Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.pu.Truscott GMQS SPA.A07002 ~ CASE NUMBER PARCEL ID # CASE NAME PROJECT ADDRESS PLANNER CASE TYPE OWNER/APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FlNAL ACTION CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED BY ~ A070-02 2735-111-09702 Truscott PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption, SPA- Deco Truscott James Lindt PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption, SPA City of Aspen Asset Management 11/25/02 Denied 1/6/03 J. Lindt ------~-- --c;--+- pi; () ! {"'->~ ~p J ORDINANCE NO. 38 e lI\ \ e (SERIES OF 2002) 4: -- 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPR9VING 1)A. GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBPCFACTI-;!1'Y, 2) ESTABLISmNG A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIYI~ION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUDTO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT IN THE TRUSCOTT 100 BUl1PJN9 TO BE USED AS OFFICES FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN A~SET MANAQEMENT ' DEPARTMENT'S PROJECT MANAGER~AJIl])QN~S!TEP:RQPF::RTY MANAGERS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. f"""\ Parcel No. 2735-124-54-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen Asset Management Department in conjunction with the Housing Authority, represented by Michelle Bonfils, requesting approval of 1) a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) to establish a consolidated conceptual/final SPA on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, and 3) a PUD amendment to the Truscott PUD to allow for the Project Managers to use the decommissioned restaurant on Lot 2 as office space until the start of construction on Truscott Phase III or the implementation of the Civic Center Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, City Council Ordinance 34, Series of 2002, restricts the use of the decommissioned restaurant area in the Truscott 100 Building to a Community Meeting Room; and, WHEREAS, City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a 1) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, and 3) a PUD amendment after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended denial of the proposal; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code and recommended that City Council approve the proposal with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recolnrtlendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, ro, t) WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the 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 THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.470.070, GMQS Exemptions; Section 26.440, Specially Planned Area; and Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; City Council hereby approves a 1) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA on a portion of Lot 2 of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, and 3) a PUD Amendment to allow for the Asset Management Department to use the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 building as offices for their four (4) Project Managers and two (2) On-site Truscott Property Managers with the following condition: 1. The use of the decommissioned restaurant by the Asset Management Department Project Managers as office space shall be reexamined by the Planning and Zoning Commission in two years to determine the appropriateness of continuing the office use in this location, Section 2: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances, Section 3: 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 4: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 25th day of November, 2002, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, t"'"", r"\ ~. .:.11 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 28th day of October, 2002. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote of 25th day of November, 2002, to L-~, this Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney MEMORANDUM 0,'1 III a... 1""", FROM: Mayor and City Council Me k" WOO", C=,,""''' Dewl"!'",,", DiM,", r James Lindt, Planner \Jl- TO: THRU: RE: Truscott Decommissioned Restaurant GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, pun Amendment- 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2002- Public Hearing DATE: November 25,2002 ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department CURRENT ZONING: RlMF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. ApPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Building PROPOSED USE: Office Use for Asset Management Department Project Managers and On-site Housing Managers BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen Asset Management Department, ("Applicant"), represented by Michelle Bonfils, is proposing to convert the decommissioned restaurant space in the Tmscott 100 Building (formerly the Red Roof Inn) to offices, The proposal would convert the old restaurant space to offices for four (4) employees of the Asset Management Department and two (2) existing on-site Housing Managers. The ordinance that approved the Truscott PUD identified that the decommissioned restaurant space could be used solely as a community meeting room, Therefore, a PUD Amendment is needed for the Applicant to change the use of this space and to utilize several of the parking spaces within the affordable housing parking lot on Lot 5. In addition, the Applicant requires a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to expand the net leasable square footage within the Truscott PUD to accommodate the office use, The Applicant is requesting that a consolidated conceptual/final SPA be established to allow for the office use within the Truscott PUD, LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED The proposed application requests the following land use actions: 1) A GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as net leasable space; and, 1 '! ~ , i 2) A PUD Amendment to utilize parking spaces dedicated for the Affordable Housing, and to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space; and, 3) A Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the office use on the property that has an underlying zoning ofR/MF (Residential Multi-Family), REVIEW PROCEDURE: GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: City Council may approve, approve With conditions, or deny a GMQS Exemption request for an Essential Public Facility after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. PUD Amendment: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a PUD Amendment after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a consolidated conceptual/final SPA after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: The Applicant has applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the existing decommissioned restaurant in the Truscott 100 BuildiIlg to be converted into offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers, as well as, for the on-site Truscott Property Managers, The decommissioned restaurant is approximately 900 square feet and was sterilized from commercial and office use by Ordinance 34, Series of2000, The aforementioned ordinance requires that tl1.e decommissioned restaurant only be used as a community meeting space and did not provide for Growth Management Allotments for the space to be utilized as net leasable square footage. The City of Aspen over-mitigated by seven (7) employees for the eleven (11) employees that they were required to house at Truscott as a result of the development of the new Golf Pro Shop and the Iselin Pool and Ice Facility by providing housing at Truscott for eighteen (18) City of Aspen employees, The Applicant is proposing to utilize the surplus mitigation of seven (7) employees for the use of the decommissioned restaurant as office space. The Housing Authority has reviewed the proposed GMQS exemption and feels that the Applicant is fulfilling it's mitigation requirements by using the aforementioned surplus mitigation, Additionally, the Housing Authority does not believe that any employees will be generated as a result of the proposed application because all of the employees that are slated to move into the decommissioned restaurant space are currently City of Aspen employees. The Planning Staff also feels that it is appropriate to allow for the surplus employee housing mitigation that was provided at Truscott to serve as mitigation for the increase in net leasable square footage that would be yielded by this proposal, 2 r" r) The Asset Management Department has requested approval of this application because it would provide an opportunity to co-locate the offices of their project managers. The Applicant feels that co-locating their offices would provide greater efficiency and would foster better communication between their Construction Project Managers and their Land Use Managers, Furthermore, the Applicant is proposing to use the decommissioned restaurant as offices only until Phase III of the Truscott Affordable Housing is enacted or until the Civic Center Master Plan yields more government office space within the City, The Planning Staff does believe that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an essential public facility in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community. Government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need, Staff also believes that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands as is required by the first review standard to grant a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility, The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, they have experienced a need for more office space, Therefore, Staff believes that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to growth generated within the community and meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility". PUD Amendment: The Planning Staff finds that the proposal will slightly increase the demand for parking at Truscott. The Applicant believes that the office use will only require two (2) parking spaces for the two (2) fleet vehicles that are owned by the Asset Management Department as is requested in the application. Therefore, the Applicant has proposed to utilize two (2) parking spaces on Lot 5, the area designated as parking for affordable housing at Truscott, Staff finds that the utilization of two (2) parking spaces for the proposed office use would have a negligible affect on the parking demand within the PUD, In reviewing the approved parking arrangement at Truscott, Staff feels that sufficient parking exists within Lot 5 to accommodate the proposal. Originally, a one parking space per unit ratio was proposed at Truscott but was bumped up through the review process to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units on the site (1.15 spaces per unit), During the conceptual review of the Truscott PUD, former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli encouraged the City to limit the availability of residential parking in this location, Morelli felt that limiting the availability of residential parking would encourage economization and the sharing of vehicle ownership and use, Additionally, Assistant City Manager Randy Ready has reviewed the proposal and feels that the on-site parking should be sufficient to accommodate the proposed office use (please see parking referral comments attached as Exhibit "B"). Staff believes that Morelli's recommendation holds true and that the affordable housing will continue to be effectively parked even if two of the parking spaces designated for the affordable housing are shifted to use by the Project Managers, 3 (""\, " Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: The Applicant has also requested approval of a consolidated conceptual/final SPA to allow for the office use in the decommissioned restaurant becaus~ the. underlying R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) zoning does not allow for offices as a permitted use, The Planning Staff feels that offices that are accessory to on-site uses and the operations of the golf course and the affordable housing units are appropriate for the space, However, the Planning Staff does not believe that the proposed offices for the AssetMallagement Department's Project Managers is an appropriate land use to be located in the immediate vicinity of the recreation facility and the affordable housing related uses, and recommends denial ofthe application. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application and recommended that City Council approve the proposal with the condition of approval that the use of the space by the Asset Management Department be reexamined in two years by the C<,Jmmission to determine if the use is still appropriate for the location (please see Exhibit "c" for the Planning and Zoning Commission's resolujion ans! minutes), The Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed condition has been included in the draft ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission indicated that they based their recommendation on the dire need for public office space within the community and that they felt that the space would not be used effectively as a public meeting space as it was earmarked for in the Truscott PUD, ST AFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommended that City Council deny the proposal finding that the review standards for approving a consolidated conceptual/final Specially Planned Area (SPA) have not been met. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment, and Consolidated ConceptuallFinal SPA to use the decomlllissioned restaurant as office space with the condition that the use of the space by the Asset Management Department be reexamined in two years by the Commission to determine if the use is still appropriate for the location. RECOMMENDED MOTION: (ALL MOTIONS ARE READ IN THEAFFIRMc\TIVE) "I move to approve Ordinance No,38, Series of 2002, approving with conditions, a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment to designate two (2) parking spaces in Lot 5 for the office use, and a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building to be used as offices for four (4) Asset Management Department Project Managers and two (2) Asset Management Department On-site Property Managers." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: 4 1'""\ , I ~, ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B Referral Comments Exhibit C -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 5 ,~ (') . ,.J" EXHIBIT A Growth Management Quota System Exemption for au Essential Public Facility Review Criteria & Staff Findings An Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the construction of an Essential Public Facility may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the 'Comrrmnity Development Director. This exemption is available provided thai the following conditions are met: 1. Except for housing, development shall be considered an essential public facility if: a. it serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demands of growth, is not itself a significant growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and serves the needs of the City. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility" in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community, Staff believes that government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need, Staff also feels that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands of the community, The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the deyelopment of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, Staff finds that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to the growth of the Community, 2. An applicant for an exemption pursuant to this Section shall be required to demonstrate to thesatisfaction of the City Council: a. That the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with: i. The generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, and Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the additional demand that would be placed on the facility by the proposal. An analysis that was done by former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli, encouraged limiting the parking available to one parking space per affordable housing unit as was originally proposed by the Housing Authority for the site, During the final PUD review process, the requirement was bumped up 6 t*l fj to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units, which yields a higher ratio of about 1,15 parking spaces per unit. Furthermore, the Planning Staff felt that the original proposal of one parking space per unit was appropriate, Given that there have been considerably more than one parking space per unit developed within the PUD, Staff believes that the use of two parking spaces by the Asset Management Department will not have a considerable negative impact on the parking situation. Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ii. The need for basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. Staff Finding The space is existing and once accommodated a restaurant use, The proposed office use will not exceed the demand on the basic services that the restaurant placed on the structure, iii. The proposed development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff believes that moving the City Asset Management Department employees may increase vehicle trips because their job necessitates that they attend to city business and meetings that are held downtown, On the other hand, the co-location of the City's Project Managers may reduce the vehicle trips associated with their internal communication. Therefore, Staff does not believe that there will be a large increase in the vehicular trips generated by the proposal and thus, there will be negligible impacts on the City's air. Furthermore, the proposal will not affect the exterior of the building and will not have a visual impact on the surrounding areas. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in sub-Sectiol1-s (1) and (2), above, the City Council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualifies as an essential public facility and may exempt such development from the growth management competition and scoring procedures and from such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposal has been initiated by a non-profit entity and qualifies as an essential public facility that serves and benefits the general public. However, Staff does not believe that the proposal to move existing government employees from the civic center area of town to the perimeter encourages good growth, Staff feels that the proposal would add to sprawl and the decentralization of government facilities that don't serve an accessory purpose to the Golf Course or the on-site affordable housing units at Truscott. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 7 r,. r) PUD Amendment REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS A PUD Amendment may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. An Amendment is available provided thatthe proposal meets the fol1owillg review stal1dards: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent 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. 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 Staff does not feel the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is consistent with the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity, The existing land uses in the immediate vicinity are primarily related to the operations of the Golf Course or are accessory to the Truscott Affordable Housing Units, Additionally, Staff does not feel that the proposal to remove employees from the center of town and relocate them on the perimeter of the City is consistent with the growth management goals of the AACP. The growth management section of the AACP encourages a compact, dense community, Staff feels that the proposal is in conflict with aforementioned goal in that it fosters the sprawl of office space to the outreaches of the city, In addition, Staff believes that the proposal is conflict with the economic sustainability section of the AACP that calls for a lively downtown, Removing employees from the downtown can only further detract from the lively nature of downtown. Staff does not find this criterion to be met by the proposal. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 8 ~ r-... j 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 ofthe 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 Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No, 2 in the Growth Management Exemption Staff Findings. However, Staff does not believe that the proposed office use is compatible with the surrounding land uses in that the proposal is decentralizing government offices from the civic center area, Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 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 The space subject to this application is internal to an existing structure and thus will not affect the scale, massing, and quantity of open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application, 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. 9 t'*"\ o d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding Staff does believe that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No, 2 of the GMQS Exemption Staff Findings. However, Staff does not believe that the proposal is appropriate in that it decentralizes public offices from the commercial core area, The proposed offices would move employees from their current offices in the core area of the city and place them at the edge of town, where the current uses are primarily residential or related to the operations of the Golf Course. Thus, Staff feels that the lack of proximity to the commercial core of the proposed office increases the demand to utilize vehicles in comparison to the Project Managers' current office location. Staff does not believe these review standards have been met. 4. The maximum allowai:lle density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed amendment will affect the water pressure, drainage, or other utilities. Furthermore, Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment will increase the need for snow reInoval apd roildillail1tenapce b~cillls~t~e~e activiti~s i.\f~ already required to serve the affordable housing on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met: ' S. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site fellture~. 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 10 "......, () with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding The proposed amendment only affects the use of the interior space and will not have an affect on the natural site characteristics within the pun. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application, 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased ifthere 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 ofa PUD may be increased if: 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 The maximum allowable density of the pun is not being increased by the proposed amendment. However, Staff believes that the proposed use of the decommissioned restaurant as public offices is not compatible with the surrounding land uses that are primarily residential in nature or related to the operation of the Golf Course, Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to this application, 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 ofthe 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. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 11 ,r'\, ~ ./.1 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. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding The structure is existing and the relationship between the building and public spaces will be unchanged as a result of the proposed PUD amendment. The site drainage was reviewed as part of the Planned Unit Development approval received in 2000, Staff finds this criterion to be 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 ofthe 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 The exterior landscaping is not proposed to be changed as part of the proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application, ! , 12 , .~ n E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 The structure is existing. The applicant is not requesting changes to the exterior of the building as part of the proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application, F. Lighting. The purpose ofthis standard to ensure the exterior ofthe 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 ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. I ~ ,I 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. 13 f", r) Staff Finding There are no proposed amendments to the exterior lighting as part of this PUD amendment. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable to the proposed application, 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 ofthe 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 The proposed PUD amendment will not affect the amount of open space or recreation area within the PUD. Staff finds this criterion to be applicable to this application, H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. I I , I I ! I " , " , 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. 