areas need to be better defined and called out. Including sheet and channel flows. 21. Improvements, structures, and tree plantings need to be placed outside of the easement width. 22. Need to specifically call out transformer locations and easements. Page: 33 23. Show portion proposed to be dedicated as ROW 24. Above Hatch for legibility 25. Encroachment license needs to be modified. It is the developments responsibility to modify license. 26. This shaded area is not shown anywhere. Page: 34 27. The dedicated ROW needs to be expanded to accommodate a full 100' diameter cul-de-sac, and loading unloading area and sidewalk. 28. Are there encroachments on Lot 1 property? 29. What encroachments exist that would need to be removed for Aspen St vacation? Page: 35 30. This easement is for sheet flow and open channel, not pipe infrastructure. 31. Gorsuch Haus will need permission from Mountain Queen to change this easement. Maintenance of an open channel is very different than maintenance of a road with pipe 32. Must be more than 5' 33. Summer Road easement open for public pedestrians and bicycle access to Ajax. 34. Public not private Page: 37 35. The location of this waterline does not coincide with the final alignment of the waterline as proposed by One Aspen. The approved waterline is further west. This area needs to be reworked and coordinated between the two projects. 36. Grading needs to be shown here that still provides access for Mountain Queen. 37. Separation with new water alignment. Electric separation for future line to pass through the summit st corridor. 38. What's the proposed separation between the proposed stormline and Mountain Queen waterline? 39. Are these drainage improvements permitted in Mountain Queens Access and water easement? 40. Proposed drainage pathway from Lift One Lodge PUD passed through the center 41. How is this pipe routed within the underground building footprint? Greenroof over parking garage? 42. Separation Distance of 10' is not maintained. The placement of the Lift One Lodge retaining wall and Gorsuch Haus 43. Building would make maintenance in this area incredibly difficult. The building should be pulled back to accommodate separation distance. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments 44. This does not coincide with One Aspen Plans. Rip rap continues further south and west. Page: 38 45. Lift One Lodge drainage continued through skier easement. This pattern is being altered. Is there sufficient capacity in South Aspen St? 46. This catch basin will have high sediment load during spring runoff. Will contribute to sediment buildup in the system and vaults further downstream in the City system. How will this be mitigated? 47. What is the slope of the cul de sac? Page: 39 48. The location of this waterline does not coincide with the final alignment of the waterline as proposed by One Aspen. The approved waterline is further west. 49. Fire suppression calc's are required to verify line size. Provide 8" calculations as well as 6" calculations to show if a 6" line is not sufficient. 50. Transformer location and easement? Planning (Jen Phelan) • Site plan. The current site plan will be difficult for staff to support. The site plan closes off the lift from the street for both views and access. The lower part of the building pinches the ski corridor and closes the lot off. • The lift moves higher up on site, making it less accessible. • Odd Configuration of replatted lots, does not follow townsite or even the somewhat rectangular lots along S. Aspen. • Architecture/materials is nice, but need to look at roof forms, height of building and massing • Growth management: Based on 1 unit per 550 sq. ft. of lot area…the mitigation is 30% of net livable for free-market and 60% for lodging and net leasable. Zoning (Claude salter) 1. Please provide a roof plan for the topmost level above the fitness, pool , service and restroom area 2. Height shall be measured according to current Code section 26.575.020(F)Measuring Building Heights: a. Measuring height along the perimeter of the building. At each location where the exterior perimeter of a building meets the ground, the measurement shall be taken from the lower of natural or finished grade. Building permit plans must depict both natural and finished grades. b. Measuring height within the footprint of the building. For the purposes of measuring height within the footprint of a building, areas of the building within 15 horizontal feet of the building’s perimeter shall be measured using the perimeter measurement, as described above. In all other areas, the natural grade of the site shall be projected up to the allowable height and the height of the structure shall be measured using this projected topography. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments Include information about items on the roof top which are exceptions to height pursuant section 26.575.020(F)(4) Allowed Exceptions to height limitations. Include information about other height related landscape features, retaining walls, planter, walls, and similar features. 