Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.pu.Truscott GMQS SPA.A07002Truscott PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemp, SPA 2735-111-09-702 A070-02 Alt' "/V t_LJ `) i -�� i U • L CASE NUMBER A070-02 PARCEL ID # 2735-111-09702 CASE NAME Truscott PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption, SPA- Deco PROJECT ADDRESS Truscott PLANNER James Lindt CASE TYPE PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption, SPA OWNER/APPLICANT City of Aspen Asset Management REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 11 /25/02 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Denied PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 1 /6/03 BY J. Lindt PARCEL ID: I2735-111-09702 jr DATE RCVD: 8/23/02 # COPIES:j CASE NOIA070-02 i CASE NAME: Truscott PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption, SPA- Decommissioned Rest PLNR: PROD ADDR: ITruscott ASE TYP: PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption STEPS: OWN/APP: City of Aspen Asset ADR r CIS/Z: f PHN: REP: ADR: CIS/Z:' PHN• FEES DUE!None FEES RCVD: None STAT: REF l MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOT REMARKS CLOSED:I 1W(�3 BY: I-i L-� L T DATE OF FINAL ACTI CITY COUNCIL: PZ: r BOA: r DRAC: F C, ORDINANCE NO. 38 (SERIES OF 2002) � 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING ql)A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY, 2) ESTABLISHING A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUD TO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT IN THE TRUSCOTT 100 BUILDING TO BE USED AS OFFICES FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN ASSET MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT'S PROJECT MANAGERS AND ON -SITE PROPERTY MANAGERS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. 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 recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, 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: 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. 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 to this 25th day of November, 2002. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner U lam_ RE: Truscott Decommissioned Restaurant GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, PUD Amendment- 2"' Reading of Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2002- Public Hearing DATE: November 25, 2002 APPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. CURRENT ZONING: R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD APPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: PROPOSED USE: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Office Use for Asset Management Building Department Project Managers and On -site Housing Managers 0 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, • • 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 of R/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 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 of 2000. 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. ►) 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. 91 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 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 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 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: 2 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Referral Comments Exhibit C -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 0 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 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 131 0 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 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 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 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: r-1 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staff s 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. L 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 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 V 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 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 of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 11 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 of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding 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 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 of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less -intensive mechanical systems. 3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding 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 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 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 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. 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 0 0 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 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 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 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 -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding 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 0 IR TRUSCOTT OFFICES CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL 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 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. 17 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 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 srr_fficient 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 • 6 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 x-aenaer: ranayrLcommons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM W Mows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 160:32 -0500 To: James Lindt <jamesl@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Randy Ready <randyr@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Truscott Parking Referral X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean L�(v l l Ol 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 (1 st come, 1 st 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 TO: James L* • FROM: Cindy Christensen DATE; September 16, 2002 RE: TR USCOTT DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT TEMPORARY USE MUD The applicant is requesting approval to extend the use of temporary office until Phase III of the Truscott Redevelopment begins or permanent office space is completed for Asset Management and the Property Managers at Truscott. KCRO : Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2000, currently governs the property and states that the decommissioned restaurant area can only operate as a community meeting area. There currently exists a community meeting room in this 100 building that will remain. Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2000, also states that Phase III of the Truscott ]Expansion Project is proposed ibr the year 2006. As part of Phase ICI, proper office space for the TnW.ott property managers will be created. This will more than likely be congruent with the schedule of the Civic Master Plan. 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 Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. P_� MENDAZION: Staff recommends approval of this application since the use of this space is not permanent and that no new employees are to be added. AvordmfOrm RpLolficespece. doc RESOLUTION NO. 28 • (SERIES OF 2002) • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE 1)A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY, 2) ESTABLISH A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUALIFINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUD TO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT IN THE TRUSCOTT 100 BUILDING TO BE USED AS OFFICES FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN ASSET MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT'S PROJECT MANAGERS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITIUN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-I11-09-702 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 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 tot 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 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 1) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) Consolidated Conceptual/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 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 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 THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: 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; the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve a 1) 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: 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 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 15`h day of October, 2002. • • APPROVED AS TO FORM COMMISSION: C-7), =�J� Ci Attorney ATTEST: ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING ric Co n, Vice -Chair 0 Nv\ CA 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council ' THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner RE: Truscott Decommissioned Restaurant GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, PUD Amendment- 2°d Reading of Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2002- Public Hearing DATE: November 25, 2002 APPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. CURRENT ZONING: R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD APPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: PROPOSED USE: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Office Use for Asset Management Building Department Project Managers and On -site Housing Managers rev 1 l we -- Iok 40 MCL,\O� 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, 1 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 of R/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 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 of 2000. 