14 r"i Staff Finding The utilities and public infrastructure on the site are existing, Staff believes that the proposed office use will not have greater demand on the utilities or site improvements than the previous restaurant use of the space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 1. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose ofthis standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adeqnate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation ofthe 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. 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. 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 ofthe 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. S. 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 The vehicular and pedestrian access will not change because the space is existing, However, Staff feels that the conversion of the decommissioned restaurant from conference space to full time office space will slightly increase the amount of traffic using the roads within the Truscott PUD. Staff does believe that the vehicular access and improvements within the PUD are adequate to accommodate the proposed use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 15 1""\ ~ J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or 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-Iieu, 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 The Applicant has proposed to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space only until the construction of Phase III of Truscott is approved and built or until the conceptual Civic Center Master Plan is implemented to provide additional government office space in the core of town, However, both Truscott Phase III and the Civic Center Master Plan are only conceptual in nature at this point in time, Staff feels that there is a chance that the proposed office use could remain in the Truscott 100 Building for much longer than the Applicant anticipates if Truscott Phase III construction is not started in 2006 as is anticipated. 16 ,-,. n TRUSCOTT OFFICES CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPA REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS 26.440.050, Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). A Consolidated Conceptual/ Final SPA may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. An SPA is available provided that the proposal meets the following review standards: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is compatible with the mix of uses in the immediate vicinity, The immediate vicinity mainly consists of uses associated with the Golf Course and the Affordable Housing Units, Staff believes that the proposed offices will serve off-site projects and thus, are not geared to serving the on-site facilities as would be consistent with the other offices within the PUD, Additionally, Staff believes that the public office use should remain within the commercial and civic core area ofthe City, Staff finds this criterion not to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public facilities and roads do exist to support the proposed office use, but the use will have minor negative impacts on the traffic utilizing the entryway in and out of Truscott. However, Staff believes that sufficient roads and vehicular access exist within the PUD to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds that this criterion is generally met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls, avalanche dangers andflood hazards. Staff Finding The subject space is internal to an existing structure. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application , 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. 17 f'""'\ n J Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal to move several of the Asset Management Department's employees from the Plaza I Building (within the Civic Center Area) to Truscott will possibly increase the trip generation of the public to and from the site; which in turn, would increase the air pollution, Staff does not find this criterion to be met, 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff does understand the need for a~ditional government office space and the need to co- locate employees to make their department more efficient. Furthermore, Staff believes that the proposal does locate development near a RFTA bus stop as is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. However, Staff believes that decentralizing government offices from within the core of the City will increase vehicle trips, which is not consistent with the AACP, In addition, the AACP's Future Land Use Composite Map indicates that the subject parcel is to be used solely for Affordable Housing and it's accessory uses. The proposed office use is not accessory to an on-site use. Furthermore, employees within the City's commercial and civic core are essential to the economic and social vitality of the downtown. These are the people who utilize the professional services of downtown (i,e. lawyers, printers, other government departments, etc.), as well as, visit the downtown restaurants and retail establishments. By removing employees from the downtown area you further detract from the vitality of the core, Staff finds that this criterion is not met. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds; rather, Staff believes that the proposal would save public funds by using an existing space for office. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). Staff Finding There are no slopes on the subject parcel that are in excess of 20%, Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable, 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. Staff Finding The Applicant has concurrently applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space to be used as net leasable square 18 f""'.. r'\ , / footage, However, Staff does not support the proposed GMQS Exemption, Please refer to the criteria and staff findings for Staff's analysis of the proposed GMQS Exemption. 19 )\.-~enaer: ranayr@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Wmows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0,58 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 r 10:32 -0500 To: James Lindt <jamesl@cl.aspen,co.us> From: Randy Ready <randyr@ci.aspen,co.us> Subject: Re: Truscott Parking Referral In-Reply-T/)' "42::1 ?QQ2Q9'3nn846?'; 01Q1Qa20@/"nmde\/'> ~mme-\I"r"ion' 1 0 X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Type' t"vt/htrP1; char<;et-'" IS-<l"cii" ~M;bi+ \'8/ James--Staff was comfortable with the 1 space per unit ratio. The additional 30 spaces should provide a reasonable buffer during peak times. Use of two of the spaces (1st come, 1st served unless spaces are assigned to permit holding residents as well) by Asset Mgmt. staff should not have a negative impact on Truscott parking. If problems do arise, I would expect them to be during the evenings and weekends, IF that's the case, Asset staff may need to make alternative overnighVweekend parking arrangements, But, weekday daytime parking is not expected to be a problem in any event. ' Hope that helps. rr ....__......."""'............. .....,..,..,.,;a TO: James u-' ~ ), FROM: DATE: Cindy Christensen September 16, 2002 TRUSCOTT DECOMMISSIONED RESTA.URANT TEMPORARY USE REI ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval to extend the use of temporary ofl1ce until Phase m of the Truscott RedllVelopment begins or pennanent office space is completed for Asset Management and the Property Managers at Truscott. BA~ROUND: Ordinance No. 34, Series of2000, currently governs the property and states that the decommissioned l"eStaurant area can only operate as a community meeting area. There currently exists a community meeting 1'00111 in this 100 building that will remain. Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2000, also states that Phase m of the Truscott llxpansion Pmjeci is proposed for the year 2006. As part of Phase m. proper office space for the Tmscott property managers win be created. Tbi$ will more than likely be congruent with the schedule of the Civic Master PlIri. Staff concurs with the applicant that City departments fulfilled and exceeded employee mitigation requirements and that the employees to utilize this space are existing employees worldng within other departments. No new employees are anticipated for the AspeJ'llPitkin County Housing Authority. RECOMMENDATION: StafI'recommends approval oftlrls application since the use of this space is not permanent and that no new employees are to be added. IWor<i1llfeml/l!pLofflcesP/Jt:lI,do. ~~~e& 4- 0 :1--1 C tJ ~q~-h~~ _~".~~:::::..~__."."^..u,___~._ James Lindt, Planner C, MM. C~: Truscott Decommissioned Restaurant GMQS Exemption for an Essential c5' Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, PUp Amendment- 2nd , ))(;~ Reading of Ordinance No. 38, Series of2002- Public Hearing --r; ~C?~ November 25,2002 .~Yd(~ L CURRENT ZONING: Lef.,([<Z(/ R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD ,~ Jlf).{- If OKf5 +~ !;:fl Cl9j; 0j6f:. , ' ~lA1-.9le. t<<alA~ -/ViA 93 +,qf'!V\S "" MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: RE: DATE: ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle BonfiIs, Asset Management Dept ApPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Building PROPOSED USE: Office Use for Asset Management Department Project Managers and On-site Housing Managers BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen Asset Management Department, ("Applicant"), represented by Michelle Bonfils, is proposing to convert the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building (formerly the Red Roof Inn) to offices. The proposal would convert the old restaurant space to offices for four (4) employees of the Asset Management Department and two (2) existing on-site Housing Managers. The ordinance that approved the Truscott PUD identified that the decommissioned restaurant space could be used solely as a community meeting room. Therefore, a PUD Amendment is needed for the Applicant to change the use of this space and to utilize several of the parking spaces within the affordable housing parking lot on Lot 5, In addition, the Applicant requires a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to expand the net leasable square footage within the Truscott PUD to accommodate the office use. The Applicant is requesting that a consolidated conceptual/final SPA be established to allow for the office use within the Truscott PUD, LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED The proposed application requests the following land use actions: 1) A GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as net leasable space; and, I ~ ~ 2) A PUD Amendment to utilize parking spaces dedicated for the Affordable Housing, and to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space; and, 3) A Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the office use on the property that has an underlying zoning ofRlMF (Residential Multi-Family), REVIEW PROCEDURE: GMOS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a GMQS Exemption request for an Essential Public Facility after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director, PUD Amendment: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a PUD Amendment after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a consolidated conceptual/final SPA after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: GMOS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: The Applicant has applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the existing decommissioned restaurant in the Truscott 100 Building to be converted into offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers, as well as, for the on-site Truscott Property Managers, The decommissioned restaurant is approximately 900 square feet and was sterilized from commercial and office use by Ordinance 34, Series of2000, The aforementioned ordinance requires that the decommissioned restaurant only be used as a community meeting space and did not provide for Growth Management Allotments for the space to be utilized as net leasable square footage. The City of Aspen over-mitigated by seven (7) employees for the eleven (11) employees that they were required to house at Truscott as a result of the development of the new Golf Pro Shop and the Iselin Pool and Ice Facility by providing housing at Truscott for eighteen (18) City of Aspen employees. The Applicant is proposing to utilize the surplus mitigation of seven (7) employees for the use of the decommissioned restaurant as office space. The Housing Authority has reviewed the proposed GMQS exemption and feels that the Applicant is fulfilling it's mitigation requirements by using the aforementioned surplus mitigation. Additionally, the Housing Authority does not believe that any employees will be generated as a result of the proposed application because all of the employees that are slated to move into the decommissioned restaurant space are currently City of Aspen employees. The Planning Staff also feels that it is appropriate to allow for the surplus employee housing mitigation that was provided at Truscott to serve as mitigation for the increase in net leasable square footage that would be yielded by this proposal. 2 r'\ ~ o The Asset Management Department has requested approval of this application because it would provide an opportunity to co-locate the offices of their project managers, The Applicant feels that co-locating their offices would provide greater efficiency and would foster better communication between their Construction Project Managers and their Land Use Managers, Furthermore, the Applicant is proposing to use the decommissioned restaurant as offices only until Phase III of the Truscott Affordable Housing is enacted or until the Civic Center Master Plan yields more government office space within the City, The Planning Staff does believe that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an essential public facility in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community. Government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need, Staff also believes that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands as is required by the first review standard to grant a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility. The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, they have experienced a need for more office space, Therefore, Staff believes that the proposal ~o utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to growth generated within the community and meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility", PUD Amendment: The Planning Staff finds that the proposal will slightly increase the demand for parking at Truscott, The Applicant believes that the office use will only require two (2) parking spaces for the two (2) fleet vehicles that are owned by the Asset Management Department as is requested in the application, Therefore, the Applicant has proposed to utilize two (2) parking spaces on Lot 5, the area designated as parking for affordable housing at Truscott. Staff finds that the utilization of two (2) parking spaces for the proposed office use would have a negligible affect on the parking demand within the PUD. In reviewing the approved parking arrangement at Truscott, Staff feels that sufficient parking exists within Lot 5 to accommodate the proposal, Originally, a one parking space per unit ratio was proposed at Truscott but was bumped up through the review process to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units on the site (1.15 spaces per unit), During the conceptual review of the Truscott PUD, former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli encouraged the City to limit the availability of residential parking in this location. Morelli felt that limiting the availability of residential parking would encourage economization and the sharing of vehicle ownership and use, Additionally, Assistant City Manager Randy Ready has reviewed the proposal and feels that the on-site parking should be sufficient to accommodate the proposed office U'se (please see parking referral comments attached as Exhibit "B"). Staff believes that Morelli's recommendation holds true and that the affordable housing will continue to be effectively parked even if two of the parking spaces designated for the affordable housing are shifted to use by the Project Managers. 3 ^ " Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: The Applicant has also requested approval of a consolidated conceptual/final SPA to allow for the office use in the decommissioned restaurant because the underlying R1MF (Residential/Multi-Family) zoning does not allow for offices as a permitted use. The Planning Staff feels that offices that are accessory to on-site uses and the operations of the golf course and the affordable housing units are appropriate for the space, However, the Planning Staff does not believe that the proposed offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is an appropriate land use to be located in the immediate vicinity of the recreation facility and the affordable housing related uses, and recommends denial of the application. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application and recommended that City Council approve the proposal with the condition of approval that the use of the space by the Asset Management Department be reexamined in two years by the Commission to determine if the use is still appropriate for the location (please see Exhibit "c" for the Planning and Zoning Commission's resolution and minutes). The Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed condition has been included in the draft ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission indicated that they based their recommendation on the dire need for public office space within the community and that they felt that the space would not be used effectively as a public meeting space as it was earmarked for in the Truscott PUD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommended that City Council deny the proposal finding that the review standards for approving a consolidated conceptual/final Specially Planned Area (SPA) have not been met. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment, and Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space with the condition that the use of the space by the Asset Management Department be reexamined in two years by the Commission to determine if the use is still appropriate for the location. RECOMMENDED MOTION: (ALL MOTIONS ARE READ IN THE AFFIRMATIVE) "I move to approve Ordinance No.38, Series of 2002, approving with conditions, a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment to designate two (2) parking spaces in Lot 5 for the office use, and a Consolidated ConceptuallFinal SPA to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building to be used as offices for four (4) Asset Management Department Project Managers and two (2) Asset Management Department On-site Property Managers," CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: 4 r-" ~ ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Referral Comments Exhibit C -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 5 ......- /""", r""\ EXHIBIT A Growth Management Quota System Exemption for an Essential Public Facility Review Criteria & Staff Findings An Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the construction of an Essential Public Facility may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendatIon !'rom the Planning and Zoning Commissionanc1 the Community Development Director. This exemption is available provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Except for housing, development shall be considered an essential public facility if: a. it seITes an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demands of growth, is not itself a significant growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and seITes the needs of the City. . Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility" in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community. Staff believes that government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need, Staff also feels that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands of the community. The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, Staff finds that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to the growth of the Community. 2. An applicant for an exemption pursuant to this Section shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council: a. That the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with: i. The generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit seITices, and Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the additional demand that would be placed on the facility by the proposal, An analysis that was done by former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli, encouraged limiting the parking available to one parking space per affordable housing unit as was originally proposed by the Housing Authority for the site, During the final PUD review process, the requirement was bumped up 6 1""". ,-, to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units, which yields a higher ratio of about 1.15 parking spaces per unit. Furthermore, the Planning Staff felt that the original proposal of one parking space per unit was appropriate. Given that there have been considerably more than one parking space per unit developed within the PUD, Staff believes that the use of two parking spaces by the Asset Management Department will not have a considerable negative impact on the parking situation, Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ii. The need for basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. Staff Finding The space is existing and once accommodated a restaurant use, The proposed office use will not exceed the demand on the basic services that the restaurant placed on the structure, iii. The proposed development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff believes that moving the City Asset Management Department employees may increase vehicle trips because their job necessitates that they attend to city business and meetings that are held downtown, On the other hand, the co-location of the City's Project Managers may reduce the vehicle trips associated with their intemal communication, Therefore, Staff does not believe that there will be a large increase in the vehicular trips generated by the proposal and thus, there will be negligible impacts on the City's air. Furthermore, the proposal will not affect the exterior of the building and will not have a visual impact on the surrounding areas, Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in sub-Sections (1) and (2), above, the City Council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualities as an essential public facility and may exempt such development from the growth management competition and scoring procedures and from such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposal has been initiated by a non-profit entity and qualifies as an essential public facility that serves and benefits the general public, However, Staff does not believe that the proposal to move existing government employees from the civic center area of town to the perimeter encourages good growth, Staff feels that the proposal would add to sprawl and the decentralization of government facilities that don't serve an accessory purpose to the Golf Course or the on-site affordable housing units at Truscott. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 7 r-, (:""") PUD Amendment REVIEW CRITERIA & STAPP FINDINGS A PUD Amendment may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. An Amendment is available provided that the proposal meets the following review standards: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent 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. 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 Staff does not feel the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is consistent with the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity, The existing land uses in the immediate vicinity are primarily related to the operations of the Golf Course or are accessory to the Truscott Affordable Housing Units, Additionally, Staff does not feel that the proposal to remove employees from the center of town and relocate them on the perimeter of the City is consistent with the growth management goals of the AACP, The growth management section of the AACP encourages a compact, dense community, Staff feels that the proposal is in conflict with aforementioned goal in that it fosters the sprawl of office space to the outreaches of the city. In addition, Staff believes that the proposal is conflict with the economic sustainability section of the AACP that calls for a lively downtown, Removing employees from the downtown can only further detract from the lively nature of downtown. Staff does not find this criterion to be met by the proposal, B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements ofthe underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 8 .