3. Setbacks are not applicable see, section 26.575.110 Building envelope: 26.575.110 Building envelopes For the purposes of this Chapter, an approved building envelope shall have the same requirements and allowances as the underlying zoning setbacks, unless otherwise noted in a site-specific development plan. For purposes of site-specific development plans, building envelopes may be established to restrict development to protect slopes, important vegetation, water courses, privacy or other considerations. Building envelopes required or designated as part of a development approval shall be described on recorded plats, site-specific development plans, ordinances, resolutions and building permit site plans. 4. Please provide information about landscape lighting, and lighting attached to the building, see section 26.575.150(L) Procedures L. Procedures. 1. Administrative review procedures. Lighting plans submitted in conjunction with applications for subdivision, planned development, development within any environmentally sensitive area or special review application shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. Lighting plans submitted as a part of a building permit application for a commercial or multi-family structure shall be reviewed administratively by the Community Development Director. The Director shall have the authority to refer an application to the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission if deemed appropriate. 3. Appeals. Any appeals related to decisions regarding outdoor lighting shall be made to the Board of Adjustment compliant with the procedures in the Appeals Chapter 26.316 of this Title. 5. Address for the development is required prior to building permit submittal. Parks (Dave Radeck) • Mitigation for trees and native vegetation will be determined by City Forester. • Trees along west edge of property may be in Shadow Mountain Condo’s approved easement. Define property boundaries to insure that trees being proposed are on your property. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments • Parks desires a more detailed grading plan showing why the trees along the east service road need to be removed. Parks would like to see these trees preserved, please indicate the amount of fill or cut required up against the trunks of trees. • Please indicate an alternative to preserve spruce trees along Caribou Condominiums. • Irrigation for Lift 1 Park, below the project must remain intact, although a different location may be proposed for the backflow and controller. APCHA RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting held June 1, 2016, and recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. Increase the vesting rights period to five years with a condition that the mitigation requirement shall be readdressed to the Code and Guidelines in place at the time of building permit approval. 2. The mitigation requirement shall be verified at the time of building permit by the Community Development Department. 3. The balance of offsite affordable housing mitigation shall be reviewed and approved by the APCHA Board prior to building permit approval and shall include at least a mix of off-site units along with the use of the Housing Credits. The balance of the FTE requirement should not be solely satisfied by the use of Housing Credits. 4. Since the applicant is requesting that a majority of their affordable housing mitigation units be located off site, a mix of category units, 1-4, are preferred versus all Category 4. 5. The applicant shall have the right to maintain the units as rentals under the following conditions: a. The deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA and must re-qualify every two years. If the tenants work specifically for the Lodge, the income and assets shall be waived; however, the rental rate charged cannot exceed Category 1-4 as stated in the Guidelines. b. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12- 301(1)(a) and (b), this Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. c. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the conditions required in APCHA’s Employee Dwelling Unit Deed Restriction. Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments 6. If the owner requests the units to become ownership units, or any of the rental units are found to be out of compliance for one year, the following shall apply: a. All of the units shall be ownership units and sold through the APCHA lottery system. b. The units will be classified as Category 3 or 4. c. The condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA. Engineering (supplemental comments dated 10/14/16) These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but a continued response to the project packet submitted for purpose of the DRC. This letter follows the initial Engineering comments dated May 19, 2016. While alterations have been made to the proposed project, the following items remain as areas of concern for the proposed Gorsuch Haus development. ROW Vacation: 42. The Engineering Department does not support the ROW vacation due to potential utility and access issues both current and future. The proposal asks for 11,360.8 sf of ROW while giving 550 sf of property to the ROW to accommodate the cul-de-sac. The project also proposes approximately 7,000 sf of easements within areas where ROW currently exists. Municipal Code Section 26.480.070 B 1 states: The proposed change maintains or improves the public health, safety, and welfare of the community and is in the best interests of the City of Aspen. The