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 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 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 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 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 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Referral Comments Exhibit C -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution • • 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 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 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 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 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 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 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: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staff s 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. 0 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 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 .7 • 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 of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 11 LI E 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 of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding 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 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 of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less -intensive mechanical systems. 3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding 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 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 • • 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 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. 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 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 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 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 • 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 -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding 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 CONCEPTUAL/FINAL 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 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. 17 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. S. 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 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 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 • • ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ,rO-05C�01r V4�-;s'►AWrC-IT ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: L,,OT Z . Dfil &OI.F �5_ :�X>8D- , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 140V C V KVV V- 1-5 , 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, i" 1I cR5E _� (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 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 4t- Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, ' ;r waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days���� jf prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from theme day of {•1,c�Kirvti�ri-,� , 200) to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. \r 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 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) N" 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. L-/4,tj� Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this i3't{day Of , 200 Z, by M«N� itc �c.v ;A WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: k � O.. Notary Public �fOFCC1 ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 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 NOTiCr rcY rrr.rr•nt,frill NT ♦— W;n l;e rinn unll hp hAd nn Monday_ November 25. 1J 11GI�L' 1 Vi ♦ L' 1N LiiuL u I —A— ..b 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 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, jamesl(c�ci.aspen.co.us. S/Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor 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 FARINO CAROL PO BOX 10421 ASPEN, CO 81612 GALARDI JOHN & CYNTHIA L 4440 VON KARMAN AVE 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 7*,v,Aes Lt N DT Gpm-tvn1ItY Da4dL-opt i coo s sT oc547 e�N CO �l LF l ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE 6 ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ' �O P As en CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (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 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, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters 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 1200 , 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 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 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) 0 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 foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of N > , 200,�, by �_� ,� Novemner c, -...., _. PUBLJC NOTICE RE: LOT 2, ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION (FORMER TRUSCOTf RESTAURANT SPACE) PUD AMENDMENT, CONSOLID• WED CONCEPTUAL/ FI- NAL SPA. AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSEN- TIAL PUBLIC FACILITY 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 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, con- tact James Lindt at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., As- pen, CO (970) 920-5095, jameslOci.aspen.co.us. s/Pelen Kahn Kianderud, Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on November 9, 2002. (9022) WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL L My commission expires: _ Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: - COPY OF THE PUBLICATION APH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN 70 �. B"kh, LIST, OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL •.......... COL C7 9 Aspen / Pitkin County Housing 23-'� ;84749 vp 530 E. Main, Suite 001 �0.3 T ZAspen, CO 81611Pe 58 U.S. POSTAGE RECEIVED I'3o S C� ST NO V 12 2002 n--A Gtl '�l(.P � l ASPEN BUILDING DE ARTME #i 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 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 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, jamesl(@ci.gMen.co.us. S/Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on November 9, 2002 City of Aspen Account C. • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directo FROM • %J(lb T�-� a �G�I James Lindt, Planner Q;�01, Truscott Decommissioned Restaurant GMQS Exemption for an Essen �l ` Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, PUD Amendment e Reading of Ordinance N0.3p , Series of 2002 DATE: October 28, 2002 APPLICANT: City of Aspen Asset Management Department REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. CURRENT ZONING: R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD APPROVED USE: Community Meeting Room LOCATION: PROPOSED USE: Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Office Use for Asset Management Building Department Project Managers and On -site 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, C` • 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 of R/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 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 of 2000. 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 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 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 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 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 "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 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., 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 • • 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 ORDINANCE NO. 3B (SERIES OF 2002) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING 1)A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY, 2) ESTABLISHING A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUD TO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT IN THE TRUSCOTT 100 BUILDING TO BE USED AS OFFICES FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN ASSET MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT'S PROJECT MANAGERS AND ON -SITE PROPERTY MANAGERS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. 