-.. t"'\ 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 surroundiug area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. StaffFinding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No, 2 in the Growth Management Exemption Staff Findings. However, Staff does not believe that the proposed office use is compatible with the surrounding land uses in that the proposal is decentralizing government offices from the civic center area, Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 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 The space subject to this application is internal to an existing structure and thus will not affect the scale, massing, and quantity of open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application, 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. 9 1""'\ t""'\ d) The proximity of the proposed development t() the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding Staff does believe that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staff's response to Review Criteria No, 2 of the GMQS Exemption Staff Findings. However, Staff does not believe that the proposal is appropriate in that it decentralizes public offices from the commercial core area. The proposed offices would move employees from their current offices in the core area of the city and place them at the edge of town, where the current uses are primarily residential or related to the operations of the Golf Course, Thus, Staff feels that the lack of proximity to the commercial core of the proposed office increases the demand to utilize vehicles in comparison to the Project Managers' current office location, Staff does not believe these review standards have been met. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed amendment will affect the water pressure, drainage, or other utilities, Furthermore, Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment will increase the need for snow removal and road maintenance because these activities are already required to serve the affordable housing on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 10 1"""\ ~ with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding The proposed amendment only affects the use of the interior space and will not have an affect on the natural site characteristics within the PUD, Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application, 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: 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 The maximum allowable density of the PUD is not being increased by the proposed amendment. However, Staff believes that the proposed use of the decommissioned restaurant as public offices is not compatible with the surrounding land uses that are primarily residential in nature or related to the operation of the Golf Course, Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to this application, C. Site Design. The purpose ofthis 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 ofthe town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. II' f""'1 r'\ 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. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding The structure is existing and the relationship between the building and public spaces will be unchanged as a result of the proposed PUD amendment. The site drainage was reviewed as part of the Planned Unit Development approval received in 2000, Staff finds this criterion to be 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 ofthe 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 uniqneness 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 The exterior landscaping is not proposed to be changed as part of the proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application. 12 1"""\ 1'\ E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is 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 ofthe 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 ofsnow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding The structure is existing. The applicant is not requesting changes to the exterior of the building as part of the proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application, F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. 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 ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final pun documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. 13 r"'\ ("'\ Staff Finding There are no proposed amendments to the exterior lighting as part of this PUD amendment. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable to the proposed application. 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 pun, 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 reliefto the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the pun. 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 pun 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 The proposed PUD amendment will not affect the amount of open space or recreation area within the PUD, Staff finds this criterion to be applicable to this application, H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 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. 14 r-., f' Staff Finding The utilities and public infrastructure on the site are existing, Staff believes that the proposed office use will not have greater demand on the utilities or site improvements than the previous restaurant use of the space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. L Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation ofthe 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. 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. 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 m,aintenance. 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 The vehicular and pedestrian access will not change because the space is existing, However, Staff feels that the conversion of the decommissioned restaurant from conference space to full time office space will slightly increase the amount of traffic using the roads within the Truscott PUD. Staff does believe that the vehicular access and improvements within the PUD are adequate to accommodate the proposed use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 15 ~, A J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose ofthis criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individualphllse are mitigll'tcil adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final pun 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 pun, 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 The Applicant has proposed to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space only until the construction of Phase III of Truscott is approved and built or until the conceptual Civic Center Master Plan is implemented to provide additional government office space in the core of town, However, both Truscott Phase III and the Civic Center Master Plan are only conceptual in nature at this point in time, Staff feels that there is a chance that the proposed office use could remain in the Truscott 1 00 Building for much longer than the Applicant anticipates if Truscott Phase III construction is not started in 2006 as is anticipated, 16 f""\ A TRUSCOTT OFFICES CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPA REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS 26.440.050. Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). A Consolidated Conceptual/ Final SPA may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission 'and the Community Development Director. An SPA is available provided that the proposal meets the following review standards: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is compatible with the mix of uses in the immediate vicinity, The immediate vicinity mainly consists of uses associated with the Golf Course and the Affordable Housing Units, Staff believes that the proposed offices will serve off-site projects and thus, are not geared to serving the on-site facilities as would be consistent with the other offices within the PUD, Additionally, Staff believes that the public office use should remain within the commercial and civic core area of the City. Staff finds this criterion not to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public facilities and roads do exist to support the proposed office use, but the use will have minor negative impacts on the traffic utilizing the entryway in and out of Truscott. However, Staff believes that sufficient roads and vehicular access exist within the PUD to accommodate the proposal, Staff finds that this criterion is generally met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls, avalanche dangers andflood hazards. Staff Finding The subject space is internal to an existing structure, Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. 17 r'\, f"1 Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal to move several of the Asset Management Department's employees from the Plaza I Building (within the Civic Center Area) to Truscott will possibly increase the trip generation of the public to and from the site; which in turn, would increase the air pollution, Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff does understand the need for additional government office space and the need to co- locate employees to make their department more efficient. Furthermore, Staff believes that the proposal does locate development near a RFT A bus stop as is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, However, Staff believes that decentralizing government offices from within the core of the City will increase vehicle trips, which is not consistent with the AACP. In addition, the AACP's Future Land Use Composite Map indicates that the subject parcel is to be used solely for Affordable Housing and it's accessory uses. The proposed office use is not accessory to an on-site use. Furthermore, employees within the City's commercial and civic core are essential to the economic and social vitality of the downtown, These are the people who utilize the professional services of downtown (i.e. lawyers, printers, other government departments, etc.), as well as, visit the downtown restaurants and retail establishments. By removing employees from the downtown area you further detract from the vitality of the core. Staff finds that this criterion is not met. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds; rather, Staff believes that the proposal would save public funds by using an existing space for office. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent meet the slope reduction and d(msity requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). Staff Finding There are no slopes on the subject parcel that are in excess of 20%, Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable. 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. Staff Finding The Applicant has concurrently applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the decornmissioned restaurant space to be used as net leasable square 18 "'-"-. ~.""-'"~ ("". t""'\ I . footage, However, Staff does not support the proposed GMQS Exemption, Please refer to the criteria and staff findings for Staff's analysis of the proposed GMQS Exemption, 19 ''''.. ~:. 1"'"'\ \" ,'I ,~ ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIPAVITQFPUi:!L1C NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.0EjO (E), ASPEN'LAND USE CODE l"eoSC-D-tr ~(vtfv{ISS\oNe:O ~iAU~T ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: utI" 2-. ~ &oL-f (.t/()!t-6E!. SU1?D. , Aspen, CO . SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: N O""VVI.~ 1.-6 ,200:z.. STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, M I C4{Cu..-e: :lpONF \ \-S (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: _ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal noti~e section of an ()fficial paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached he!~tP. ...:ry;:;:'''''''''',,,::.c:;:>, ~"'1;:'\1>:'l tr ...'"~:~ W 11I,-..J:! """ ~ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtaine<:\, n-9inili'e....:.~...~;~" Community Development Department, which was made of suitable'/~t~ .{~. .;~ waterproof materials, which was not less thantwenty-two (22) ii1ch~s ~id' J! 2* and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composedof1eft~?s"nofJyAM ,/~Y le~s than one in~h in h~ight. Said notic~ was post~d,at least fiftee((l~'>::da.ts~~';:~; pnor to the pubhc heanng and was contmuously vlSlble from the \1'l"l.iI'i~2.fw"" N.~I,......-y- ,2002-, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ~ Mailing of notice, By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivere,d ,or mailed by' first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other govemmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) ".'~ ',', ", -"'!; r'J " PUBLIC NOTICE RE: LOT 2, ASPEN GO, LF, C, 0, URSE SUBDIVI, S,IO" N"(FORME,, R TRUSCOTT .. .. .... ...... '. .. ,... .'... .... .. ...0 '..... ...'.::....'..:. ....,...: '., ..,........:'."'.....' ,>:"':"'~::<""""".::" """.:"",:.','-',: ..:':< -'-'_'::< ,'_,I .".. '. .......... .. .. .. .. .. REST, AURANT SPACE) PUD Al\1ENDMENT, CONSOLIDAtE)) CONCEPTUALIFINAL .. .. ','", ....-..,.,...,... '"',,... ...... ..,.,":': " , ....... .. ...'..'....no.... .. ",':," SPA, AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENJI~rlJJJq<::lfACILI'fY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, November 25, 2002, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena Street, to consider an application submitted by the City of Aspen Asset Management Department and Housing Authority, requesting approval of a PUD Amendment to the approved Truscott PUD, a Consolidated ConceptuallFinal SPA, and a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision to allo\V for, the deconunissioned restaurant to be used as Clffi<::es fClr fo,ur (4) Project Managers and two (2) On-site Housing Managers. The property is commonly mown as the former Red Roof Inn and is described as Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision. For further infonnation, contact James Lindt at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S, Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5095, iamesllalci.asoen.co.us. S/Helen Kalin KIanderud. Mavor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on November 9, 2002 City of Aspen Account '?" ~ JEHOVAHS W!TNESSES ASPEN CONGREGATION C/O ROGER LONG PO BOX 3849 ASPEN, CO 81612 MARKS LARRY J & DIANE NANCY 39500 HWY 82 ASPEN, CO 81611 r, FARINO CAROL PO BOX 10421 ASPEN, CO 81612 GALARDI JOHN & CYNTHIA L 4440 VON KARMANAVE STE#222 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ,/ ~ GREENBERG DEBRA S & PETER R 22 PYRAMID RD ASPEN, CO 81611 TRUSCOTT PHASE II LLLP 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL ASPEN, CO 81611 'J""""'ElS L4 NDT t::.DMM"'N I rt De-Jel-O~ IVO S ~e:Nf-'<: 5T P6f1e:N CO <;:'\.If'11 ~, f'" .~'- ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~oI- >_ .~pevt 6-o/(JCo.~~ft;Suf6, SCHEDULED PuBLIC HEMUNG DATE: :J t/ z. ;/ O:? ,200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) .---::-'-- L \ It I, ,,) a M, 9~ ! (/(~ - ,. (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the Ity of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certifY that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ,~publication oj notice: By the publication in the legal notice section ofan official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy oj the publication is attached hereto, _ Posting oj notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the ) Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide ) and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph oJthe posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ' _ Mailing oj notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand' delivered or mailed by first class postage i prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government;. school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency tllat owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing, A copy oJthe owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) r--. r--. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ~~ ~ignature The k2rfgoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before m~~y of V 'JDV, ,200~by 0~<'" f-.-) ,!'l?v~~~~r,~;":",~~',,-~',,, '-"::mct:':^~"":;~'''''St;;;~i:<'s:r;;;~~'~r, -,,:,-,"~'pue:UCNO, . "ESUBDIVISION ' , RE:, ' IDT2,ASPENG~ CZ~TSPACErpUD (FORMER 'rRTU~~~~L1D~ED 'tONCE}>TUAt! F1~ AMENJ?MEN, ,," r...,,"" ON'FOR AN ESSEN- NALSPA. AND GMQS ~',," ,'. . ":i', llALPl.l~LrF~~TX1VENthat'a public he~r1ng NOTlCE,ISJiE"".,._" ember 25'-2002, ata will be tieldon .Mond'a:'m before'the Aspen m~t,~g to .begln ~~I~.~Oh:~b'ms,"l30 ,5. ~alena City Councd, ~ou,,,_ ";'~ IIca"tiori SUbJl1iued by street to con~lder an ayp -.'tDepartinent the City 01 Aspen'Asset Man~ge;,-?eni'oval of a ".,o"'_'H" ,', "",'Authorlty, requesting a1>'P ,- pUD and 91:!SI1:'\ " 'fovecrrruscott , PUD #eno~en~ to tlleapp, ,"SPA"ano"a a" ,consOII~,at~""S~~l:ePt~~eJt~(~ublid"Fa.dlity',i.. ?~~i,: GMQS, ExemptIon for ,ad 'If'Co'oYS'eSubdiVision to on L?t 2, 01 the ASpen I~icinedrestaurant}~ be aU()w, for" t~ed~{)~m '(4) Prolect Managers and useo, asollicesfor o~r - - rs The property tw6'(2) On-Site Housing Man,age " D~O Roof Inn ; "', k own"as the ormer "'" , ',' , is commonly, n 'Loti "of'tne"-;r;.spen Golf and ,IS" de5c~I~,edas 'rlurtber Informat!()n,con.- ~'c()u~s,e Sub(h,,~:O~. t~~'CIi:Y'of ASpen Community tad, James Un , ,- ,,'"' t'" '130 S ,Galena St", As- , 1 'ffient Departmen, , ' " Dev~, op ,", 920-5095 jameSl@Cl,aspen.C?us. pen, CO (970) , sl'l~n KallnJ<Ia.~~erU?, Mayor ,'_ ASpen City Coundl T' on November 9, published in th~ ,,,A;; n lme5 2002.(9622) " WlTNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commissio expires: 'Y ) 5 ~~,. Notary Public Sf nt'\H ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION ":;4PH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) '--,~- :__:"~---'-'--- GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 1""'\ !"""1 'V"b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: ~~~ Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directo~ O/", ~~(""',',' I o>~. l'.? Jf 4i~~ James Lindt, Planner C51- ~~ "1& / <3 ,~ 1>'a >O~ i:?~ Truscott Decommissioned Restaurant GMQS Exemption for an Esser~ Public Facility, Consolidated ConceptuallFinal SPA, pun Amendment~'&-4;>- Reading of Ordinance No. Q[, Series of 2002 FROM: RE: DATE: October 28, 2002 ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department CURRENT ZONING: RlMF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. ApPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Building PROPOSED USE: Office Use for Asset Management Department Project Managers and On-site Housing Managers BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen Asset Management Department, ("Applicant"), represented by Michelle BonfiIs, is proposing to convert the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building (formerly the Red Roof Inn) to offices, The proposal would convert the old restaurant space to offices for four (4) employees of the Asset Management Department and two (2) existing on-site Housing Managers, The ordinance that approved the Truscott PUD identified that the decommissioned restaurant space could be used solely as a Community Meeting Room, Therefore, a PUD Amendment is needed for the Applicant to change the use of this space and to utilize several of the parking spaces within the affordable housing parking lot on Lot 5. In addition, the Applicant requires a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to expand the net leasable square footage within the Truscott PUD to accommodate the office use. The Applicant is requesting that a consolidated conceptual/final SPA be established to allow for the office use within the Truscott PUD, LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED The proposed application requests the following land use actions: 1) A GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as net leasable space; and, 1 r-" ~ 2) A PUD Amendment to utilize parking spaces dedicated for the Affordable Housing, and to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space; and, 3) A Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the office use on the property that has an nnderlying zoning ofR/MF (Residential Multi-Family). REVIEW PROCEDURE: GMOS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: City Conncil may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a GMQS Exemption request for an Essential Public Facility after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Commnnity Development Director. PUD Amendment: City Conncil may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a PUD Amendment after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Commnnity Development Director. Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: City Council may approve, approve With conditions, or deny an application for a consolidated conceptual/final SPA after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Commnnity Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: GMOS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: The Applicant has applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the existing decommissioned restaurant in the Truscott 100 Building to be converted into offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers, as well as, for the on-site Truscott Property Managers, The decommissioned restaurant is approximately 900 square feet and was sterilized from commercial and office use by Ordinance 34, Series of2000. The aforementioned ordinance requires that the decommissioned restaurant only be used as a commnnity meeting space and did not provide for Growth Management Allotments for the space to be utilized as net leasable square footage. The City of Aspen over-mitigated by 7 employees for the 11 employees that they were required to house at Truscott as a result of the development of the new Golf Pro Shop and Iselin Pool and Ice Facility by providing housing at Truscott for 18 City of Aspen employees. The Applicant is proposing to utilize the surplus mitigation of 7 employees for use of the decommissioned restaurant as office space, The Housing Authority has reviewed the proposed GMQS exemption and feels that the Applicant is fulfilling it's mitigation requirements by using the aforementioned surplus mitigation, Additionally, the Housing Authority does not believe that any employees Will be generated as a result of the proposed application because all of the employees that are slated to move into the decommissioned restaurant space are currently City of Aspen employees. The Planning Staff also feels that it is appropriate to allow for the surplus employee housing mitigation that was provided at Truscott to serve as mitigation for the increase in net leasable square footage that would be yielded by this proposal, 2 r-; ~ , The Asset Management Department has requested approval of this application because it would provide an opportunity to co-locate the offices of their project managers, The Applicant feels that co-locating their offices would provide greater efficiency and would foster better communication between their Construction Project Managers and their Land Use Managers, Furthermore, the Applicant is proposing to use the decommissioned restaurant as offices only until Phase III of the Truscott Affordable Housing is enacted or until the Civic Center Master Plan yields more government office space within the City, The Planning Staff does believe that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an essential public facility in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community, Government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need. Staff also believes that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands as is required by the first review standard to grant a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility. The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need' for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, they have experienced a need for more office space, Therefore, Staff believes that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to growth generated within the community and meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility", PUD Amendment: The Planning Staff finds that the proposal will slightly increase the demand for parking at Truscott, The Applicant believes that the office use will only require two (2) parking spaces for the two (2) fleet vehicles that are owned by the Asset Management Department as is requested in the application, Therefore, the Applicant has proposed to utilize two (2) parking spaces on Lot 5, the area designated as parking for affordable housing at Truscott, Staff finds that the utilization of two (2) parking spaces for the proposed office use would have a negligible affect on the parking demand within the PUD, In reviewing the approved parking arrangement at Truscott, Staff feels that sufficient parking exists within Lot 5 to accommodate the proposal. Originally, a one parking space per unit ratio was proposed at Truscott but was bumped up through the review process to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units on the site (1.1 5 spaces per unit), During the conceptual review of the Truscott PUD, former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli, encouraged the City to limit the availability of residential parking in this location (memo included as attachment "D"). Morelli felt that limiting the availability of residential parking would encourage economization and the sharing of vehicle ownership and use. Additionally, Assistant City Manager Randy Ready has reviewed the proposal and feels that the on-site parking should be sufficient to accommodate the proposed office use (please see parking referral comments attached as Exhibit "E"). Staff believes that Morelli's recommendation holds true and that the affordable housing will continue to be effectively parked even if two of the parking spaces designated for the affordable housing are shifted to use by the Project Managers. 