proposal has not demonstrated the ROW vacation is in the best interest of the City of Aspen. Municipal Code Section 26.480.070 B 6 states: For partial or full vacation of existing rights-of-way, the applicant shall demonstrate the rightof-way, or portion thereof, has no current or future use to the community as a vehicular way, pedestrian or bike way, utility corridor, drainage corridor, or recreational connection due to dimensions, location, topography, existing or proposed development, or other similar circumstances The project has not demonstrated these standards are met. For S Aspen St and Hill St there is a potential use for pedestrians, bicyclists, utilities, and drainage. S Aspen St ROW Vacation: 43. Abandoning the southern end of South Aspen St cuts off public access to City boundary limits, cuts off access to the mountain, and prevents skier return down this corridor. 44. Aspen streets serve as view corridors to the mountain. By vacating the Aspen St ROW the property would cut off this view plane. Hill St ROW Vacation: 45. Hill St serves as an important utility corridor. The proposed placement of an easement in this area demonstrates the need for the ROW. Maintaining the area as City ROW prevents limitation to future uses that could occur in this area. The vacation of this ROW Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments does not maintain nor improve the public health, safety, and welfare of the community. It is not in the best interest of the City of Aspen. The project could still pave the area with a revocable encroachment license and utilize the ROW space for pedestrians as is currently proposed. Transit Strategy: 1. The estimated skier demand is based off current use of Lift 1A. With a new high speed quad it is reasonable to believe more skiers will opt to utilize this portal to the mountain. The additional use should be taken into account when planning the transit strategy and configuration of the drop off area. 2. The drop off area on Dean St that is a part of the Lift One Lodge PUD will be greatly underutilized with the proposed Gorsuch Haus Development. The majority of drop off stops will occur at the cul-de-sac which is undersized and unable to accommodate the amounts of traffic that is foreseen with the proposed development. 3. The proposed route passes through a private road adjacent to the St. Regis. This route is not a public access way. The project would need to get permission to utilize the private road. 4. South Aspen St has 16% slopes. There is concern for shuttle busses and additional vehicles to be placed on this steep slope in icy conditions. The example case for the shuttle from Park City was driving on slopes of 13%. 5. With the additional traffic on S Aspen St and proposed shuttles there is concern for vehicle safety on the steep and often icy road. Snowmelt shall be investigated as an option to improve vehicle safety in this area. Cul-de-sac: 1. Alterations have been made since the initial submittal to accommodate more vehicle staging and pedestrian width. However, the area is still not sufficient to accommodate the anticipated hotel and skier vehicles. The proposed configuration cannot accommodate both hotel use and public vehicles. 2. The proposal states that there will be no skier drop off and all skiers will utilize Ruby Park and the shuttle. However, there is no mechanism to keep public drop offs from occurring at the cul-de-sac. Even with signage people will drive up to drop off skiers. 3. The public has a right to drive up there as it is the end of a public road. The public road should not be privatized. 4. The Engineering Department does not support the Porte Cochere overhang into the ROW. The ROW should be for public use and benefit from below the ground to the sky. 5. The COA Engineering Dept recommends an 11’ vehicle lane loading/unloading area for both hotel and public use. An 8’ wide passenger loading/unloading area. And an 8’ walkway around the perimeter of the cul-de- sac. Configurations should be investigated to limit retaining wall height and maximize staging area. Pedestrian Facilities: Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments 6. The Engineering Department is not in support of minimal pedestrian accommodations around South Aspen St and through the site. As use in this area increases, there needs to be sufficient pedestrian facilities. Drainage: 7. Lift One Lodge PUD shows drainage passing through the center skier access easement. Gorsuch Haus proposes to divert all mountain runoff to the South Aspen St storm system. The drainage report needs to coincide with both the Lift One Lodge and One Aspen drainage plans. Any alterations need to be specifically called out and all downstream impacts analyzed. Easements: 8. The Engineering Department supports an increase in public access easements through the site. The proposed Development cuts off public access corridors. 1. The 15’ water pipeline easement located on the NE corner of the property needs to be extended to 30’ to accommodate the steep slopes. The Hill St ROW width of 25’ is sufficient for the east/west alignment of the waterline since it runs across the hill. The water line and easement gets off track in the north/south alignment at the east side of Hill St where it crosses Ski Co property. This existing north/south easement should be updated and increased to 30’ to improve the water alignment and accommodate the slope of the area. The east/west alignment along Hill St ROW is sufficient and should not be abandoned. There is no need to change this to an easement for better alignment. 