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 recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, 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 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. • • 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 to -�, this 25th day of November, 2002. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney • E 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 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 0 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 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 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. Estahlishment 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: 0 0 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staff's 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. OJ • • (1) 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 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 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 of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 11 • • 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 of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding 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 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 of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less -intensive mechanical systems. 3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding 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 PUD documents. Up -lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. 1� • • 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 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. 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 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 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 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 • 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 -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding 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 CONCEPTUAL/FINAL 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 o/ intid flow, rockfalls, 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. 17 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 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 (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 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 AWCIiMENT 2 —LAND USE APPLOTION SUBJECT PROPERTY Address: 39951 Highway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description: Lot 2 of the P Amended Plat of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision parcel of land situated in a portion of Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12 Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6`h 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 Roof Inn"). 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 *ACHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLOTION 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 AWCHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPL*ION 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 WACHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPI!ATION 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 of RFTA 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 #Units #Parking Stalls Phase I (cul-de-sac) 58 67 Phase II (new) 41 47 200 & 300 bldgs 46 53 100 Building 50 58 195 225 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 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. El OACHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPI&TION 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 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. 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 of RFTA 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. AACHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLIOION 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 #Units #Parkin Stalls talls Phase I (cul-de-sac) 58 67 Phase II (new) 41 47 200 & 300 bldgs 46 53 100 Building 50 58 195 225 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. 2 ARMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLI(*ION 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 AHMENT 2 - LAND USE APPLI(OION 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. A IlCHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLIdeION 26.445.050 REVIEW STANDARDS: CONSOLIDATED PUD 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, 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 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: 0 A I•CHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLI*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 of RFTA 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 #Units #Parking Stalls Phase I (cul-de-sac) 58 67 Phase II (new) 41 47 200 & 300 bldgs 46 53 100 Buildinc 50 58 195 225 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 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 of RFTA 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 AOCHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLIOION 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 if there 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. 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 AOCHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLIOION 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 ��tlJOTES I�[�4�510N�D ReSTA.)P- r SPA PCoPos�D +i,f- C4 J 1NueD IET-4poRadc-y anFr-rcE SprtcIF. EI D04a Es $xIST)N6, c� TizuscolT l'-NFeRmIcE cq�,tlftt;L0 O O O O T,eusc-tTNwu��,�_ STALL. �uN tT 'P*�sF- .IF "�wkar1�_ Zcn e P-+ irlUj_ 2co 4 .zoo &D6,s P � 'fl uh��S Fo ukt�h `f!o units �f7 P°`y T�Ajjs 56 POW" s6,t,Cs v&,4s �-SP�N baGf" �� �r�Nn/�s �t/LKscoTT /f�jsl�/b /GW-(e,r tr/V1 PL,t-N ,58 ur;�ts U7 o_ o a o p j-;r% OF- JEUF & 0�4-tCf.= SjlACI— (RAIS o-4q 7Fr-v>or-Atr--/ or-T=ICE) 0 El M e-"T,tTt I i.. k.Q�l tat, �l ----------- A:;nET r • R� s'Sl�u RAT SPA Tyo POSED -Fir- co ri me-D -�09,60-y aF�t cE s p�c�. El pe4oTE-C. EAICT)N6 lllzusec lT 4:,N{ev-AN4ff ceObM 0 0 O (DC � I DRIVWG RANGE PRACTICE TEE 0 0 PRACTICE GREEN 0'7�VSI�77 STALL,�(-)41� 2ao .boo &4)&I s ��I too et-� P� f c i Yt i.�s 6-0 "pt t,� 47 sa POW" St L��3 o RELOCATED +.TN GREEN 1Si Tf TEE �;J POW PHASE HOI/SN G UNTS (LF CART STACAHG TREE OOSCOE� GOLF GRT BM. 11 GOLF RUBIDUSE STADWIN COURT O O ;RCP -OFT \ DELI' AREA/SEAR PROOF � iR.191 COH TAWERS Q C 'K Y IwP (r TEN. T CC �KEX G N IE IRE BKEI RNRES _ .-AC G .. 1 � 2 RECREAYOH PAaRWG HOUSNG (.5O SPACES) PARKING OVERHEAD UpCOx0 lR( SPACES) I .05E BIB/ FIII1lFE N RNG iOUHTAN tvolrose.OL f � SNOW sroaAct BIHE UNCERPASi,-� \ `FUTURE COOT R.O.W. UNDERPASS B9fE PATH CCNNELnCRR TO 4AROpR � ---PEDESTRIAN skis STOP RCA:GNED HIGHWAY at 'xAl_-uCUN� L'GHT:NG SUS STGP SNOW STORAGES NREE WAY 1 STOP PHASE II NOUSNG UNITS HauwG LREAR-PROOF TRASH E.S'NG RED ROOF I - (FUTURE PHASE II HOUS:W) IRRRGAnoR DITCH RELOCATED TENTH TEES POLE u0UX1ED �U�EC�.__ _ "- dpJlai� PCIR Hd {R11.iTY AlK+tBlf �USCDR CNTRY C s,a+wm :xmRsecncN EMSTHG LAHDSCAPE KRu 49 CH -STREET PARNNG E=DNG COTTONWOODS ION FARWAY 9 a 0 sHo. STORAGE a 0 58 (P-7 fW�lRn) GCS to TUCK UNDER PIR G SPACES 0 BEAR -PROOF CONTAHERs ` 13 PARW / SNOW STORAGE DO F COlRRSE ACCESS ROAD FUTURE HfA15N NANIENANCE `AR 1 rs OF GTRADII I bfalryp /GGpTST7L/tr/V.0 PG A✓ /"= /�a �k.�.. SEP.16.2002 11:35PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC MEMOR"DUM TO: James Iandt FROM: Cindy Christensen DATE: September 16, 2002 NO.691 P . 1 , -- >ctF: TRUSCOTT DECOMMUSIONED RESTAURANT TEMPORARY USE �X�� ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval to extend the use of temporary office until Phase M of the Truscott Redevelopment begins or permanent office space is completed for Asset Management and the Property Managers at Truscott, A : Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2000, currently governs the property and states that the decommissioned restaurant area can only operate as a community meeting area There currently exists a community meeting room in this 100 building that will remain. Ordinance No, 34, Series of 2000, also states that Phase III of the Truscott Expansion Project is proposed fbr the year 2006. As part of Phase III, proper office space for the Truscott property managers will be created. This will more than likely be congruent with the schedule of the Civic Master Plan. 