3 r., ~ Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: The Applicant has requested approval of a consolidated conceptual/final SPA to allow for the office use in the decommissioned restaurant because the underlying R/MF (Residential/Multi- Family) zoning does not allow for offices as a permitted use, The Planning Staff feels that offices that are accessory to on-site uses and the operations of the golf course and the affordable housing units are appropriate for the space. However, the Planning Staffdoes not believe that the proposed offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is an appropriate land use to be located in the immediate vicinity of the recreation facility and the affordable housing rehifed uses, and recommends denial of the application. The Planning and Zoning Commission revieVied the appli~~tion.and recommended that City Council approve the proposal with the condition of approval that the use of the space by the Asset Management Department be reexamined in two years by the Commission to determine if the use is still appropriate for the location (please see Exhibit "F" for the Planning and Zoning Commission's resolution and minutes). The Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed condition has been included in the proposed ordinance, The Planning and Zoning Commission indicated that they based their recommendation on the dire need for public office space within the community and that they felt that the space would not be used effectively as a public meeting space as it was earmarked for in the Truscott PUD, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommended that City Council deny the proposal finding that the review standards have not been met. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment, and Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space with the condition that the use ofthe space by the Asset Management Department be reexamined in two years by the Commission to determine if the use is still appropriate for the location. RECOMMENDED MOTION: (ALL MOTIONS ARE READ IN THE AFFIRMATIVE) "1 move to approve Ordinance No,_, Series of 2002, approving with conditions, a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment to designate two (2) parking spaces in Lot 5 for the office use, and a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building to be used as offices for four (4) Asset Management Department Project Managers and two (:2) Asset Management Department On-site Property Managers," CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: 4 t"""\ fi ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Development Application Exhibit C -- Referral Comments Exhibit D -- Transportation Planner Claude Morreli's Memo Dated Feb. 9, 2000 Exhibit E -- Parking Referral Comments Exhibit F -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 5 t'""'\ ,(""'\ } EXHIBIT A Growth Management Quota System Exemption for an Essential Public Facility Review Criteria & Staff Findings An Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the construction of an Essential Public Facility may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. This exemption is available provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Except for housing, development shall be considered an essential public facility if: a. it serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demands of growth, is not itself a significant growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and serves the needs of the City. . Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility" in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community. Staff believes that government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need. Staff also feels that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands of the community, The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, Staff finds that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to the growth of the Community, 2. An applicant for an exemption pursuant to this Section shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction ofthe City Council: a. That the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with: i. The generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, and Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the additional demand that would be placed on the facility by the proposal. An analysis that was done by former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli, encouraged limiting the parking available to one parking space per affordable housing unit as was originally proposed by the Housing Authority for the site, During the final PUD review process, the requirement was bumped up 6 1"""'\ r-., 'j to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units, which yields a higher ratio of about 1,15 parking spaces per unit. Furthermore, the Planning Staff felt that the original proposal of one parking space per unit was appropriate. Given that there have been considerably more than one parking space per unit developed within the PUD, Staff believes that the use of two parking spaces by the Asset Management Department will not have a considerable negative impact on the parking situation. Staff believes, that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ii. The need for basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. Staff Finding The space is existing and once accommodated a restaurant use. The proposed office use will not exceed the demand on the basic services that the restaurant placed on the structure, iii. The proposed development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff believes that moving the City Asset Management Department employees may increase vehicle trips because their job necessitates that they attend to city business and meetings that are held downtown. On the other hand, the co-location of the City's Project Managers may reduce the vehicle trips associated with their internal communication. Therefore, Staff does not believe that there will be a large increase in the vehicular trips generated by the proposal and thus, there will be negligible impacts on the City's air. Furthermore, the proposal will not affect the exterior of the building and will not have a visual impact on the surrounding areas. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in sub-Sections (1) and (2), above, the City Council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualifies as an essential public facility and may exempt such development from the growth management competition and scoring procedures and from such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposal has been initiated by a non-profit entity and qualifies as an essential public facility that serves and benefits the general public. However, Staff does not believe that the proposal to move existing government employees from the civic center area of town to the perimeter encourages good growth, Staff feels that the proposal would add to sprawl and the decentralization of government facilities that don't serve an accessory purpose to the Golf Course or the on-site affordable housing units at Truscott, Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 7 r-, '1 PUD Amendment REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS A PUD Amendment may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. An Amendment is available provided that the propos:i1 meets thef'()Il()wiIlg review stiilldards: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent 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. 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 pun development plan review. Staff Finding Staff does not feel the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is consistent with the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity, The existing land uses in the immediate vicinity are primarily related to the operations of the Golf Course or are accessory to the Truscott Affordable Housing Units, Additionally, Staff does not feel that the proposal to remove employees from the center of town and relocate them on the perimeter of the City is consistent with the growth management goals of the AACP. The growth management section of the AACP encourages a compact, dense community, Staff feels that the proposal is in conflict with aforementioned goal in that it fosters the sprawl of office space to the outreaches of the city. In addition, Staff believes that the proposal is conflict with the economic sustainability section of the AACP that calls for a lively downtown. Removing employees from the downtown can only further detract from the lively nature of downtown, Staff does not find this criterion to be met by the proposal. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimeqsional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements ofthe underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 8 t"""'\ ~ 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 ofthe 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 Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No, 2 in the Growth Management Exemption Staff Findings, However, Staff does not believe that the proposed office use is compatible with the surrounding land uses in that the proposal is decentralizing government offices from the civic center area, Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 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 pun and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding The space subject to this application is internal to an existing structure and thus will not affect the scale, massing, and quantity of open space, Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application, 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. 9 r\ ~ ;r d) The proximity ofthe proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding Staff does believe that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No, 2 of the GMQS Exemption Staff Findings, However, Staff does not believe that the proposal is appropriate in that it decentralizes public offices from the commercial core area, The proposed offices would move employees from their current offices in the core area of the city and place them at the edge of town, where the current uses are primarily residential or related to the operations of the Golf Course, Thus, Staff feels that the lack of proximity to the commercial core of the proposed office increases the demand to utilize vehicles in comparison to the Project Managers' current office location, Staff does not believe these review standards have been met. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed amendment will affect the water pressure, drainage, or other utilities. Furthermore, Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment will increase the need for snow removal and road maintenance because these activi,tie, s are already .. ,............ c-...."......,>.......... ...,.,.....:,...::......:. ..'..................:..,... ..... .......... required to serve the affordable housing on the site, Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazar(}s 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 ofthe 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 10 ,-., ,A ( ., with the terrain or canses harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding The proposed amendment only affects the use of the interior space and will not have an affect on the natural site characteristics within the PUD. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application. 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: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals ofthe 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 The maximum allowable density of the PUD is not being increased by the proposed amendment. However, Staff believes that the proposed use of the decommissioned restaurant as public offices is not compatible with the surrounding land uses that are primarily residential in nature or related to the operation of the Golf Course, Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to this application, 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 ofthe site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity ofthe town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 11 t"'"'; !l 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. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatiC functions assoCiated with the use. StaffFinding The structure is existing and the relationship between the building and public spaces will be unchanged as a result of the proposed PUD amendment. The site drainage was reviewed as part of the Planned Unit Development approval received in 2000, Staff finds this criterion to be 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 ofthe 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 The exterior landscaping is not proposed to be changed as part of the proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application, 12 k~ n E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose ofthis standard is 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 The structure is existing, The applicant is not requesting changes to the exterior of the building as part of the proposed PUD amendment, Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. 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 ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final pun documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. 13 I"""'\. n Staff Finding There are no proposed amendments to the exterior lighting as part of this PUD amendment. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable to the proposed application, 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 ofthe 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 The proposed PUD amendment will not affect the amount of open space or recreation area within the PUD, Staff finds this criterion to be applicable to this application. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an nndue 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 ofthe developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. 14 I""': ~ Staff Finding The utilities and public infrastructure on the site are existing. Staff believes that the proposed office use will not have greater demand on the utilities or site improvements than the previous restaurant use of the space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. L Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation ofthe 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. 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. 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 ofthe 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 The vehicular and pedestrian access will not change because the space is existing. However, Staff feels that the conversion of the decommissioned restaurant from conference space to full time office space will slightly increase the amount of traffic using the roads within the Truscott PUD, Staff does believe that the vehicular access and improvements within the PUD are adequate to accommodate the proposed use, Staff finds this criterion to be met. 15 f""\ ~ J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose ofthis 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 ofimpact fees and fees-in-Iieu, 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 The Applicant has proposed to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space only until the construction of Phase III of Truscott is approved and built or until the conceptual Civic Center Master Plan is implemented to provide additional government office space in the core of town. However, both Truscott Phase III and the Civic Center Master Plan are only conceptual in nature at this point in time, Staff feels that there is a chance that the proposed office use could remain in the Truscott 100 Building for much longer than the Applicant anticipates if Truscott Phase III construction is not started in 2006 as is anticipated. 16 r-, ~ TRUSCOTT OFFICES CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPA REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS 26.440.050. Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). A Consolidated Conceptual/ Final SPA may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. An SPA is available provided that the proposal meets the following review standards: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is compatible with the mix of uses in the immediate vicinity, The immediate vicinity mainly consists of uses associated with the Golf Course and the Affordable Housing Units. Staff believes that the proposed offices will serve off-site projects and thus, are not geared to serving the on-site facilities as would be consistent with the other offices within the PUD, Additionally, Staff believes that the public office use should remain within the commercial and civic core area of the City. Staff finds this criterion not to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public facilities and roads do exist to support the proposed office ,use, but the use will have minor negative impacts on the traffic utilizing the entryway in and out of Truscott, However, Staff believes that sufficient roads and vehicular access exist within the PUD to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds that this criterion is generally met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls, avalanche dangers andflood hazards. Staff Finding The subject space is internal to an existing structure. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. 17 r'l ~ , Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal to move several of the Asset Management Department's employees from the Plaza I Building (within the Civic Center Area) to Truscott will possibly increase the trip generation of the public to and from the site; which in turn, would increase the air pollution, Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff does understand the need for additional government office space and the need to co- locate employees to make their department more efficient. Furthermore, Staff believes that the proposal does locate development near a RFT A bus stop as is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. However, Staff believes that decentralizing government offices from within the core of the City will increase vehicle trips which is not consistent with the AACP, In addition, the AACP's Future Land Use Composite Map indicates that the subject parcel is to be used solely for Affordable Housing and it's accessory uses, The proposed office use is not accessory to an on-site use, Furthermore, employees within the City's commercial and civic core are essential to the economic and social vitality of the downtown, These are the people who utilize the professional services of downtown (ie. lawyers, printers, other government departments, etc.), as well as, visit the downtown restaurants and retail establishments. By removing employees from the downtown area you further detract from the vitality of the core, Staff finds that this criterion is not met, 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds; rather, Staff believes that the proposal would save public funds by using an existing space for office, Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). Staff Finding There are no slopes on the subject parcel that are in excess of 20%. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable, 8. Whether there are Sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. Staff Finding The Applicant has concurrently applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space to be used as net leasable square 18 1""', ~ footage. However, Staff does not support the proposed GMQS Exemption, Please refer to the criteria and staff findings for Staffs analysis of the proposed GMQS Exemption, 19 AI""ACHMENT 2 - LANDU8EA.PPLr"rION - ' ( Exh I to '+\'8/ SUBJECT PROPERTY Address: 39951 Highw?, 82, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description: Lot 2 of the 3' Amended Plat of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision parcel ofland situated in a portion of Sections 1,2, II and 12 Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th PM, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. APPLICANT City of Aspen, Asset Management Department/Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Contact: Michelle Bonfils, 920-5582 EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) The subject property is the decommissioned restaurant in the 100 building (formerly the "Red RoofInn"). Currently, the restaurant space is utilized as temporary office space for Shaw Construction during the expansion of the Truscott Affordable Housing. Temporary walls and offices exist in the space. When construction work associated with Truscott Affordable Housing is completed, Shaw will vacate the premises and the space will sit vacant. Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2000, currently governs the subject property. Said Ordinance regulates the decommissioned restaurant area to operation solely as a community meeting area. However, a community meeting room already exists in the 100 building. The meeting room is commonly referred to as the "Truscott Conference Room." PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Currently, the "decommissioned restaurant" space is configured into several offices and a conference area for the use of Shaw Construction during the construction of the Truscott Expansion Project. The City of Aspen Asset Management Department and the Truscott Property Managers propose to continue use of the temporary arrangement until Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. IMPROVED EFFICIENCY The Asset Management Department consists of four project managers. Two project managers are construction oriented -- two are land use approvals oriented. One "construction" and one "land use" project manager are paired on each of the City's development projects. Currently, the project managers work from separate office spaces limiting efficiency for this department. It is proposed that these four project managers temporarily relocate to the offices in the decommissioned restaurant space. Additionally, two on-site property managers run Truscott Place affordable housing. Currently, one of the property managers runs his office out of his home at Truscott. The second property manager has a makeshift space in the basement of the 100 building. It is proposed that these two property managers also relocate temporarily to the decommissioned restaurant space. IMPROVED CUSTOMER SERVICE I o ACHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLt"'\TION Half of the Asset Management Department currently resides in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) office. APCHA is severely space constricted, affecting the quality of.customer service APCHA is able to provide. Moving the Asset Management Project Managers out of this office would provide much needed additional space for APCHA to serve its clientele as well as provide valuable working space to its staff. Similarly, half of the Asset Management Department resides in the Park's Department offices. Moving the Asset Management Project Managers out of this office would provide much needed additional space for Park's to serve its clientele as well as provide valuable working space to its staff. Currently, the City of Aspen Community Development Department is working on a Civic Master Plan to address the office space needs of the City government departments (such as Asset Management), among other issues. Construction of the proposed projects in the Civic Master Plan are likely to take several years to execute. In the meanwhile, departments such as the Housing Authority and Parks will continue to operate under compromised office arrangements. Similarly, Ordinance No. 34 (Series of2000) states that Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project is proposed for the year 2006. As part of Phase III, proper office space for the Truscott property managers will be created. Scheduling of Phase III is likely congruent with the schedule of the Civic Master Plan. Therefore, it would be appropriate, efficient and timely to allow the City Asset Management Department and the Truscott property managers to utilize the existing temporary office space in the decommissioned restaurant the Civic Master Plan and/or Truscott Phase III is approved and budgeted for. 2 J"\.CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLf"'noN 26.470.070 H GMQS EXEMPTION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Development shall be considered an essential public facility if: a. It serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demand of growth, is not itself a significant generator, is available for use by the general public, and services the needs of the City. Currently, the "decommissioned restaurant" space is configured into several offices and a conference area for the use of Shaw Construction during the construction of the Truscott Expansion Project. The City of Aspen Asset Management Department and the Truscott Property Managers propose to continue use of the temporary arrangement until Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. This proposed continued use would serve an essential public purpose by providing adequate office space for City of Aspen government employees. 2. An applicant for an exemption pursuant to this Section shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of City Council: a. That the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with: i. The generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, and NO GENERATION OF ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES The proposed continued temporary office use would generate zero additional employees. Instead, existing City of Aspen employees will be moved from scattered office locations to one efficient office until Truscott Phase III and/or the Civic Master Plan are approved and budgeted for. Currently, the Asset Management Department consists of four project managers. Two project managers are construction oriented -- two are land use approvals oriented. One "construction" and one "land use" project manager are paired on each of the City's development projects. Currently, the project managers work from separate offices (in the Parks and Housing departments) eliminating efficiency for this department. No additional employees will be generated. Similarly, the two on-site Truscott housing property managers already operate in makeshift offices on the property. Relocating to a more appropriate office space will allow greater customer service. No additional employees will be generated. Lastly, APCHA has been reducing the size of it's staff. An increase, or "replacement" of the "vacated positions" would be to confuse APCHA's employee need versus APCHA's need for desk space. MINIMAL DEMAND FOR PARKING, ROAD AND TRANSIT SERVICES A minimal demand for parking will be generated as the proposal is for temporary use. 3 nACHMENT 2 -LANI> USE APP{"":U10N Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFT A service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program- Transportation Options Program. Parking is available in the affordable housing parking lot, referred to as Lot 5. Following is a breakdown of the parking provided for the housing: Location Phase I ( cul-de-sac) Phase II (new) 200 & 300 bldgs 100 Building #Units 58 41 46 50 195 #Parking Stalls 67 47 53 58 225 ii. The need for basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. It shall also he demonstrated that: Currently, the "decommissioned restaurant" space is configured into several offices and a conference area for the use of Shaw Construction during the construction of the Truscott Expansion Project. Basic services are already provided to the site. No increases in demand or other impacts are anticipated on those services. iii. The proposed development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding areas. No adverse impacts will arise from the temporary use of the "decommissioned restaurant" as office space. Rather, air quality will maintain or be bettered by the consolidation of the City of Aspen Asset Management Department. Currently, four of four Asset Project Managers drive individual automobiles to their offices regularly. It is anticipated that the consolidation of two offices into one at the decommissioned restaurant space will allow the Project Managers to car-share fleet vehicles for site visit trips. The ability to car-share would better the air quality by reducing two vehicles from daily traffic. No modifications to the exterior of the building are proposed at this time. 4 /'."":ACHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLt\TION 26.470.070 E GMQS EXEMPTION FOR EXP ANSlON OF NET LEASABLE SF 1. A minimal number of additional employees will be generated by the expansion. The proposed continued temporary office use would generate zero additional employees. Instead, existing City of Aspen employees will be moved from scattered office locations to one efficient office until Truscott Phase III and/or the Civic Master Plan are approved and budgeted for. Currently, the Asset Management Department consists offour project managers. Two project managers are construction oriented -- two are land use approvals oriented, One "construction" and one "land use" project manager are paired on each of the City's development projects. Currently, the project managers work from separate offices (in the Parks and Housing departments) eliminating efficiency for this department. No additional employees will be generated. Similarly, the two on-site Truscott housing property managers already operate in makeshift offices on the property. Relocating to a more appropriate office space will allow greater customer service. No additional employees will be generated. 2. Employee housing will be provided for the additional employees generated. No additional employees will be generated by the temporary relocation of existing City of Aspen employees to one office. However, employee housing for City employees has largely been mitigated for at Truscott. Whereas the Recreation Department was required to mitigate for 7.4 employees and the Iselin project was required to mitigate for 4 bedrooms by contributing funding to the Truscott redevelopment project, the Parks and Recreation Departments funded mitigation for 18 employees, a mitigation surplus of 7 employees or bedrooms. Furthermore, an additional 2 employees have been mitigated for from funding by the Water Department and the Parking Department. Overall, City departments have fulfilled and exceeded employee mitigation requirements. 3. Minimal amount of additional parking spaces will be demanded by the expansion and that parking will be provided. A minimal demand for parking will be generated as the proposal is for temporary use. Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program _ Transportation Options Program. 5 A~CHMENT 2 - LANI> USE APP:LI0ION Parking is available in the affordable housing parking lot, referred to as Lot 5. FolIowing is a breakdown of the parking provided for the housing: Location Phase I ( cuI -de-sac) Phase II (new) 200 & 300 bldgs 100 Building #Units 58 41 46 50 195 #Parking StalIs 67 47 53 58 225 4. Minimal visual impact on the neighborhood. No modifications to the exterior of the building are proposed at this time. 5. Minimal demand will be placed on the City's public facilities. No modifications to the existing public facilities are proposed. 6 A.f:CHMENT:2 - LAND USE APPLIrlON 26.440.050 REVIEW STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN A SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. The proposed continued use of the temporary office space of the decommissioned restaurant will not modify the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, landscaping, nor open space. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. The proposed continued use of temporary office space will not have a significant impact on public facilities or roads. Rather, the impact will decrease significantly when Shaw Construction vacates the premises and is replaced by the six proposed employees of the City Asset Department and Truscott property managers. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails, and similar amenities for the uses or the project and the public at large. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The proposed temporary use is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in that it does not contribute to growth beyond the urban growth boundary and increases City services efficiency and productivity by consolidating several scattered offices into one until the Civic Master Plan and/or Truscott Phase III is approved and budgeted for. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed temporary use will require no expenditure of public funds to provide public facilities. 7 A I0CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLI~I<)N 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 8. Whether sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. See attached findings for 26.470.070 E GMQS EXEMPTION FOR EXPANSION OF NET LEASABLE SF. 8 A~CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLH!""\ON 26.445.050 REVIEW STANDARDS: CONSOLIDATED PUI:> A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. The proposed temporary use is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in that it does not contribute to growth beyond the urban growth boundary and increases City services efficiency and productivity by consolidating several scattered offices into one until the Civic Master Plan and/or Truscott Phase III is approved and budgeted for. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed continued use of the decommissioned restaurant area, as temporary office space is consistent with the existing land uses in the surrounding area, It will provide appropriate office space for the Truscott housing property managers unit Phase III is constructed. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. The applicant proposes to continue use of the temporary office arrangement in the decommissioned restaurant until Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. Temporary use will not affect the future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, fmal PUD development plan review. See attached findings for 26.470.070 E GMQS EXEMPTION FOR EXPANSION OF NET LEASABLE SF. B. ESTABLISHMENT OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: 9 At""CHMENT 2 - LANI> USE APPLIt'ION a. Probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. A minimal demand for parking will be generated as the proposal is for temporary use. Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program- Transportation Options Program. Parking is available in the affordable housing parking lot, referred to as Lot 5. Following is a breakdown of the parking provided for the housing: Location Phase I (cuI -de-sac) Phase II (new) 200 & 300 bldgs 100 Building #Units 58 41 46 50 195 #Parking Stalls 67 47 53 58 225 b. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. The proposal is for a temporary use, impacting the demand for parking for a limited time. The two City Asset Department vehicles will use parking spaces in the go1fi'recreation parking lot during the hours of8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Generally, the greatest demand for parking by the Truscott Place residents is in the evenings after 7:00 pm. 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. Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program- Transportation Options Program. 10 AT"'CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLlC''ION d. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. The proposed temporary use is located in an existing Structure. Activity generated for the proposed temporary tenants are development projects within the City and County. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced ifthere exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. The proposed continued use of temporary office space will not have a significant impact on public facilities or roads. Rather, the impact will decrease significantly when Shaw Construction vacates the premises and is replaced by the six proposed employees of the City Asset Department and Truscott property managers. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. A provisional increase in density is requested to allow the continued use of the temporary office space in the decommissioned restaurant at Truscott. This provisional density increase will support the community by increasing City service efficiency and productivity in the consolidation of several scattered offices into one. C. SITE DESIGN No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. D. LANDSCAPE PLAN No modification to the exterior of the building -height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. E.ARCHITECTURALCHARACTER No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. F. LIGHTING No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. G. COMMON PARK, OPEN SPACE, OR RECREATION AREA No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. H. UTILITIES AND PUBLIC FACILITIES 11 AT""CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPUr'lON No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. I. ACCESS AND CIRCULATION No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. J. PHASING DEVELOPMENT No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. Temporary use of the decommissioned restaurant will end when Truscott Phase III and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. 12 ~ ...., ~. ~ <:~ "~ ~l ~"" - ' '::! -;: ~~ , ~~ ~ "" ,'" , - (\ \f~ ~l "-~ ..;J ~'" ~~ <\' ; ! i ! / j i i ~ f\ lJ o o .. o j i i j j ! i i i i i o o I ! o o \l f ~ jt~~ ~ ~ iil,n'g =l g " .!.i 'e ~ ~VI "ji~m Ii ~~~l 11\..g- 0 i m 1 IN ~ o 0 '" 00' o CJ ::,~l ., '"ll ~ f' ~ c' A J'" t j;- I i!' ~ "I f z -"' 1 ~ ~ I o 2:? \I)~18 '" 0 '" ls~ JQc~ t ,~ ~ J; VI g)#-~ :i! """ ~ .... ..t ~fr ~ i J' 1 ~ t f 1: v ..... l;' \rI :} .J (j> ill 1~. ~ "S:5"tt~ t ~ .s;- -5' I )>3 _~ f (I~~~, ~d 0 5 --:'\ t.) 1"""\ n '" ~ __.... Z. :...','" ~ 11 ~~ ,""~ --~ ~ E \ "0 i-;:~ ~ ~ \ 11 '- 1'\ I ~ .. 11\ ,...-1 f "1 7' I' Z. z. \ \"~ I ~\ l'fi,""" I - -- - >1- ~-----.-I .....:z; ~~ " I ./ ...=r ~"i{idll.--; I'" . , /, /' .""... HI '~~ 1 Ii' II '11'\.:/' , ,//:" // ..\ ,/:/','1\ I" " l~;;;; I :, /1~L.'//V1' ili!" I" ",\ ] ~ , ' ' _...' /.' "I' I , ,,"' '[ I ,'" i ",,'~_I......L ~'I..ii ,I r I,' \ I ~iiJ I ' OIf fJ I) F ~ II /> /.) i"" ,V v/;) i;:1 ~ ~ I ('~;KJ t .'.' 8_ ir~.~ 1 II' ~I I f I 11 \,-ffi' ,I 1/)1 iH \ 'j" ~ ,I I / I : T I r \ I' i L.~ r ~ f 11~ ltl ", V ~ .~ ~& I ", L ~ ~ ~ 11 --' ;{VT7-r ',,\ ~,I, I /,~JI ,) J/ i, r i ,iiI ,.' , " ..., ,. '/I'!/! \.' ~ /-If-- ~_~, MJ1 X1'II -1/ I I I' ~ >,.V l'lt' ;1,',/1) 11 ~I".,I." _,,_,_ I ~~l~~:r~NOJ I' /'V! J/"[]:I II/!.I , ,.1-' p""., ,,} ,x " / t I +___._.._...,.."._,_,__ i' , / / .J,~>" .7/.17r~~J/! ,_,_____.." I, I " ~",' r---''::=:~-'-- I ~ i; " / /;/' _ I ,;.:I /i" /' " // .--- :i.T_--'---'- ' 1 .~/ /T..ty.--.e ' ,_/~>/ ----=- ' .~, ' I';' . , ~l ,,// ,id h:.-1 ~ ~ ,jg [f1 .... l7 ~ ,') i",)'lt\ rT ~ lEi "', ~ \'i P' r ~ ~ OJ --; SEP.16.2002 11:3SAM ASPEN HOUSING OFC (", NO. 691 P.1 f""\ Exl1/torl Ie r MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: James Lindt CJndy Christensen DATE: September 16, 2002 TRUSCOTT DECOMMISSIONED RESTA.URANT TEMPoRARY USE RE: lSRIlJ!.: The applicant is requesti:agapl'rova! to extend the use of tempot'lUy office until Phase m of the Truscott Redevelopment begins or permlllleDt office apace is completed for Asset Management and the Property MlUlai'CI"S at Troscott. BA.~ROUNDf QrrffnlW1c No. 34, Series of2000, CU1Te.lltly governs the property lll1d states that the dcc:ommissioned restaurant area can only operate as a community meeting area. There CU1Te.lltly exists a community meeting room. in this 100 building that will remain. Ordinanoe No. 34, Series of 2000, also states that Phase m of the Tniseott Expansion Project is proposed for the year 2006. As part of Phase DI, proper office space for the Truscott property lIl8.l1ageI'B will be created. This will InOre than likely be congruent with the schedule of the Civic Muter Plan. Staff concurs with the applicant that City deparlU1ents fulfiUed and exceeded employee Il1itigation requirements and that the ernp~ to utilize this space are existing employees working within other departments. No new emplo}'ecs are anticipated for the AspeniPitkin County Housing Authority. BBCOMMHND,4TIONf StatTrecomrnends approval of this application since the use oflhis space is not permanent and that no new employees are to be added. ~""'I"Pl~_,do. I I , -1 ~ r) , \ ~h b (-I- ~fJ I( MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Planner t:;..c ~ t:i'~::;' FfB o 9 POOQ '~r-/},N/~ D~veI..O"/.,.,'*r FROM: Claude Morelli, City Transportation Planner CC: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE: ~ RJo,~ RE: Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual PUD Review Parcel ID #2735-111 fl , J In response to your request, staff of the City of Aspen Transportation & Parking Department has reviewed the Conceptual Submission for the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club! Truscott Housing project [J and offers the following comments: A. NEED FOR ACTIVE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT AT TRUSCOTT , j , , 1 i1 j , :1 , I : i ;. J d ;:-j Summary. Aspen haS a clear policy of holding traffic at the Entrance to Aspen to ctuTent levels. The purposes of this policy include protecting air and water quality, limiting traffic noise, managing congestion, minimizing the visual impacts of roadways, minimizing the quantity of land consumed 'by roadways, and minimizing the costs of building and maintaining roadway infrastructure. Given the City's traffic policy, together with recognition that the cumulative long-term impact of many small or medium-size projects can be substantial, staff considers all projects that generate additional traffic volume as cause for concern. The plan for redeveloping Truscott calls for adding 141 units and 176 bedrooms to the existing housing/golf site. The housing component of the project could add as many as 400 additional automobile trips per day to the stream of traffic crossing the Castle Creek Bridge. This number represents an increase in average daily traffic (ADT) of approximately 1.5 to 2.0-percent. Staff'views an increase of this magnitude as representing a substantial impact. For this reason, staff recommends implementation of an active (and aggressive) travel management program as an appropriate traffic mitigation strategy. "Active" in this sense means on-going committment and effort by Housing staff to support and encourage use of alternative travel modes. Such support and encouragement should go above and beyond simple "passive" measures such as incorporation of supportive physical elements into the project. A detailed outline of staff s recommended program for Truscott is provided in Section B of this memo. Itrusctt Page 1 on I""' Review Com' ',: Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual PUD Cit) ripen, Transportation & Parking Department , '~ , ] ,1 Background and Conte.'Y:t: The Entrance to Aspen Traffic Policy. For almost a decade, a key component of Aspen/AACP transportation policy has been to hold traffic volumes into and out of tov.n to the levels of 1993/94, This traffic restraint forms the basis of the Entrance to Aspen (ETA) Record of Decision, and is one of the primary standards by which staff of the Transportation & Parking Department evaluates proposed development projects in the Highway 82 corridor. Staff determines compliance with the standard by considering the potential impact of development projects on peak-hour and average daily traffic (ADT) crossing the Castle Creek Bridge. r I Traffic Volumes at the Entrance to Aspen. Table 1 provides information on policy and realized Highway 82 ADT for 1998 and 1999. As the data in the table indicate, the ADT cap has generally been met in recent years; however, very little capacity remains available in the system.' During peak ' , hours, even less capacity is available. :"j ~ J Factors in the Success of the Traffic Policy. Staff attributes the success of the Aspen traffic policy on a combination offactors. These include: · The availability of excellent public transit service as an alternative to driving in the Highway 82 corridor. · Paid parking in the Aspen Core Area. . Willingness on the part of many Aspen-area employers and others to support and encourage use of alternative travel modes (i.e" buses, carpools, vanpools, cycling, walking, telecommuting, etc.). · Transit and pedestrian-oriented design of many Aspen-area development projects, , 'f I , J Table 1: A VERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ON THE CASTLE CREEK BRIDGE r 1 ,,'f, d Traffic Cap 1998 1999 January 23.800 22,500 22,700 February 24.300 23,700 23.700 March 24.800 23,600 25.600 April 18,800 19.800 19.700 May 19,300 ,. 18,200 18.500 June 26,200 NiA 25,~00 July 28,600 29.000 26.600 August 28,600 27.200 25,100 Septem ber 24,000 23,300 23.300 October 20,500 20,500 NiA November 20,000 NiA NiA Decem ber 25,200 24,200 NiA :J' L:,: '] t' n il 1trusctl Page 2 of7 f; , I I , J '1 , I :1 f] , , J ;1 c, J : ! u f1 , , ; i Lo r) Review Com" ': Truscon Redevelopment Conceptual PUD City~pen, Transportation & Parking Department \.. .>J' .obstacles to Continued Success of the Traffic Policy. Staifis concerned that land-use and other changes occurring in the Highway 82 corridor will make continued realization of the traffic-cap policy increasingly difficult in future years. In particular, staff is concerned by two emerging and problematic trends: . Increasincr difficul associated with crossin Hi hwa 82 for non-motorized access to bus stops.' eDGT's plans for Highway 82 calI for the transfonnation of the road into a controIled access facility. Part of this transfonnation involves substantially increasing the pavement width of the highway's cross-section. The increase in width wiIl exacerbate existing and future scarcities in traffic gaps to make non-motorized traversal of the highway considerably more difficult. Both problems are particularly apparent at Truscott, where a planned widening of the highway to almost 100 feet would exacerbate the difficulties caused by the existing, near-continuous flow of traffic to and through the nearby roundabout. · Risin dail traffic volumes crenerated b increasin 0 ulation in and around As en. On average, Aspen-area residents tend to generate substantiaIly more local vehicle trips than in-commuters. For example, the typical in-commuter to Aspen generates one inbound and one outbound trip per day, plus occasional mid-day trips. The likelihood of an in- . COmmuter traveling into and out of town by bus (and traveling by foot for mid-day travel) is generally high.' By contrast, the typical resident of a two-person/two- automobile household in Aspen can be expected to generate at least 4.05 home-based trips per day, plus several non-horne-based mid-day tripS.2 Absent any significant disincentives to using automobiles, a resident is likely to make most of these trips by car, Thus, if part of the Aspen work force shifts from "in-commuter" to "resident" status by moving to Truscott or other in-town development sites, and if the Housing Authority and other developers do not commit to active (and aggressive) travel-demand management programs, substantiaIly more traffic on Aspen's local streets will result. Impacts of the Truscott Redevelopment Project on Traffic at the Entrance to Aspen. The plan for redeveloping Truscott calls for adding 141 units and 176 bedrooms. Absent an active and aggressive travel management program, the impact of these additional units and bedrooms on traffic at the Entrance to Aspen would be sigruficant. If, for example, each bedroom were occupied by one person with access to an automobile, and if each person were, on average, to generate a maximum of 2.82 net new automobile trips per day, the number of new automobile trips generated by the project could total as many as 496 per day (= 176 bedrooms x 1 person per bedroom x 2.82 trips per personV As many as 80-percent, or about 400, 1 For Aspen employee mode split infonnation, see Healthy Mountain Communities, Study of Local and Regional Travel Patterns, Volume L 2 Martin, William A. and Nancy A, McGuckin, 1998, Travel Estimation Techniques for Urban Planning. NCHRP Report 365 (Washington, DC: National Academy Press), esp, Table 6. 