9. The private access easements and recreational use easements are described as private, solely for the use of the owners of Lots 1,2,3,4. What public amenity space, with public easements and public access is being proposed? 10. A 5’ easement to the Summit St corridor is not sufficient. A larger width and proposed walkway shall be recorded with the PUD. This easement shall be open to all public pedestrian and bicycle access. 11. Follow the utility easements dimensions found in section 2.5.2 of the Engineering Design Standards. All rear and side lot lines shall have a 5’ utility easement. 12. The water and storm sewer easements on the northeast corner of the property shall be wider than minimum to accommodate future maintenance in the area with steeper slopes. 13. Provide easements for any required mud or debris walls. 14. Drainage easements need to incorporate channel flow, not just areas where stormwater infrastructure is proposed. 15. Gorsuch Haus will need permission from Mountain Queen to change their drainage and access easement. Maintenance of an open channel is very different than maintenance of a road with pipe Utilities: 1. It has come to the City’s attention a Holy Cross switchgear which is currently located on Dean St between S Aspen St and Monarch St needs to be relocated to the top of S Aspen to better serve the area and to improve the pedestrian walkway along Dean St. A location Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments for this switchgear along with adequate clearance distances shall be incorporated into the Gorsuch Haus design. The necessity of this switchgear relocation further demonstrates the need for City ROW in the vicinity to serve a public benefit. 2. The location of the 16” waterline main does not coincide with the final alignment of the waterline as proposed by One Aspen. The One Aspen plans have the waterline located further west. The water alignment on the One Aspen plans may affect the proposed Gorsuch retaining walls and stairways, and elevator. This area needs to be reworked to ensure it functions and proper separation distances are maintained. 3. It is highly recommended the Gorsuch Haus project coordinate with One Aspen on the water main alignment. 4. All trees shall be planted a minimum of 10’ away from existing and proposed utilities. 5. Fire flow calculations shall be submitted at building permit to demonstrate an 8” line is necessary. Calculations for a 6” line shall also be submitted which show the 6” line does not supply adequate fire sprinkler protection. TIA: 16. A full TIA review cannot take place until the following comments are addressed. 17. The project is taking credit for improvements that are proposed to South Aspen St under Lift One Lodge PUD. The improvements need to be specific to Gorsuch Haus. 18. A transportation option needs to be proposed and agreed upon to address the traffic congestion that will occur at the cul-de-sac. 19. With the proposed improvements, the Dean St drop off loop will be greatly underutilized. This has a negative impact on the transportation in the area. 20. Points shall be deducted for all negative impacts. For example, the attached sidewalk, and placing a driveway through a pedestrian area. 21. A plan drawing which shows all MMLOS improvements is needed. 22. The project takes credit for a full bus stop, as well as individual bus stop amenities. This is doubling points for the same MMLOS measure. Stability: 23. An agreement shall be in place that should a slope stability Improvement District be created for the Strawpile slope, Gorsuch Haus will join the district. Earth Retention: 24. Inclinometers will be required prior to and during construction to monitor ground movement. Below is wording from South Aspen St PUD that shall be included in the Gorsuch Haus PUD. b. Ground Stability Monitoring. In order to ensure that development of the Project does not exacerbate naturally occurring ground movement, an inclinometer shall be installed and maintained by Gorsuch Haus or its successors or assigns with bi-annual readings taken through the time of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The first Building Permit application for the Project shall include a report on the Exhibit H Referral Agency Comments initial readings and a subsequent report is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Additional Comments: 25. The property needs to accommodate snow storage, both onsite and for the cul-de-sac. A minimum functional area equaling 30% of the paved area shall be provided contiguous to the paved area and designed to accommodate snow storage (unheated areas). For heated areas, the functional area can be reduced to 10%. Streets and Sidewalks/Cost Recovery: 2. The property is required to reimburse One Aspen for a pro-rata share of costs associated with the reconstruction of South Aspen St and associated sidewalks, public utilities, and drainage facilities. Reimbursement shall take place prior to issuance of a building permit per Lift One Lodge Subdivision Agreement Sections 3.3-3.5.