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 working within other departments. No new employees are anticipated for the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. REC0I9MENDA O-N: Staff recommends approval of this application since the use of this space is not permanent and that no new employees are to be added, /wnrdrefermkVLaf60e8pece. doc 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Planner FROM: Claude Morelli, City Transportation Planner CC: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE: 8,Pe � ,112ey RE: Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual PUD Review Parcel ID 42735-111 ,Zcc, v<0 FEBCokkA o 9 'nn JN pp17 � 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 and offers the following comments: A. NEED FOR ACTIVE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT AT TRuscoTT Summary. Aspen has a clear policy of holding traffic at the Entrance to Aspen to current 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 infrastnlcture. 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. 1 trusctt Page 1 of 7 Review Com is Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual PUD Cit) Spen, Transportation & Parking Department Background and Context: 1he Entrance to As en Traffic Polic . For almost a decade a keaP Y � ,y component of Aspen/AACP transportation policy has been to hold traffic volumes into and out of town 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. 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. Factors in the Success of the Traffic Policy. Staff attributes the success of the Aspen traffic policy on a combination of factors. 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. Table 1: AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ON THE CASTLE CREEK BRIDGE 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 25.400 July 28,600 29,000 26.600 August 28.600 27.200 25,100 September 24,000 23.300 23.300 October 20,500 20,500 NIA November 20,000 N/A Ni A December 25.200 24,200 NIA Itrusctt Page 2 of 7 Review Com• Truscott Redevelopment Conceptual PUD • City 0pen, Transportuion & Parking Department Obstacles to Continued Success of the Traffic Policy. Staff is 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: • Increasing difficulty associated with crossing Highway 82 for non -motorized access to bus stops. CDOT's plans for Highway 82 call for the transformation of the road into a controlled access facility. Part of this transformation involves substantially increasing the pavement width of the highway's cross-section. The increase in width will 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. • Rising daily traffic volumes generated by increasing population in and around Aspen. On average, Aspen -area residents tend to generate substantially 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 -home -based mid -day trips.' 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, substantially 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 sicnificant. 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 person).' As many as 80-percent, or about 400, t For Aspen employee mode split information, see Healthy Mountain Communities, Study of Local and Regional Travel Patterns, Volume 1. '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: (1) All future Truscott residents 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 (= 0.77 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 ttruscu Page 3 of 7 teevlcw t_ommr-- Inacott Rcdcvelopment t_onceptual t'UD City mn, Transportation & Parking Department of these trips might reasonagbe destined for points east of the Castl•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.' Given the strict, policy -driven traffic volume and capacity limits at the Entrance to Aspen, staff considers that an impact of this magnitude justifies implementation of aggressive travel - management measures. B. PROPOSED TRAVEL -DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FOR TRUSCOTT "Passive" Traffic-iWana;ement 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: High/Wide Pedestrian Underpass. The current proposal calls for constructing a high and wide underpass of Highway 82 to provide a direct, safe and comfortable connection to the eastbound RFTA 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). 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 through a narrowing of the difference between auto and transit "out of vehicle" time at the start and end of trips. • Good System of Walkways. The current proposal (at least as staff interprets 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 surnmer and winter.' 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. s At least one of the architects working on the Truscott project suggested that streets on the site could be designed for j shared vehicle/pedestrian use in the "Woonerf' style. In staffs 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 surfaces at least as j effectively in the case of Woonerfs as in the case of sidewalks. twscn Page 4 of 7 Review Comn Truscon Redevelopment Conceptual PUD City con. Transportation & Parking Department Recommended "Active" Traffic -Management Elements. In addition to the passive traffic- 0 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 Truscon should be limited to encourage economization and sharing of vehicle ownership 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. l The purpose of a system of this sort is twofold. First, it provides a stream of revenue to 1 reimburse the public for its investment of scarce capital resources in the parking facility and f 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 of vehicle movements and accounting of accumulated fees. An example of variable fee schedule might look something like the following: Fee Component Fee Monthly base fee (payed by all users of the parking facility, $100.00 regardless of the frequency of departure) First 15 departures Free 16'' through 25' departure $1.00 per departure 26" through 35°i departure $2.00 per departure 36" through 45' departure $3.00 per departure 46`h through 60' departure $4.00 per departure >_ 6 1 " departure $6.00 per departure Surcharge for each departure made during peak travel periods $1.00 (e.g.; weekdays from 7:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.) (I Itrusett Page 5 of 7 Review Comm• Truscon Redevelopment Conceptual PUD City c _ an, Transportation & Parking Department Example: A re ident 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 S 100.00 First 15 departures (@ S0.00) S 0.00 16' through 25" departure (@ $1.00) S 10.00 26' through 35`" departure (@ S2.00) S 20.00 36" through 45'" departure (@ S3.00) S 30.00 46" through 50' departure (@ S4.00) S 20.00 Ten (10) peak -period departures (@ S 1.00) S 10.00 TOTAL monthly varkino bill S 190.00 • Formal Transportation -Management Program. A formal transportation -management program should be instituted at Truscott.V 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 RFTA 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 taxi 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 Avenue as an appropriate model. ltruscu - Page 6 of 7 Review Comr* -: Tnucott Redevelopment Conceptual PUD City pen, Transportation &Parking Department 0 • Bicycle Parking. Atleast two ground -level, easily accessible and secure e bic clparking Y P g spaces should be provided in close proximity to the front door of all housing units in the project. l trusctt Page 7 of 7 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/lime-Version 1 n X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean 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 L L RESOLUTION NO.28 (SERIES OF 2002) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE 1)A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY, 2) ESTABLISH A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUD TO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT 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-I11-09-702 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 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 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 1) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) Consolidated Conceptual/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 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 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 THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING CONIIVHSSION AS FOLLOWS: 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; the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve a 1) 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: 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 1 5"' day of October, 2002. CJ • APPROVED AS TO FORM COMMISSION: City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING Jasmine Tygre, Chair '5� wl'z-sx�Pe- 0 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 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, jamesl(a),,ci.aspen.co.us. S/Jasmine Tygre, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 28, 2002 City of Aspen Account 0 0 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: % 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) CC 0A C'0- J �� _ ; �,� �� f (name, please print) being or representing an Applicanto 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) 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, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters 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 pr'or 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 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) E 0 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. ature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged befgre me thi��day of �`� , 200 2,-by—� �,� PUBLIC NOTICE RE: LOT 2. ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION (FORMER TRUSCOTT RESTAURANT SPACE) PUT) AMENDMENT. CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/ FI- NAL SPA, AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSEN- TIAL PUBLIC FACIL—Y 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 Concep- tual/ Final SPA, and a GMQS Exemption for an Es- sential Public Facility on Lot 2, of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision to allow for the decommis- sioned 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 De- partment, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920- 5095, jamesl@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Jasmine Tygre, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in The Aslen Times on September 28, 2002 (9423) WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public 7Y'•. Ci O A G7 � �O COLO ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION ►TOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: S , 200_,7_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (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) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Tv Posting of 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 of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to he public hearing and was continuously visible from the M 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 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 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) Re.:oning 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. Signa e The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before Uie this& day of 200.2, by WITNESS MY HAND AND OOFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public �C' �3 O �O 1' .• /ice ..COVQ ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYHAIL 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 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, tamesl(a)ci.aspen.co.us. S/Jasmine Tyue, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 28, 2002 City of Aspen Account • A MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director-c—W \ FROM: James Lindt, Planner E: Truscott Decommissioned RestauraGPOS Exemption for an nu)i. vvtQ Public Facility, Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA, PUD Amendment- k Qot Public Hearing I / DATE: October 15, 2002 C rkt4 A%V, 4 ^Lk a to APPLICANT: CURRENT ZONING: S � City of Aspen Asset Management R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) PUD i Qasc ,02 Department yectt.S 4/ REPRESENTATIVE: APPROVED USE: �A Michelle Bonfils, Asset Management Dept. Community Meeting Room �. LOCATION: PROPOSED USE: CIQusQ Decommissioned Restaurant in Truscott 100 Office Use for Asset Management Building Department Project Managers and On -site lEfr,G 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, 1 1] 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 of R/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 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 of 2000. 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 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 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 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 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 100 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, and 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) "I move to approve Resolution No.1'21so&L, 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 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." 4 0 r: 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\Rio Grand SPA Skateboard Park Amendment\Rio Grande SPA Amendment.doc 5 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 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 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 Z 0 • 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 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 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 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient parking exists in the affordable housing parking lot to accommodate the proposal as is detailed in Staff s 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. X 0 • (1) 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 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 0 0 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 of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 0 • 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 of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 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 0 • 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 of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less -intensive mechanical systems. 3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding 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 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 0 0 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 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. 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 0 • 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 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 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 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 0 0 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 -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding 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 U TRUSCOTT OFFICES CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPA REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS 26.440.050. Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). 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, rockfalls, 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. 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 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 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 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 (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 GNIQS 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 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. 18 RESOLUTION NO.28 (SERIES OF 2002) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE 1)A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY, 2) ESTABLISH A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA ON LOT 2 OF THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION, AND 3) A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE TRUSCOTT PUD TO ALLOW FOR THE DECOMMISSIONED RESTAURANT 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: 2 735-111-09- 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 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 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 1) GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility, 2) Consolidated Conceptual/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 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 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 THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: 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; the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve a 1) 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: 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 15t' day of October, 2002. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATAHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICRON SUBJECT PROPERTY Address: 39951 Highway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description: Lot 2 of the 3` Amended Plat of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision parcel of land situated in a portion of Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12 Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 61h 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 Roof Inn"). 