'The auto trip generation rate is based on the following assumptions: (I) All future Truscott residenis would otherwise live Downvalley and commute to Aspen; (2) 80-percent of future residents would otherwise commute in personal vehicles with an average occupancy level of 1.3 persons per vehicle (~O. 77 vehicle trips per in-commuter per day); and (3) the remaining 20-percent of future residents would otherwise commute by bus, Thus, given a "base" residential ItrusCll Page 3 of7 KeVlew ....omml':~.... Jruscon Redevelopment LonCeptu31PUD City lat, Transportation & Parking Department I') . ......... f"') of these trips might reasonabLibe destined for points east of the Castle Creek Bridge. The addition of these trips to the existing traffic stream would increase the volume of Highway 82 traffic by approximately 1.5 to 2.0 percent, depending on the season.' . j '1 Given the strict, policy-driven traffic volume and capacity limits at the Entrance to Aspen, staff considers that an impact of this magnitude justities implementation of aggressive travel- management measures. B. PROPOSED TRA. VEL-DEMAND MA;:<AGEMENT STRA. TEGY FOR TRUSCOTT "Passive" Traffic-Management Elements of the Current Proposal. The current Truscott proposal incorporates several "passive" traffic-mitigation features. Staff strongly recommends retaining these in the final plan. They include: 11 · High/Wide Pedestrian Underpass. The current proposal calls for constructing a high and \Vide underpass of Highway 82 to provide a direct, safe and comfortable connection to the eastbound RFT A bus stop for non-motorized travelers. Construction of such an underpass is essential to overcoming the difficulties and dangers associated with crossing the highway by foot and bike (see discussion in Section A). i J . J , l 1 [_1 '1 . , t.- Remote Parking for Truscott Residents. The current proposal would locate much (though, unfortunately, not all) of the parking for the project some distance away from. the residential units. Locating parking in this manner tends to increase the relative attractiveness of using the bus instead of driving. The means by which this is achieved is throue:h a narrowing of the difference between auto and transit "out of vehicle" time at - , the start and end of trips. 'J' L Good System of Walkways. The current proposal (at least as staffinterprets the conceptual site plan) appears to call for the construction of a network of wide (ideally, <: '5 feet), detached sidewalks and clearly visible crosswalks throughout the site. Well- designed, pedestrian-exclusive pathways are essential for enabling and encouraging non- motorized internal circulation and access to the Highway 82 bus stops during both summer and winter.s . , I i , , u person-trip generation rate of 4.05 trips per day, the following relatIonship holds: (Net maximum auto-trip generation rate) = (4.05 total trIps per day) - [(2.00 work trips per day) x (0.80) x (0.77)] = (4.05 total trips per day) _ (1.232 "credit" work trips per day) = 2.818 :; 2.82 net total trips per day. , Percentages are based on the "Traffic Cap" volumes shown in Table 1. , At least one of the architects working on the Truscott project suggested that streets on the site could be designed for shared vehicle/pedestrIan use in the "Woonerf' style. In staff's opinion, Woonerf-style walkways may be inferior to sidewalks during winter unless it can be proven that snow and ice can be removed from walking suifaces at least as effectively in the case ofWoonerfs as in the case of sidewalks. ! 1 L) Itrusctt Page 4 00 :1 , j ] . , , j iJ i U . I I j I ,J 1 1""1 Review Coron Truseon Redevelopment Conceptual PUD City nil. Ttansportatjon & Parking Department .. .J Recommended "Active" Traffic-Management Elements. In addition to the passive traffic- mitigation features already incorporated into the proposed conceptual plan for Truscott, staff recommends incorporating the following "active" traffic-management elements: · Limited Residential Parking Supply. The supply of parking available to residents of Truscott should be limited to encourage economization and sharing of vehicle o\"nership and use. The ratio of resident-accessible parking spaces to units (not bedrooms) should be held to a maximum of 1.0 (and ideally much less). On-site provision of additional parking should be considered, but these spaces should be reserved for long-term, remote car storage (a subject that staff will discuss in more detail in a future memo). Parking spaces reserved for golf in summer should be available only for remote car storage during other seasons. · Parking Fees. The Housing Office should require Truscott residents to pay for the privilege of parking on-site. Under no circumstances should parking be included in the rent for. housing. Instead, the Housing Office should charge a separate fee or set of fees. The purpose of a system of this sort is twofold. First, it provides a stream of reyenue to reimburse the public for its investment of scarce capital resources in the parking facility and for the administrative and other costs associated with parking operations. Second. it enables the project residents to choose for themselves how often or even whether to pay for parking. This gives the residents opportunities to trade the purchase of "more" parking for the purchase of goods and services they might value more highly (e.g., new furniture, movie tickets, a better pair of skis, etc.). Ideally, to encourage economy of vehicle use by project residents, the Housing Office should establish a variable parking-fee structure. Such a structure would provide a powerful tool for managing and moderating the volume and time of "departures" from the parking facility. Application of smart-card technology can minimize the administrative burden of the system. The technology permits easy tracking ofvehicIe movements and accounting of accumulated fees. An example of variable fee schedule might look something like the foll9wing: Fee Component Fee Monthly base fee (payed by all users of the parking facility, regardless of the frequency of departure) $100.00 First 15 departures 16~ through 25~ departure 26~ through 35~ departure 36~ through 45~ departure 46~ through 60~ departure <: 61 n departure Free $ J .00 per departure $2.00 per departure $3.00 per departure $4.00 per departure $6.00 per departure Surcharge for each deparlure made during peak travel periods (e.g.; weekdays from 7:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.) $1.00 (" 1 trusctt Page 5 00 '1 j :] fJ I , J : } :J, '.,,' ,1 ,- : I ,j ;j ~ 1 J I') Review Carom,. Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual PUO City c. en, Transponation & Parking Department A , !;l Example: A resIdent makes 50 departures from the Truscott parkIng facility in a month. Ten of these departures are during peak travel periods. The resident pays a total of$190 in parking charges. Explanation: Base Fee $ 100.00 First 15 departures (@$O.OO) $ 0.00 16'" through 25'" departure (@ $1.00) $ 10.00 26'" through 35'" departure (@ $2.00) $ 20.00 36'" through 45" departure (@ $3.00) $ 30.00 46" through 50'" departure (@ $4.00) $ 20.00 Ten (10) peak-period departures (@$1.00) $ 10.00 TOTAL monthly parking bill $ 190.00 · Formal Transportation-Management Program. A formal transportation-management program should be instituted at Truscott. This program should include, but not be limited to: · Periodic distribution of information to residents on alternative travel modes. · Regular participation of the Truscott housing manager in the City's Transportation Options Program (TOP). . Sale of RFT A passes on-site. · Periodic administration of resident travel surveys (to be provided by the City Transportation & Parking Department). · Taxi Voucher Program. The Housing Office should provide two non-transferable ta."I:i vouchers per month to each Truscott resident. Additional vouchers should be provided to residents on a "co-pay" basis (e.g., $3.00 per trip). The vouchers should be valid only for one-way travel between Aspen and Truscott. The purpose of the voucher program would be to enable Truscott residents to travel into town by bus for shopping, but travel back (with heavy items such as grocery bags, etc.) by car. . Other Recommended Improvements. In addition to the active travel-demand management elements listed above, staff recommends incorporating the following "passive" elements into the Truscott plan: · "Loop" Termination of the Access Road. To leave open the possibility of operating "small" transit vehicles (including the elderly/handicapped dial-a-ride vehicles) directly nto and out the Truscott site, the terminus for the project's access road should be designed as a cul-de- sac or loop rather than a "hammer-head". Project designers might consider the loop that terminates Ute A venue as an appropriate model. ItrusClt Page 6 of7 , I '1 I I , J 8 i'J o 1 ,1 iJ ] L1 , I , 1 I.> , I U , i u I trusen Review Comrr. "-: Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual pun City~pen. Tl'iUlsportation & Parking Department ('" " "1 · Bicycle Parking. At least two ground-level, easily accessible and secure bicycle parking' spaces should be provided in close proximity to the front door of all housing units in the project. Page 7 of7 r"\ n ~}dtJh,'f ~ If X-Sender: randyr@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 20:00:32 -0500 To: James Lindt <jamesl@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Randy Ready <randyr@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Truscott Parking Referral In-RE'ply-To' <"'2 {200709300846?') 01Q197120@"omdeuo. ~mme-\!E'r.,ion' 1 0 X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean ~ontE'nt- Typ,=,' (,=,vt1ht"ll; C''l71r~et=''''s-..~C'ii'' James--Staff was comfortable with the 1 space per unit ratio. The additional 30 spaces should provide a reasonable buffer during peak times. Use of two of the spaces (1st come, 1st served unless spaces are assigned to permit holding residents as well) by Asset Mgmt. staff should not have a negative impact on Truscott parking. If problems do arise, I would expect them to be during the evenings and weekends. IF that's the case, Asset staff may need to make alternative overnight/weekend parking arrangements. But, weekday daytime parking is not expected to be a problem in any event. Hope that helps. rr .. I') qlr\; b~t- \~f( < RESOLUTION NO. 28 (SERIES OF 2002) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMl\1ENDING THA.T CITy CQtJN(;IL APPROVE l)A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR ANE;SSE;NTW PUBLIC FACILITY, 2) ESTABLISH A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPECIALI..Y PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN C:;:OLF COURSE SUBDMSION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUD TO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED REST AVRANT IN THE TRUSCOTT 100 BUILDING TO BE USED AS OFFICES FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN ASSET MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT'S PROJECT MANAGERS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-111-09-702 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen Asset Management Department in conjunction with the Housing Authority, represented by Michelle BonfiIs, requesting approval of I) a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) to establish a consolidated conceptual/final SPA on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, and 3) a PUD amendment to the Truscott PUD to allow for the Project Managers to use the decommissioned restaurant on Lot 2 as office space until the start of constmction on Tmscott Phase III or the enactment of the Civic Center Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, City Council Ordinance 34, Series of 2002, restricts the use of the decommissioned restaurant area in the Truscott 100 Building to a Community Meeting Room; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended denial of the proposed I) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) Consolidated ConceptuaI/Final SPA, and 3) PUD amendment to allow for the decommissioned restaurant to be used as offices; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 15, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved this resolution, by a five to one (5-1) vote, recommending that City Council approve with conditions, the proposed GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the office use on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, and PUD Amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission fmds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, , , ,-, ~.. .., r-, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TIlE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Sectionl: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.470.070, GMQS Exemptions; Section 26.440, Specially Planned Area; and Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve a I) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA on Lot 2 of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, and 3) a PUD Amendment to allow for the Asset Management Department to use the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 building as offices for their four (4) Project Managers and two (2) On-site Truscott Property Managers with the following condition: I. The use of the decommissioned restaurant by the Asset Management Department Project Managers as office space shall be reexamined by the Planning and Zoning Commission in two years to determine appropriateness of continuing the office use in this location. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning COmmission of the City of Aspen on this 15th day of October, 2002. ,~ I) APPROVED AS TO FORM: COMMISSION: City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk n ".'.:..:J PLANNING AND ZONING Jasmine Tygre, Chair ~/l~~ cJJ r9/.2S/tf2- ,~ PUBLIC NOTICE RE: LOT 2, ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION (FORMER TRUSCOTT RESTAURANT SPACE) PUD AMENDMENT, CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPA, AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 15,2002, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, 130 S. Galena Street, to consider an application submitted by the City of Aspen Asset Management Department and Housing Authority, requesting approval of a PUD .Amendment to the approved Truscott PUD, a Consolidated Conceptua1/Final SPA, and a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision to allow for the decommissioned restaurant to be used as offices for four (4) Project Managers and two (2) On-site Housing Managers. The property is commonly known as the former Red Roof Inn and is described as Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision. For further information, contact James Lindt at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920- 5095, iamesluuci.a.snen.co.us. S/Jasmine TVf!re, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 28, 2002 City of Aspen Account ,- ';:r;~,,:,~ -,.: ~ r-: ,~ :{j ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: .Lt,:I~ A~ ~/4--1{..L , Aspen, CO - r L $''' ru,""" SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: "'fLl 1 /,?1e:. /5 ,200.2..- STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, ~ a,/, .,../ (name, please print) being or repr enting an A licant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: _ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) It l days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. i!!: Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Cornmunity Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofIetters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days ~e public hearing and was continuously visible from the 1/l day of . , 200b to and including the date and time of the public J hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. L~. ~ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) ::~r~ ,. r-"~ 11 r"1 ~ .\. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ~-4. ~~~~ Slgnat e The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledgeC\ bef~i~()day of ~ ,200.2., by ~ 1--.) WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: ~* Notary Public '-f /..2Y..2..c:::f:::l3 ATTACHMENTS: 0..' </ s. '.:'-\ O/'.~ c::Jo COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL d;;~:f-L cA <,:- ... " :? ~s/CJ 2- f'i PUBLIC NOTICE RE: LOT 2, ASPEN GOLF COURSE. SUBDIVISION (FORMER TRUSCOTT RESTAURANT SPACE) PUD AMENDl\1El!f,CON~()~II>ATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPA, AND GMQS EXEMPTION FORAN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearingwiII be held on Tuesday, October 15,2002, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, 130 S. Galena Street, to consider an application submitted by the City of Aspen Asset Management Department and Housing Authority, requesting approval of a PUD Amendment to the approved Truscott PUD, a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, and a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision to allow for the decommissioned restaurant to be used as offices for four (4) Project Managers and two (2) On-site Housing Managers. The property is commonly known as the former Red Roof Inn and is described as Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision. For further information, contact James Lindt at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920- 5095, iamesllalci.l\Stlen.co.us. S/Jasmine TVl!:re. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September28, 2002 City of Aspen Account /'\ ,/,\ " * ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Lor 2- , 6.."/('01.11/ t;;e ,S;'A 11 ,Aspen, co SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: / I () iL c;h . ='" . 200_ I I STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, Jc< VVl cQ... S ~ _I \ l/( r}/-- (name, please print) being or representing an Applican to the CIty of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally . . certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: X'Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, t waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide \ and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not ( less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 200-, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. _ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days p~jor to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postag prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal governm t, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) /' ,..-, Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived.' However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. The ~~Affidavit of Notice" was aCkn, o.>>'ledged befqre me ~ay of ,200.2-by ~ [...-"..,....--,. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: 2f/~.:2JU~ "'')'"''';''''''W%ii,'Md'9.~l'I . W6~ii~l\lffll.:ilti! ;^,7~:;;t:i~:Th?';:\:,:~, !'1J;BthlFc'QuRSE 5UBD:IVl?I()N RE: L(?T2. ASPEN ,'" -"RANT SPACE)Pt1D {FORMER c~U~~~~~~~cdNCEP'P,lN-1 Fl~ ~~,~~~~D GMQSE.)(~MfTl~N F,?R ~FSSEN. ,: 1f'.;rn.~~~~':t~I~L l~;'T~~U~\.t~ r:,~.b,t~'", ~89?,'at a.m'e~tln ~':~~~nag Commission, 'S1st~r ASpen Plannl~~o Galena Street,to consi(\er,~n Cities Rj)om,,' "Cit a/ASpen, ASset ";:;';ippH~'a~loli"'S:UbmlttedbYtthed H~USing Authorit~. Mani'l,sement Departmenai}, ,",'" dment t6 the' ~j~~&esting approvalp~Da P'~:;rt~ate<l Cpncep. ::aj:iproved Truscott ,'" ,a" "m t10n lor an Es" }ial/Final SPA, an.d.a GM~t~eOf~he Aspen Golf' '.se,~tlal Pllblkra<:1l1ty on \I " for the decommiS;' *~~~~e.S1lb<1i?~io~ot~\~;d as office~fo~fo~r ;;:sloIl~d !(:staurant ""'{jlwiY (2) On-site J-iouslng !4<(4)Project Managers an," ommori1y known as :;Manli.~ers" ~~ ~6~1~~~ ~~; is described as Lot <the,former,. T.""""" m"",' 5 bd"vlsion. ,;, '~'2""6ltheAsp:enGol!~o1lrsemu I ','" 'UnOtat ~,F6ilurther I~f?rmatlon,co~tact .JS~~S merit'Oe: ~~~,;RAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) 2002 (9423)___.:_~~;;;.~iii~~,;:AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL ~- Dcxd7~ Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION ;"',,';:',i,:i;f.<!,,' ':~;:l,:,ji1Zy?,:)k~;::if;~:;;i;,:q;<1:"'"<~\:':;:':; ~>,-".",',,:~ .~ :;,::';,e:~,c:.:/;~~:;;;;;i,~',.~:';;J,;"L:;; ,:,:,,,"',,,;', ':...;"" <":;.i:if;:.c..:.:::.:;:.;;.~~ . "", ~ 7'''' 1"""1 MEMORANDUM rz A. ~~~ ' ptor-' ()iA-5,+e: fJAQbl [g~ TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director<.JAv FROM: \"If <tiIIf'-:1 James Lindt, Planuer 0 I..----- JZ .- A ~.L .;7-- - #rtlv( \0 T'8 ~<fls Ll Truscott Decommissioned Restaurarit G QS Exemption for an Esse ial if0q{a liA. it{ W Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, PUD Amendment- I~', -!--lJJo Veot Public Hearing ,- p.~ I ~ ff'2- ~. C ov4IM-Gl/\.rS 'I October 15, 2002 . < -, "" J'~r () / ..- l'lA GC>IM.jO , __I(L~,I0~1/' t ~' ,<ekty CURRENT ZONING: "- ~ (~dJ<E/u) << R/MF (ResidentiallMuIti-Family) PUD C (a(J..se~~2 V <2pI5-f1{~ (JJcd"j 0v~ <ePvf O~l~ - ,- 01.1. - SlAVI ~ oIa.uS<2?f: +-",-?oyl'5 EriC- Ai RE: DATE: ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. ApPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Building PROPOSED USE: Office Use for Asset Management Department Project Managers and On-site Housing Managers BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen Asset Management Department, ("Applicant"), represented by Michelle Bonfils, is proposing to convert the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building (formerly the Red Roof Inn) to offices. The proposal would convert the old restaurant space to offices for four (4) employees of the Asset Management Department and two (2) existing on-site Housing Managers. The ordinance that approved the Truscott PUD identified that the decommissioned restaurant space could be used solely as a Community Meeting Room. Therefore, a PUD Amendment is needed for the Applicant to change the use of this space and to utilize several of the parking spaces within the affordable housing parking lot on Lot 5. In addition, the Applicant requires a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to expand the net leasable square footage within the Truscott PUD to accommodate the office use. The Applicant is requesting that a consolidated conceptual/final SPA be established to allow for the office use within the Truscott PUD. LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED The proposed application requests the following land use actions: 1) A GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as net leasable space; and, I I""'\, ~ 2) A PUD Amendment to utilize parking spaces dedicated for the Affordable Housing, and to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space; and, 3) A Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the office use on the property that has an underlying zoning ofRlMF (Residential Multi-Family). REVIEW PROCEDURE: CMOS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a GMQS Exemption request for an Essential Public Facility after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. PUD Amendment: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a PUD Amendment after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. and the Community Development Director. Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a consolidated conceptual/final SPA after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: CMOS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility: The Applicant has applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the existing decommissioned restaurant in the Truscott 100 Building to be converted into offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers, as well as, for the on-site Truscott Property Managers. The decommissioned restaurant is approximately 900 square feet and was sterilized from commercial and office use by Ordinance 34, Series of2000. The aforementioned ordinance requires that the decommissioned restaurant only be used as a community meeting space and did not provide for Growth Management Allotments for the space to be utilized as net leasable square footage. The City of Aspen over-mitigated by 7 employees for the II employees that they were required to house at Truscott as a result of the development of the new Golf Pro Shop and Iselin Pool and Ice Facility by providing housing at Truscott for 18 City of Aspen employees. The Applicant is proposing to utilize the surplus mitigation of 7 employees for use of the decommissioned restaurant as office space. The Housing Authority has reviewed the proposed GMQS exemption and feels that the Applicant is fulfilling it's mitigation requirements by using the aforementioned surplus mitigation. Additionally, the Housing Authority does not believe that any employees will be generated as a result of the proposed application because all of the employees that are slated to move into the decommissioned restaurant space are currently City of Aspen employees. The Planning Staff also feels that it is appropriate to allow for the surplus employee housing mitigation that was provided at Truscott to serve as mitigation for the increase in net leasable square footage that would be yielded by this proposal. 2 r\ ~ The Asset Management Department has requested approval of this application because it would provide an opportunity to co-locate the offices of their project managers. The Applicant feels that co-locating their offices would provide greater efficiency and would foster better communication between their Construction Project Managers and their Land Use Managers. Furthermore, the Applicant is proposing to use the decommissioned restaurant as offices only until Phase III of the Truscott Affordable Housing is enacted or until the Civic Center Master Plan yields more government office space within the City. The Planning Staff does believe that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an essential public facility in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community. Government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need. Staff also believes that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands as is required by the first review standard to grant a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility. The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, they have experienced a need for more office space. Therefore, Staff believes that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to growth generated within the community and meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility". PUD Amendment: The Planning Staff finds that the proposal will slightly increase the demand for parking at Truscott. The Applicant believes that the office use will only require two (2) parking spaces for the two (2) fleet vehicles that are owned by the Asset Management Department as is requested in the application. Therefore, the Applicant has proposed to utilize two (2) parking spaces on Lot 5, the area designated as parking for affordable housing at Truscott. Staff finds that the utilization of two (2) parking spaces for the proposed office use would have a negligible affect on the parking demand within the PUD. In reviewing the approved parking arrangement at Truscott, Staff feels that sufficient parking exists within Lot 5 to accommodate the proposal. Originally, a one parking space per unit ratio was proposed at Truscott but was bumped up through the review process to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units on the site (1.15 spaces per unit). During the conceptual review of the Truscott PUD, former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli, encouraged the City to limit the availability of residential parking in this location (memo included as attachment "D"). Morelli felt that limiting the availability of residential parking would encourage economization and the sharing of vehicle ownership and use. Additionally, Assistant City Manager Randy Ready has reviewed the proposal and feels that the on-site parking should be sufficient to accommodate the proposed office use (please see parking referral comments attached as Exhibit "E"). Staff believes that Morelli's recommendation holds true and that the affordable housing will continue to be effectively parked even if two of the parking spaces designated for the affordable housing are shifted to use by the Project Managers. 3 r-, I) Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA: The Applicant has requested approval of a consolidated conceptual/final SPA to allow for the office use in the decommissioned restaurant because the underlying R1MF (ResidentiallMulti- Family) zoning does not allow for offices as a permitted use. The Planning Staff feels that the offices that are accessory to on-site uses and the operations of the golf course and the affordable housing units are appropriate for the space. However, the Planning Staff does not believe that the proposed offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers enhance the mix of land uses in the immediate vicinity. Staff believes that the majority of general public office uses (offices not accessory to on-site uses), should be focused within the civic center area of Aspen and not outside of the original townsite. Moreover, Staff does not believe that the office use is compatible with the affordable housing use within the vicinity. Thus, the Planning Staff cannot support the establishment of the proposed consolidated conceptual/final SPA to allow for offices that serve off-site projects within the Truscott lOO Building. Summary of Staff Comments: Staff feels that offices for the on-site Property Managers at Truscott are appropriate for the decommissioned restaurant space and do not require land use actions because they are accessory to the Affordable Housing Units on-site. However, from a land use perspective, Staff does not feel that proposed office use for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers are compatible with the surrounding uses. Staff does not support the decentralization of public offices from the periphery area of the core of the City as a solution to the increasing demand for public/government office space. Therefore, the Planning Staff cannot support the proposed land use requests. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission put forth a recommendation that City Council deny the proposed GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment, IIlld Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space finding that the review standards have not been met. Recommended Motion: (All motions are read in the affirmative) "1 move to approve Resolution No.2$., Series of 2002, recommending that City Council approve the proposed GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, PUD Amendment to designate two (2) parking spaces in Lot 5 for the office use, and a Consolidated ConceptuallFinal SPA to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space in the Truscott 100 Building to be used as offices for four (4) Asset Management Department Project Managers and two (2) Asset Management Department On-site Property Managers." 4 .-, 1""\ . . J ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Development Application Exhibit C -- Referral Comments Exhibit D -- Transportation Planner Claude Morreli's Memo Dated Feb. 9, 2000 Exhibit E -- Parking Referral Comments C:\home\nickl\Active Cases\Rlo Grand SPA Skateboard Park Amendment\Rio Grande SPA Amendment.doc 5 k '~ .".....", r'\ ) EXHIBIT A Growth Management Quota System Exemption for an Essential Public Facility Review Criteria & Staff Findings An Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the construction of an Essential Public Facility may be approved by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. This exemption is available provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Except for housing, development shall be considered an essential public facility if: a. it serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demands of growth, is not itself a significant growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and serves the needs ofthe City. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal for government offices meets the definition of an "Essential Public Facility" in that the definition requires a facility to be available for use by, or for the benefit of the public and which serves the needs for the community. Staff believes that government offices benefit the general public and are created in response to a community need. Staff also feels that the proposal serves a public purpose in response to growth demands of the community. The increasing growth pressure on the City of Aspen over the past decade has expanded the need for the development of employee housing and community facilities, and because the Asset Management Department is largely responsible for such development, Staff finds that the proposal to utilize the decommissioned restaurant as offices is in response to the growth ofthe Community. 2. An applicant for an exemption pursuant to this Section shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction ofthe City Council: a. That the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with: i. The generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, and Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the additional demand that would be placed on the facility by the proposal. An analysis that was done by former City of Aspen Transportation Planner Claude Morelli, encouraged limiting the parking available to one parking space per affordable housing unit as was originally proposed by the Housing Authority for the site. During the final PUD review process, the requirement was bumped up to 225 parking spaces for the 195 affordable housing units, which yields a higher ratio of 6 r~ r" , about 1.15 parking spaces per unit. Furthermore, the Planning Staff felt that the original proposal of one parking space per unit was appropriate. Given that there have been considerably more than one parking space per unit developed within the PUD, Staff believes that the use of two parking spaces by the Asset Management Department will not have a considerable negative impact on the parking situation. Staff believes that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ii. The need for basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. Staff Finding The space is existing and once accommodated a restaurant use. The proposed office use will not exceed the demand on the basic se!vic~s th<itthe restall!'fl1l;t placed on the structure. iii. The proposed development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff believes that moving the City Asset Management Department employees may increase vehicle trips because their job necessitates that they attend to city business and meetings that are held downtown. On the other hand, the co-location of the City's Project Managers may reduce the vehicle trips associated with their internal communication. Therefqre, Staff does not believe that there will bealarge increase in the vehicular trips generated by the proposal and thus, there will be negligible impacts on the City's air. Furthermore, the proposal will not affect the exterior of the building and will not have a visual impact on the surrounding areas. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in sub-Sections (1) and (2), above, the City Council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualifies as an essential public facility and may exempt such devel9pment from the growth management competition and scoring procedures and from such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposal has been initiated by a non-profit entity and qualifies as an essential public facility that serves and benefits the general public. However, Staff does not believe that the proposal to move existing government employees from the civic center area of town to the perimeter encourages good growth. Staff feels that the proposal would add to sprawl and the decentralization of government facilities that don't serve an accessory purpose to the Golf Course or the on-site affordable housing units at Truscott. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 7 I"" 1""'\ J PUD Amendment REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS In reviewing an amendment to an approved PUD, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Commnnity Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surroullding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. StaffFinding Staff does not feel the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is consistent with the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity. The existing land uses in the immediate vicinity are primarily related to the operations of the Golf Course or are accessory to the Truscott Affordable, Housing Units. Additionally, Staff does not feel that the proposal to remove employees from the center of town and relocate them on the perimeter of the City is consistent with the growth management goals of the AACP. The growth management section of the AACP encourages a compact, dense community. Staff feels that the proposal is in conflict with aforementioned goal in that it fosters the sprawl of office space to the outreaches of the city. In addition, Staff believes that the proposal is conflict with the economic sustainability section of the AACP that calls for a lively downtown. Removing employees from the downtown can only further detract from the lively nature of downtown. Staff does not find this criterion to be met by the proposal. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements ofthe underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 8 1", ,....... 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible withtlie 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 Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No.2 in the Growth Management Exemption Staff Findings. However, Staff does not believe that the proposed office use is compatible with the surrounding land uses in that the proposal is decentralizing government offices from the civic center area. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 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 The space subject to this application is internal to an existing structure and thus will not affect the scale, massing, and quantity of open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 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 automot>ile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. 9 r-. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding Staff does believe that sufficient parking exists to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staffs response to Review Criteria No.2 of the GMQS Exemption Staff Findings. However, Staff does not believe that the proposal is appropriate in that it decentralizes public offices from the commercial core area. The proposed offices would move employees from their current offices in the core area of the city and place them at the edge of town, where the current uses are primarily residential or related to the operations of the Golf Course. Thus, Staff feels that the lack of proximity to the commercial core of the proposed office increases the demand to utilize vehicles in comparison to the Project Managers' current office location. Staff does not believe these review standards have been met. 4. The maximum allowllble density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed amendment will affect the water pressure, drainage, or other utilities. Furthermore, Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment will increase the need for snow removal and road maintenance because these activities are already required to serve the affordable housing on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. S. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site featllres, 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 10 .1""\ (1 i.'t with the terrail). or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding The proposed amendment only affects the use of the interior space and will not have an affect on the natural site characteristics within the PUD. Staff finds this griteriol1 not to be applicable to the proposed application. 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 c9nstraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: 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 The maximum allowable density of the PUD is not being increased by the proposed amendment. However, Staff believes that the proposed use ofthe decommissioned restaurant as public offices is not compatible with the surrounding land uses that are primarily residential in nature or related to the operation of the Golf Course. Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to this application. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the, pun 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. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 11 r--. n 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement ofvehicnlar and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not)1egatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. StaffFinding The structure is existing and the relationship between the building and public spaces will be unchanged as a result of the proposed PUD amendment. The site,clrairlage was reviewed as part of the Planned Unit Development approval received in 2000. Staff finds this criterion to bernet. 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 ofthe 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 The exterior landscaping is not proposed to be changed as part ofthe proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application. 12 r", ,.-, , , E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is 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 ofthe proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character ofthe proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual characterofthe city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture ofthe 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 ofsnow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding The structure is existing. The applicant is not requesting changes to the exterior of the building as part of the proposed PUD amendment. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed application. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the, deyelopment 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 ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otlierwise 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. 13 ,1"""\ Staff Finding There are no proposed amendmentstothe exterior lighting as part of this PUD amendment. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable to the proposed application. 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,chara(:ter 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 b.enefit of the yarious lap.d uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all cOillmonpark 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 The proposed PUD amendment wiIlnottiffect the, amount <if open space or recreation area within the PUD. Staff finds this criterion to be applicable to this application. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified finll-ncial 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. 14 I""l ("\ Staff Finding The utilities and public infrastmcture on the site are existing. Staff believes that the proposed office use will not have greater demand on the utilities or site improvements than the previous restaurant use of the space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 1. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. 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. 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 ofthe Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to he 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 tothe extent practical. Staff Finding The vehicular and pedestrian access will not change because the space is existing. However, Staff feels that the conversion of the decommissioned restaurant from conference space to full time office space will slightly increase the amount traffic using the roads within the Tmscott PUD. Staff does believe that the vehicular access and improvements within the PUD are adequate to accommodate the proposed use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 15 .r\. f""'l J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose ofthis 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 he 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 pun, 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 The Applicant has proposed to use the decommissioned restaurant as office space only until the construction of Phase III of Truscott is approved and built or until the conceptual Civic Center Master Plan is implemented to provide additional government office space in the core of town. However, both Truscott Phase III and the Civic Center Master Plan are only conceptual in nature at this point in time. Staff feels that there is a chance that the proposed office use could remain in the Truscott 100 Building for much longer than the Applicant anticipates if Truscott Phase III construction is not started in 2006 as is anticipated. 16 !"'\ ~ TRUSCOTT OFFICES CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPA REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS 26.440.050. Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area(SP A). In the review of a development application for a consolidated conceptual/final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposed use of offices for the Asset Management Department's Project Managers is compatible with the mix of uses in the immediate vicinity. The immediate vicinity mainly consists of uses associated with the Golf Course and the Affordable Housing Units. Staff believes that the proposed offices will serve off-site projects and thus, are not geared to serving the on-site facilities as would be consistent with the other offices within the PUD. Additionally, Staff believes that the public office use should remain within the commercial and civic core area of the City. Staff finds this criterion not to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public facilities and roads do exist to support the proposed office use, but the use will have minor negative impacts on the traffic utilizing the entryway in and out of Truscott. However, Staff believes that sufficient roads and vehicular access exist within the PUD to accommodate the proposal. Staff finds that this criterion is generally met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. Staff Finding The subject space is internal to an existing structure. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. StaffPinding Staff believes that the proposal to move several of the Asset Management Department's employees from the Plaza I Building (within the Civic Center Area) to Truscott will possibly 17 .,..." ,~ increase the trip generation of the public to and from the site; which in turn, would increase the air pollution. Staff does not find this crity~iol1to be O1e~. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff does understand the need for adflitional government office space and the need to co- locate employees to make their department more efficient. Furthermore, Staff believes that the proposal does locate development near a RFT A bus stop as is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. However, Staff believes that decentralizing government offices from within the core of the City will increase vehicle trips which is not consistent with the AACP. In addition, the AACP's Future Land Use Composite Map indicates that the subject parcel is to be used solely for Affordable Housing and it's accessory uses. The proposed office use is not accessory to an on-site use. Furthermore, employees within the City's commercial and civic core are essential to the economic and social vitality of the downtown. These are the people who utilize the professional services of downtown (ie. lawyers, printers, other government departments, etc.), as well as, visit the downtown restaurants and, retail establishments. By removing employees from the downtown area you further detract from the vitality of the core. Staff finds that this criterion is not met. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds; rather, Staff believes that the proposal would save public funds by using an existing space for office. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). Staff Finding There are no slopes on the subject parcel that are in excess of 20%. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable. 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotm.ents for the proposed development. Staff Finding The Applicant has concurrently applied for a GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to allow for the decommissioned restaurant space to be used as net leasable square footage. However, Staff does not s\lpport the proposed GMQS Exemption. Please refer to the criteria and staff findings for Staffs analysis ofthe proposed GMQS Exemption. 18 ) t"'\, , n AT1~CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICAtION SUBJECT PROPERTY Address: 39951 Highway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description: Lot 2 of the 3rd Amended Plat of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision parcel ofland situated in a portion of Sections 1,2, 11 and 12 Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th PM, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. APPLICANT City of Aspen, Asset Management Department! Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Contact: Michelle Bonfils, 920-5582 EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) The subject property is the decommissioned restaurant in the 100 building (formerly the "Red RoofInn"). Currently, the restaurant space is utilized as temporary office space for Shaw Construction during the expansion of the Truscott Affordable Housing. Temporary walls and offices exist in the space. When construction work associated with Truscott Affordable Housing is completed, Shaw will vacate the premises and the space will sit vacant. Ordinance No. 34, Series of2000, currently governs the subject property. Said Ordinance regulates the decommissioned restaurant area to operation solely as a community meeting area. However, a community meeting room already exists in the 100 building. The meeting room is commonly referred to as the "Truscott Conference Room." PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Currently, the "decommissioned restaurant" space is configured into several offices and a conference area for the use of Shaw Construction during the construction of the Truscott Expansion Project. The City of Aspen Asset Management Department and the Truscott Property Managers propose to continue use of the temporary arrangement until Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. IMPROVED EFFICIENCY The Asset Management Department consists offour project managers. Two project managers are construction oriented -- two are land use approvals oriented. One "construction" and one "land use" project manager are paired on each of the City's development projects. Currently, the project managers work from separate office spaces limiting efficiency for this department. It is proposed that these four project managers temporarily relocate to the offices in the decommissioned restaurant space. Additionally, two on-site property managers run Truscott Place affordable housing. Currently, one of the property managers runs his office out of his home at Truscott. The second property manager has a makeshift space in the basement of the 100 building. It is proposed that these two property managers also relocate temporarily to the decommissioned restaurant space. IMPROVED CUSTOMER SERVICE 1 I"", n ,. '. ............" ...... .', . \ ..., A TT ACHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLlCA 1 iON Half of the Asset Management Department currently resides in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) office. APCHA is severely space constricted, affecting the quality of customer service APCHA is able to provide. Moving the Asset Management Project Managers out of this office would provide much needed additional space for APCHA to serve its clientele as well as provide valuable working space to its staff. Similarly, half of the Asset Management Department resides in the Park's Department offices. Moving the Asset Management Project Managers out of this office would provide much needed additional space for Park's to serve its clientele as well as provide valuable working space to its staff. Currently, the City of Aspen Community Development Department is working on a Civic Master Plan to address the office space needs of the City government departments (such as Asset Management), among other issues. Construction of the proposed projects in the Civic Master Plan are likely to take several years to execute. In the meanwhile, departments such as the Housing Authority and Parks will continue to operate under compromised office arrangements. Similarly, Ordinance No. 34 (Series of 2000) states that Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project is proposed for the year 2006. As part of Phase III, proper office space for the Truscott property managers will be created. Scheduling of Phase III is likely congruent with the schedule of the Civic Master Plan. Therefore, it would be appropriate, efficient and timely to allow the City Asset Management Department and the Truscott property managers to utilize the existing temporary office space in the decommissioned restaurant the Civic Master Plan and/or Truscott Phase III is approved and budgeted for. 2 "....." , ,-" , .:" ;" " ", ,," J ATTA~HMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICA.tON 26.470.070 H GMQS EXEMPTION FoR. CON$TRtJCtI()N OF ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Development shall be considered an essential public facility if: a. It serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demand of growth, is not itself a significant generator, is available for use by the general public, and services the needs ofthe City. Currently. the "decommissioned restaurant" space is configured into several offices and a conference area for the use of Shaw Construction during the construction of the Truscott Expansion Project. The City of Aspen Asset Management Department and the Truscott Property Managers propose to continue use of the temporary arrangement until Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. This proposed continued use would serve an essential public purpose by providing adequate office space for City of Aspen government employees. 2. An applicant for an exemption pursuant to this Section shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of City Council: a. That the impacts ofthe essential public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with: i. The generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, and NO GENERATION OF ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES The proposed continued temporary office use would generate zero additional employees. Instead, existing City of Aspen employees will be moved from scattered office locations to one efficient office until Truscott Phase III and/or the Civic Master Plan are approved and budgeted for. Currently, the Asset Management Department consists of four project managers. Two project managers are construction oriented -- two are land use approvals oriented. One "construction" and one "land use" project manager are paired on each of the City's development projects. Currently, the project managers work from separate offices (in the Parks and Housing departments) eliminating efficiency for this department. No additional employees will be generated. Similarly, the two on-site Truscott housing property managers already operate in makeshift offices on the property. Relocating to a more appropriate office space will allow greater customer service. No additional employees will be generated. Lastly, APCHA has been reducing the size of it's staff. An increase, or "replacement" of the "vacated positions" would be to confuse APCHA's employee need versus APCHA's need for desk space. MINIMAL DEMAND FOR PARKING, ROAD AND TRANSIT SERVICES A minimal demand for parking will be generated as the proposal is for temporary use.t 3 r-, ,,',' , n ATTl-l.CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICA.10N Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program _ Transportation Options Program. Parking is available in the affordable housing parking lot, referred to as Lot 5. Following is a breakdown of the parking provided for the housing: Location Phase I (cul-de-sac) Phase II (new) 200 & 300 bldgs 100 Building #Units 58 41 46 50 195 #Parking Stalls 67 47 53 58 225 ii. The need for basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. It shall also be demonstrated that: Currently, the "decommissioned restaurant" space is configured into several offices and a conference area for the use of Shaw Construction duting the construction of the Truscott Expansion Project. Basic services are already provided to the site. No increases in demand or other impacts are anticipated on those services. iii. The proposed development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding areas. No adverse impacts will arise from the temporary use of the "decommissioned restaurant" as office space. Rather, air quality will maintain or be bettered by the consolidation of the City of Aspen Asset Management Department. Currently, four of four Asset Project Managers drive individual automobiles to their offices regularly. It is anticipated that the consolidation of two offices into one at the decommissioned restaurant space will allow the Project Managers to car-share fleet vehicles for site visit trips. The ability to car-share would better the air quality by reducing two vehicles from daily traffic. No modifications to the exterior ofthe building are proposed at this time. 4 1~ A... ",' ,. () A TT h.LHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLlCA . ioN' 26.470.070 E GMQS EXEMPTION FOR EXPANSION OF NET LEASABLE SF 1. A minimal number of additional employees will be generated by the expansion. The proposed continued temporary office use would generate zero additional employees. Instead, existing City of Aspen employees will be moved from scattered office locations to one efficient office until Truscott Phase III and/or the Civic Master Plan are approved and budgeted for. Currently, the Asset Management Department consists off our project managers. Two project managers are construction oriented -- two are land use approvals oriented. One "construction" and one "land use" project manager are paired on each of the City's development projects. Currently, the project managers work from separate offices (in the Parks and Housing departments) eliminating efficiency for this department. No additional employees will be generated. Similarly, the two on-site Truscott housing property managers already operate in makeshift offices on the property. Relocating to a more appropriate office space will allow greater customer service. No additional employees will be generated. 2. Employee housing will be provided for the additional employees generated. No additional employees will be generated by the temporary relocation of existing City of Aspen employees to one office. However, employee housing for City employees has largely been mitigated for at Truscott. Whereas the Recreation Department was required to mitigate for 7.4 employees and the Iselin project was required to mitigate for 4 bedrooms by contributing funding to the Truscott redevelopment project, the Parks and Recreation Departments funded mitigation for 18 employees, a mitigation surplus of7 employees or bedrooms. Furthermore, an additional 2 employees have been mitigated for from funding by the Water Department and the Parking Department. Overall, City departments have fulfilled and exceeded employee mitigation requirements. 3. Minimal amount of additional parking spaces will be demanded by the expansion and that parking will be provided. A minimal demand for parking will be generated as the proposal is for temporary use. Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program _ Transportation Options Program. 5 1""1 ' ,,'. ' n ATln.cHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLlCAdON Parking is available in the affordable housing parking lot, referred to as Lot 5. Following is a breakdown of the parking provided for the housing: Location Phase I (cul-de-sac) Phase II (new) 200 & 300 bldgs 100 Building #Units 58 41 46 50 195 #Parking Stalls 67 47 53 58 225 4. Minimal visual impact on the neighborhood. No modifications to the exterior of the building are proposed at this time. 5. Minimal demand will be placed on the City's public facilities. No modifications to the existing public facilities are proposed. 6 1"""", n '.,': . ..,......,' " :' : ",' ATTACHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICA liON 26.440.050 REVIEW STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN A SPECIAtt. y PLANNED AREA (SPA) 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. The proposed continued use of the temporary office space of the decommissioned restaurant will not modify the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, landscaping, nor open space. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. The proposed continued use of temporary office space will not have a significant impact on public facilities or roads. Rather, the impact will decrease significantly when Shaw Construction vacates the premises and is replaced by the six proposed employees of the City Asset Department and Truscott property managers. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails, and similar amenities for the uses or the project and the public at large. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The proposed temporary use is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in that it does not contribute to growth beyond the urban growth boundary and increases City services efficiency and productivity by consolidating several scattered offices into one until the Civic Master Plan and/or Truscott Phase III is approved and budgeted for. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed temporary use will require no expenditure of public funds to provide public facilities. 7 1", , n ATTh.CHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICAdON 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). No modification to the exterior ofthe building - heIght, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 8. Whether sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. See attached findings for 26.470.070 E GMQS EXEMPTION FOR EXPANSION OF NET LEASABLE SF. 8 AT~HMENT 2 - LAND USEAPPLICA\10N 26.445.050 REVIEW STANDARDS: CONSOLID;\''f:E:D PlJD. A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. The proposed temporary use is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in that it does not contribute to growth beyond the urban growth boundary and increases City services efficiency and productivity by consolidating several scattered offices into one until the Civic Master Plan and/or Truscott PhasylIIisapproved and budgeted for. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed continued use of the decommissioned restaural1tarea, as temporary office space is consistent with the existing land uses in the surrounding area. It will provide appropriate office space for the Truscott housing property managers unit Phase III is constructed. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. The applicant proposes to continue use of the temporary office arrangement in the decommissioned restaurant until Pl1ase III of the Tnl~c,ott Expansion Project and/or the Civic Master Plan is approved and budgeted for. Temporary use will not affect the future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. See attached findings for 26.470.070 E GMQS EXEMPTION FOR EXPANSION OF NET LEASABLE SF. B. ESTABLISHMENT OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property. No modificatioIl to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are p~oposed. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character ofthe proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: 9 ^ .,. ," () ATTft":HMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICA~10N a. Probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. A minimal demand for parking will be generated as the proposal is for temporary use. Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system. City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they tal(e alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program- Transportation Options Program. Parking is available in the affordable housing parking lot, referred to as Lot 5. Following is a breakdown of the parking provided for the housing: Location Phase I (cul-de-sac) Phase II (new) 200 & 300 bldgs 100 Building #Units 58 41 46 50 195 #Parking Stalls 67 47 53 58 225 b. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. The proposal is for a temporary use, impacting the demand for parking for a limited time. The two City Asset Department vehicles will use parking spaces in the golf/recreation parking lot during the hours of 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Generally, the greatest demand for parking by the Truscott Place residents is in the evel1ings after 7:00 pm. c. The availability of public transit aud other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or thecomlIlitlIlllnt to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. Parking is already provided for the two Truscott property managers as they currently operate on-site. The property manager's movement within the property will not generate addition demand for parking. The four City Asset Management employees will require two parking spaces for the two fleet vehicles allotted to this department. Only two parking spaces will be required temporarily. Two of the Asset Managers are anticipated to take advantage ofRFTA service to the site and the open space trail system, City of Aspen employees are similarly rewarded when they take alternative transportation to work through the "TOP" program- Transportation Options Program. 10 ,....." ".", ", ,i t) A TT A...:HMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLICA ..ON d. The proximity ofthe proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. The proposed temporary use is located in an existing structure. Activity generated for the proposed temporary tenants are development projects within the City and County. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUDmay be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. The proposed continued use oftemporary office space will not have a significant impact on public facilities or roads. Rather, the impact will decrease significantly when Shaw Construction vacates the premises and is replaced by the six proposed employees of the City Asset Department and Truscott property managers. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. No modification to the exterior ofthebllilding - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. 6. The maximum allo",able 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 surroJInding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. A provisional increase in density is requested to allow the continued use of the temporary office space in the decommissioned restaurant at Truscott. This provisional density increase will support the community by increasing City service efficiency and productivity in the consolidation of several scattered offices into one. C. SITE DESIGN No modification to the exterior ofth~buil<ling - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. D. LANDSCAPE PLAN No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. E. ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. F. LIGHTING No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. G. COMMON PARK, OPEN SPACE, OR RECREATION AREA No modification to the exterior of the building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. H. UTILITIES AND PUBLIC ,FACILITIES 11 r" ",", () A TT h":HMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLlCA 1 inN No modification to the exterior of th~ building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. I. ACCESS AND CIRCULATION No modification to the exterior of tlJe building - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are prOposed. J. PHASING DEVELOPMENT No modification to the exterior of the buil<iing - height, bulk, architecture, and landscaping, and open space are proposed. Temporary use of the decommissioned restaurant will end when Truscott Phase III andJor th,e Civic Master Plan is apPrOved and budgeted for. 12 r"'< \~ (' CITY OF ASPI:N " PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: James Lindt, 920.5095 DATE: 8.6.02 Truscott Insubsla!1tial PlaJUled Unit Deyelopment Amendment, GMQS Exemption for Expansion of Net Leasable SF, Establish a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the use of offices Michelle Bonfils City of Aspen Insubstantial Pun Amendment, GMQS Exemption for Expansion of Net Leasable SF, Establishment ofa Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA on Lot Applicant would like to utilize the former restaurant area in the Truscott 100 building for Asset Management Project manager Offices. PLANNER: PROJECT: REPRESENTATNE: OWNER: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Land Use Code Section(s) 26.445.100 Amendment of PlJD development order. 26.470.070(E) GMQS Exemption Expansion of Commercial or Office Uses 26.440.040(8) Specially Planned Area Review by: Staff for complete application, referral agencies for technical considerations, Planning and Zoning Commission for Approval ofGMQS Exemption and PUD Amendment. Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to City Council on the establishment of the Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA Yes at P & Z, Council 2nd Reading of Ordinance City Case- No Fees City Case- No Development Review Fees Required Public Hearing: Planning Fees: Total Deposit: To apply, submit the following information: " 1. Total Deposit for review of application. v 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. v 3. Signed fee agreement. " 4. Pre-application Conference Summary. 5. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. " 6. Proposed site plan that includes a parking plan. 7. Proposed floor plan. 8. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 10 Copies of the complete application packet (items 5-8)' Process: Apply. Planner checks application for completeness. Staff reviews application against PUD Amendment and GMQS Exemption Standards. Application referred to applicable referral agencies. Staff writes memo of recommendation. Planning and Zoning Commission reviews case and makes [mal decision on,the GMQS Exemption and PUD Amendment, reconunendation to City Council on Consolidated ConceptuallFma:i SPA. ' , Disclaimer: The foregoing sunnnary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that mayor may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. ("'. r"'\ CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Ae:reement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (A TV OF- ASpeN A85E'T MANA&eM~ 'jJ\5Pf (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: I. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for LoT Z- OF Tf1fO.A>f'el-.i e.oLf' ~ <WI':.DIVISION l t>ex~MVlI%IONeD 'l2€SV'<\J~TS~ (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ K) which is for _ , hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initIal deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made withIn 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT Julie Ann Woods Community Dewlopment Director BY:W~iJJo ~) Date: '6(1(;(0'2.- Cd\ As-5er~ AfC{j4-- By: Mailing Address: 53::> ~ MAl N S~ I~ \ J7V6l- l\G~t{, CD '6lLP 1\ g:\supportlformslagrpayas.doc 1/10/01 r-, r1 ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION Location: (. TIZ-usco :Pfo'N'e;:D ~q'5'5l \-l\~A'f '02 \--OI:z.. OF A G.o CPv.e5e <6ul3D\'J\::,tON (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Name: ApPLICANT: Name: Address: Phone #: (;11'1 OF AS'S'E..j Mf'<N""""'EM~T M J::.l--L-'e C(o ~PC-\>1A 30 e: 1'-'\I><lN 51 i..-O~ L..e:;Vel- AS C\lo,q'2.0'G5B2.. Rji;PRESENTA TNE: jN=' Address: Phone #: PROJECT: SAM~ AS> ~ \l-S ConditIonal Use Special Review Design Review Appeal GMQS Allotment GMQS Exemption A-IM.-e..~. o ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane o Lot Split 0 Temporary Use o Lot Line Adjustment 0 Text/Map Amendment TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) o o o o o ~ l2:J 'gj o o Conceptual POD Final POD (& POD Amendment) Conceptual SPA Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Subdivision Subdivision Exemption (includes condominiumization) o o o o o o Conceptual Historic Devt. Final Historic Development Minor Historic Devt. Historic Demolition Historic Designation Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion o Other: see. A-n4c.H:eD PROPOSAL: (descrIption of proposed buildings, uses, modifcations, etc.) I 5s:: A'f1Act,jED FEES DUE: $ Rl , Have you attached the following? o Pre-Application Conference Summary o Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement o Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form o Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. - ,!i!i """ = == = 0= , - - - - - o \:; o o o o 8 o o ~ o N o U . '" " Ul ;:: ;; ., o \:; "' ~ Ii: ci t( '" \Ix r-, ..4t Fireman's Fund POLICY NUMBER S 68 MZX 8079 00 53 Named Insured Sequential Endorsement Number 002 ASPEN PITKIN HOUSING OFFICE PORTFOLIO CHANGE ENDORSEMENT Effective 03/28/02, 12,01 A.M., Standa~d Time at the add~ess of the insu~ed This is an Endo~sement only. Othe~ than changes shown, all othe~ p~e-existing coverage remains in full force and effect. Premiumadiustments are shown. PREMIUM SUMMARY: ADDITIONAL PREMIUM DUE NOW ADDITIONAL PREMIUM Deferred until Fina1^AUdit $0.00 $12.00 The P~emium shown includes Adjustable P~emium(s). Refe~ to P~emium Adjustment Info~mation attached. The following Locations are The General Declarations: Loc. 020 39551 STATE HWY 82 ASPEN added to the "Location of premises" described in CO 81611 PITKIN (COUNTY) :!: cow<=igrurt= of Aoilioriwi A""" ;a. ~ producer NEIL-GARING/ASPEN AGENCY 210 lCC'-AABC ASPEN CO 81611 CHANGE ENDORSEMENT CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 Date 04/09/02 N U Page 1 ,.,...." t) ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM -r\UJSco11' \)e;c:oHM~ ~TA<v~ Ur-/ OF AsPlaNp.,GGaT AAN~e:Nt" I A~ "Y\Ge;;1 \-bc.::.ftW '2..- L.-OT:t. Of' CdJo:se::su N1S.t~ RMF (for the purposes of calculatIng Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the MunIcipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: ~ ~~ Number of residential units: Existing: // Proposed: Number of bedrooms: Existing: ,/ Proposed: Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties onIY):o"'~.' ~ / /' ,.-' / DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Principal bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Access. bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Site coverage: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: '1l:--. Front Setback: Existing: Required.: Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined FIR: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: Required: Proposed: i .,.- r"~" Existing non-conformities or encroachments: ./ ./ ,,,- .;./' ./ Variations requested: ~,,/ -'-- .-