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 ATT*HMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICAOON 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. FA ATIOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICAMON 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. ATIOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICAMON 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 of RFTA 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 #Units #Parking Stalls Phase I (cul-de-sac) 58 67 Phase II (new) 41 47 200 & 300 bldgs 46 53 100 Building 50 58 195 225 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 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 AT*HMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICAMON 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 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. 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 of RFTA 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. AT4HMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICA40ON 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 #Units #Parking Stalls Phase I (cul-de-sac) 58 67 Phase 11(new) 41 47 200 & 300 bldgs 46 53 100 Building 50 58 195 225 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. 3 ATTOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICAMON 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 ATTOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICA9ON 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 ATTOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICA90N 26.445.050 REVIEW STANDARDS: CONSOLIDATED PUD 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, 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 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: ATTOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICAMON 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 of RFTA 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 #Units #Parking Stalls Phase I (cul-de-sac) 58 67 Phase II (new) 41 47 200 & 300 bldgs 46 53 100 Building 50 58 195 225 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 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 of RFTA 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 AJOHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICANN 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 if there 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. 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 ATTPHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICARON 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 0 0 CITY OF ASPEN PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: James Lindt, 920.5095 DATE: 8.6.02 PROJECT: Truscott Insubstantial Planned Unit Development Amendment, GMQS Exemption for Expansion of Net Leasable SF, Establish a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA to allow for the use of offices REPRESENTATIVE: Michelle Bonfils OWNER: City of Aspen TYPE OF APPLICATION: Insubstantial PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemption for Expansion of Net Leasable SF, Establishment of a Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA on Lot DESCRIPTION: Applicant would like to utilize the former restaurant area in the Truscott 100 building for Asset Management Project manager Offices. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.445.100 Amendment of PUD development order. 26.470.070(E) GMQS Exemption Expansion of Commercial or Office Uses 26.440.040(B) Specially Planned Area Review by: Staff for complete application, referral agencies for technical considerations, Planning and Zoning Commission for Approval of GMQS Exemption and PUD Amendment. Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to City Council on the establishment of the Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA Public Hearing: Yes at P & Z, Council 2"d Reading of Ordinance Planning Fees: City Case- No Fees Total Deposit: City Case- No Development Review Fees Required To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 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. 3. Signed fee agreement. 4. Pre -application Conference Summary. 5. An 8 1/2" x I I" 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 final decision on the GMQS Exemption and PUD Amendment, recommendation to City Council on Consolidated Conceptual/Final SPA. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary 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 may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. • 0 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and C%TY CW- ,,aSPt5N Pc��,,F-T (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for LOT 2 OF- THE .4rpet-t (2%OLf- C.e>t_� %-oi DIKISION , u"T SPA05 (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 $_ 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 By: Julie Ann Woods Community DeN elopment Director Mailing Address: g:\support\forms\abrpayas.doc 1/10/01 0 • ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION Name: (6Iri OF A5;Eg 4) T12-Us COT ir-z Location: 3g455 I H16fwAY 22, "T 2 OF AW64 G,04: C000_5e- SU6Dl\iSS Qt-4 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: Name: GIT4 OF Asf'�1 �s�T M t=M IT, MIGNf_::wE tL_s Address: O�0 p%PGtAA cj3o N ST, t—aw Phone #: 110.9 20 - 58 2- REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Sikh% AS PqF;,_lE Address: Phone #: PROJECT: Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Special Review Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal Conceptual SPA Minor Historic Devt. ❑ GMQS Allotment Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Historic Demolition Ix GMQS Exemption kVVwJ ❑ Subdivision Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Subdivision Exemption (includes Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane Lot Split Temporary Use Other: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that aDDlvl: EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) SSE P•TTA644--l—D PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) SFE �rT�c4��'D Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $� Pre -Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form ❑ 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n m 0 U • 40041 Fireman's Fund POLICY NUMBER S 68 MZX 8079 00 53 Named Insured ASPEN PITKIN HOUSING OFFICE PORTFOLIO CHANGE ENDORSEMENT Effective 03/28/02, 12:01 A.M., Standard Time at the address of the insured Sequential Endorsement Number 002 This is an Endorsement only. Other than changes shown, all other pre-existing coverage remains in full force and effect. Premium adjustments are shown. PREMIUM SUMMARY: ADDITIONAL PREMIUM DUE NOW $0.00 ADDITIONAL PREMIUM Deferred until Final Audit $12.00 The Premium shown includes Adjustable Premium(s). Refer to Premium Adjustment Information attached. The following Locations are added to the "Location of Premises" described in The General Declarations: Loc. 020 39551 STATE HWY 82 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (COUNTY) 0 c n 0 !D �i w Countersignature of Authorized Agent: ,/1,,iDate 04/09/02 o Producer NEIL-GARING/ASPEN AGENCY 210 #CC-AABC N u ASPEN CO 81611 m CHANGE ENDORSEMENT CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 R Mx 0 Page 1 0 0 POLICY NUMBER S 68 MZX 8079 00 53 Named Insured ASPEN PITKIN HOUSING OFFICE Sequential Endorsement Number 002 (continued) RATING PERIOD 10-18-01 TO 10-18-02 GENERAL LIABILITY SCHEDULE Premise 01 Location 001 39551 HWY 82 TRUSCOTT #100 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 02 Location 002 39551 HWY 82 TRUSCOTT #200 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 03 Location 003 39551 HWY 82 TRUSCOTT #300 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 04 Location 004 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG A/800 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 05 Location 005 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG B/700 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 06 Location 006 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG C/600 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 07 Location 007 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG D/500 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 08 Location 008 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG E/400 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 09 Location 009 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG F/300 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 10 Location 010 200 MAROLT DRIVE BLDG G/200 ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 11 Location 011 200 MAROLT DRIVE CARETERIA ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) Premise 12 Location 012 414 PARK CIRCLE ASPEN CO 81611 PITKIN (CNTY) CHANGE ENDORSEMENT CONTINUED ON PAGE 3 Paae 2 0 0 ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM 'ro' e TI? j6 coTf �lican • C.iTf of -per► ?�ssSr' cation: 3as51 Al6mU WAV Y ?52. I,0T 2 Or 460-T) 6,0I,F 66U9SE Fsue:D1v1SL, Lot Size: Lot Area: (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: ?P�r opose $gip Number of residential units: Existing: oposed: Number of bedrooms: Existing: .% Proposed: Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only);. 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: Front Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined F/R: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: Required: Proposed: Existing non -conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: _ ORDINANCE NO. 34 (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN APPROVING THE ASPEN GOLF AND TENNIS CLUB/TRUSCOTT HOUSING FINAL PLANNED, UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION, REZONING, AND EXEMPTIONS FROM THE SCORING AND COMPETITION PROCEDURES OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application (the application) from the City of Aspen and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, applicant, for a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval, Subdivision approval, Rezoning approval, Special Review for parking, Residential Design Standards Review, Growth Management Quota System exemption for reconstruction commercial square footage, and an affordable housing exemption from the scoring and competition procedures of growth management for redevelopment of the Aspen Golf Course parking lot, golf support areas, and Truscott Affordable Housing to include additional affordable housing and recreational facilities on land currently described as Lot 41 and Lot #2 of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, parcel numbers 2735-111-09-702 & 2735-111-09-001, including land within said Subdivision described as "golf course support area;" and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Aspen City Council Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000, the Truscott Affordable Housing and Aspen Golf and Tennis Club project (the project) was granted Conceptual PUD approval; and, WHEREAS, the Conceptual PUD approval considered three phases of housing development with the specific understanding that the third phase is not expected to occur until 2006 and that the Conceptual approval allowed for a Final Development Plan to be submitted for said third phase at anytime, combined with the Final PUD application or as a separate application, including beyond the one year limitation of Conceptual approvals; and, . WHEREAS, the application includes only the first and second phases of residential development and the third phase, to be located on proposed Lot #2 of the Third Amended Plat of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision Plat, shall remain subject to Final Development Plan approval and subject to City Council Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060 of the Land Use Code, and in consultation with the applicant, the Community Development Director has permitted a modification in review procedures to combine the Special Review for parking and the Residential Design Standards review with the Planned Unit Development review and the growth management exemption review for reconstruction of commercial square footage with the affordable housing growth management exemption review for the purposes of ensuring economy of time and clarity; and, WHEREAS, such review procedure modification has not lessened any public hearing noticing or any scrutiny of the project as would otherwise be required; and, Ordinance No. 34, i I"III "III "III' illy �II'I' I[�II II�II 11111111 IN IN Series of 2000. Page 1 446358 08/24/2000 09:58A ORDINANC DAVISILVI 1 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO WHEREAS, the application was refer -red to the relevant referral agencies including the Fire Marshall, Colorado Department of Transportation, USWEST Communications, the Pitkin County Community Development Department, Holy Cross Electric, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the Roaring Fork Transit Agency, City Water Department, Environmental Health Department, City Engineering Department, Parks Department, and the Building Department; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the proposed Final PUD and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304 of the Land Use Code, Final PUD, _. Subdivision, Rezoning approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, relevant referral agencies, the Community Development Director, and testimony by the general public; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on June 20, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to consider an overview presentation of the project and continued the public hearing to July 11, 2000, to consider the project in total and testimony by the general public, and continued the public hearing to July 18, 2000, and, by a three to two (3-2) vote, recommended City Council not approve the Final PUD, Subdivision, and Rezoning of the Aspen Golf and Tennis/Truscott Affordable Housing project; and, WHEREAS, during a meeting on July 25, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission decided to reconsider the denial recommendation and continued the reconsideration hearing to August 1, 2000; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on August 1, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission re -considered the recommendation to City Council and recommended, by a seven to zero (7-0) vote, City Council approve the Final PUD, Subdivision, and Rezoning of the Aspen Golf and Tennis/Truscott Affordable Housing project, subject to conditions of approval listed hereinafter. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304 of the Land Use Code, City Council may exempt affordable housing in compliance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and the comments offered by the general public at a duly notice public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has recommended approval of the project; 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 recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111Ordinance No. 34, 446358 08/24/2000 09:58A ORDINANC DAVIS SIL! Series of 2000. Page 2 2 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 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 as follows: Section 1 The Truscott Affordable Housing and Aspen Golf and Tennis Club Redevelopment Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, and exemptions from the Growth Management Quota System are hereby approved, subject to the conditions of approval listed hereinafter. Section 2• The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be and is hereby amended by the Community Development Director to reflect Lots 2, 3, and 4 of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, City of Aspen, as included in the Residential Multi -Family — Planned Unit Development Housing (RMF-PUD); to reflect a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay designation on all portions of Lot #1; and, to amend the Golf Course Support (GCS) Overlay on Lot 41 consistent with the area described on the Third Amendment Plat of the Golf Course Subdivision. Section 3: Conditions of Approval: 1. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision Plat and Final PUD Development Plan. The Subdivision plat shall include easements and signature blocks for any utility mains that are intended to serve adjacent parcels or include easements to the benefit of any jurisdiction other than the City of Aspen. The Final PUD Plans shall include an illustrative site plan, landscape plan, arcliitectural character plan, a utility plan, a grading/drainage mitigation plan, and an exterior lighting plan. The PUD Plans shall describe Lot #2 as "Phase Three Housing" and remaining subject to Final Development Plan approval. The landscape plan shall include a signature line for the City Parks Director. 2. The applicant shall provide the fmal approved Subdivision line data or survey description data describing the revised subdivision boundaries and the revised Golf Course Support Area (GCS) Overlay to the Geographic Information Systems Department prior to applying for a building permit. The final building location data, including any amendments, shall be provided to the GIS Department prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the housing units. Ordinance No. 34, 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Series of 2000. Pate 3 446358 08/24/2000 09: 58A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 3 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO • 3. A revised lighting plan shall be approved by the Planning and Zoning Conllnlsslon and recorded as an addendum to the Final PUD Plans prior to issuance of a building pen -nit. An appeal of the Commission's decision may be considered by the City Council. 4. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD Agreement binding this property to this development approval. The Agreement shall include the necessary items detailed in Section 26.445.070, in addition to the following: The agreement shall state the ownership and maintenance responsibilities of the common areas of the project. The Agreement shall describe the provisions applicable to the un-approved Phase 43 of the residential development remaining subject to Final Development Plan approval. The agreement shall include the draft construction schedule and shall require approval by the Community Development Department for any substantial changes to the schedule or areas of disturbance. 5. The Final PUD approval is subject to approval of an addendum Transportation Demand Management Plan by the City Council after conducting a joint meting with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Board. Said plan shall describe strategies to reduce automobile usage that will be implemented by the owner/operator of each individual lot (residential and recreational), any shared responsibilities, and shall include an amendment procedure. The Plan shall be approved prior to occupancy of the residential portion of the development. 6. The applicant shall be required to maintain adequate emergency access to and within all areas of the site including plowing, if necessary, the access road across the golf course in a manner determined adequate by the Aspen Fire District and the Pitkin County Disaster Coordinator. Failure to maintain this access in an acceptable condition shall result in an immediate stop work order. Any actions required by the City in reinstating proper access shall be at the sole cost of the applicant. The primary contractor should be notified of this provision and to any provision of their service contract that indicates monetary responsibility for reinstating the access. 7. The public trail system shall remain open during construction. Alternate route designs shall be approved by the City Parks Department and shall be clearly signed. Final trail designs and specifications shall be approved by the City Trail Coordinator prior to start of construction. Restoration of trail shoulders and surrounding vegetation shall be included in the trail designs. Manhole locations shall not coincide with trails. The trail designs shall coordinate with the Entrance to Aspen Maroon Creek Bridge pedestrian crossing plans being prepared by CDOT. 9. The wetlands shall be designed in coordination with the City Parks Department and the City Engineer to ensure sediment -loaded drainage does not enter Maroon Creek. The applicant shall be responsible for acquiring any necessary Federal permits. Ililll IIIII (IIIII IIIII IIIIiI IIIII IIIlI Ordinance No. 34, 446358 08/24/2000 09:58A ORDINANC II III lIII II DAVIS SILVI Series of 2000. Page 4 4 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 0 0 10. The Final PUD plans shall indicate bicycle racks near the clubhouse and teiulis complex, show bicycle rack location near the housing development, and a drinking fountain near the tennis facility. 11. The applicant shall coordinate utility plans and specifications with the City Water and Aspen Sanitation District, including manhole locations, in order to schedule the proposed Fall start date. 12. The building permit application shall include/depict: a) A letter from the primary contractor stating that the approving Ordinance has been read and understood. b) A signed copy of the final Ordinance granting land use approval and a signed copy of the PUD/Subdivision Agreement. c) A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Health Department which addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads; perimeter silt fencing, daily cleaning of adjacent rights -of -way, speed limits within and accessing the site, and the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance during construction. d) A payment for school land dedication in the amount of $51,787. Building permit fees and land use fees shall not be required as those fees are waived by City Council. e) A soil and sand interceptor in the cart barn and an oil and grease interceptor in the restaurant. 13. The recreational parking area shall be routinely cleared of any non -permitted cars. Accommodation for permitted overflow parking from the Burlingame Seasonal Housing shall be provided in the recreational parking lot during the winter season until such time as the overflow parking is moved or is no longer needed. 14. The four drop-off parking spaces within the housing development shall be signed for "15 minute parking only." No parking shall be permitted along the internal streets outside of designated parking areas. Both of these provisions shall be enforced by the housing property manager. 15. Surface residential parking that becomes available with the completion of the future Phase Three housing development shall become available as "remote parking" to the benefit of infill development projects and shall not become excess or overflow parking for Truscott residents. 16. The surface parking lot, as depicted in the final development application and intended to serve both recreation and residential parking demand, shall be developed with the flexibility to accommodate the findings of the remote parking study and not preclude a future partial or full upper deck. 17. The winter season overflow parking obligation for the Burlingame Seasonal Housing project (expected to be 30-40 cars) shall be accommodates on -site or at another in kind site through the construction phases of Truscott. This obligation shall be noted in the PUD Agreement and any on -site provision shall be noted in the Construction Management Plan. Ordinance No. 34, 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Series of2000. Paze 5 446358 08/24/2000 09:58A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 5 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 0 0 18. The trash containers provided on -site shall be "bear proof," meeting the standards of Ordinance 13, Series of 1999. 19. During construction, construction staging, contractor parking shall be limited to the site and areas identified in the Construction Management Plan, appended to the PUD Agreement. The construction disturbance areas may be amended by the Community Development Director. The applicant shall encourage contractors to car-pool and/or use of the daily parking lots at the airport park -and -ride. At no time shall contractor parking along State Highway 82 be permitted. 20. The applicant shall wash tracked mud and debris from the street as necessary, and as requested by the City, during construction. _. 21. The applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building. There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. 22. Any substantial modification to the architecture of the project or of the exterior materials shall require review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Section 4• Ninety-nine (99) permanently deed restricted affordable housing rental units, as proposed on the Truscott site, are hereby exempted from the scoring and competition procedures of growth management. The reconstruction of net leasable commercial square footage in the proposed restaurant and pro -shop is hereby exempted from the scoring and competition procedures of growth management conditioned upon the provision of the necessary subsidy to house 7.4 employees in the Truscott project from the Recreation budget to the Housing budget in a form agreed to by both parties. The decommissioned restaurant area in the Truscott 100 building may operate as a community meeting area but shall be prohibited from operating as a corrunercial venture, excluding any pre-existing leases. No additional commercial leases or lease extensions shall be approved for this decommissioned space. Section 5• All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 6• 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 sarne shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Ordinance No. 34, I ("III I�III I�IIII I'll"II�I' I'III Ili�l III lllli �lll III Series of 3000. Page 6 446358 08/24/2000 09:58A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 6 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 0 • Section 7• 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 remaiiung portions thereof. Section 8• That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 9• A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 14`' day of August, 2000, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to wluch hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the I' day of August, 2000. Attest..`` f ^ SA WaVh r`y°n'S. K ' , City Clerk achel E. Richards, or FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 14tl' day of August, 2000. Attest: isC� Q nY£i. eh, City Clerk Approved as to form: C:\home\Chris\CASES\TruscottFinal\Ordinance.doc 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Ordinance No. 34, 446358 08/24/2000 09: 58A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI Series of 2000. Page 7 7 of 7 R 35.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO J