Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.apz.20170103
AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING January 03, 2017 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES A. Draft Meeting Minutes for December 13, 2016 V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 427 Rio Grande Place (Aspen City Offices) - Major Public Project Review VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. AACP-LUC Coordination Process Update B. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair for 2017 VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 1, 2017 Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 1 Mr. Keith Goode, Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members Kelly McNicholas Kury, Brian McNellis, Ryan Walterscheid, Jesse Morris and Keith Goode. Jasmine Tygre, Spencer McKnight and Skippy Mesirow were not present for the meeting. Also present from City staff; Andrea Bryan, Jennifer Phelan, Ben Anderson, and Sara Nadolny. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Mr. McNellis stated it good to hear Mayor Skadron acknowledge P&Z’s recommendations on the Gorsuch Haus. Ms. McNicholas Kury asked if there will be discussions in January, 2017 regarding chain stores. Ms. Phelan noted Staff has scheduled a check-in with P&Z regarding chain store regulations in February. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Phelan stated she has three items to cover. 1. Staff wants to schedule a third meeting on January 24th to accommodate the number of planning cases coming up in the near future. 2. Staff wants to schedule a working lunch meeting date for a moratorium check-in before it gets finalized by Council. 3. A site visit for Caribou Condos will be scheduled next week. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES November 15, 2016 – Ms. McNicholas Kury motioned to approve the minutes with a couple of modifications as presented. Mr. Walterscheid seconded the motion. All in favor, motion approved. December 6, 2016 – Mr. Goode motioned to approve the minutes as presented and Ms. McNicholas Kury seconded the motion. All in favor, motion approved. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were no declarations. P1 IV.A. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearing – 501 W Hallam St – Variation – Residential Design Standards Mr. Goode opened the continued public hearing. Mr. Ben Anderson, Community Development Planner, reviewed the standard for the commission to consider for the requested variation. He noted the standard is a non-flexible standard which requires a P&Z review and it is only applicable in the Aspen Infill Area. In meeting the standard there are three options and the proposed design is most closely aligned with option three which asks for increased rear setbacks to the rear of the building and it steps down toward the rear of the building. The maximum length before you get to the step down is 45 ft which is the basis of the requested variation. He added the second floor is longer than the 45 ft maximum. He then presented the previously submitted design reviewed by P&Z. The length of the structure is nearly 60 ft. He stated it steps down and there is an additional five ft setback at the rear of the building. In response to P&Z comments from the previous meeting regarding the roofline which included a recommendation for additional articulation of the roofline, the applicant is proposing a new design with more articulation on the second story element roofline. Mr. Anderson noted the house is very visible from the 4th St elevation. He then provided slides depicting the proposed reconfigured structure and pointed out the designed 60 ft where it should be 45 ft. Mr. Anderson identified the two standards P&Z should consider for the variation request: 1) The design provides an alternative that meets the overall intent. 2) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. He stated Staff does not feel there are unusual site specific constraints so it is really about the consideration of the intent. The intent statement in the code language states designs should: a. Promote light, air access, articulated building walls utilizing multiple forms – Staff feels this has been met b. Include massing and articulation that convey forms similar in massing to historic aspen residential buildings – Staff feels the most recent submission does not meet this c. Change the building side wall planes to step down to one story and limit the overall depth of the structure - Staff feels this has been met Staff continues to recommend denial. Mr. Goode asked for questions of Staff. No one had questions so he then turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. Chris Bendon, BendonAdams, was present to represent the applicant, Mr. Scott Hoffman who was also present. P2 IV.A. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 3 Mr. Hoffman thanked P&Z for their patience and spoke of the guidance received from P&Z regarding the massing options. They reduced the overall side wall length from 80 ft to just under 60 ft. It’s not 45 ft, but is a step in that direction. He also looked at Staff’s comments from the 2nd meeting, particularly the part discussing how the form that respects the history of the area. Based on the importance of the corner lot location, he toured the area to survey other homes with a side wall greater than 60 ft. He found 21 examples of homes with side walls greater than 60 ft and five of those with a side wall greater than 70 ft. After the most recent meeting, per the direction of P&Z, he looked at the ridgeline of the structure. Mr. Bendon noted and discussed the progression of design for each step with P&Z. He provided slides of the design iterations. He noted the applicant is passionate about the living space on the 2nd floor. He discussed the most recent change of the ridgeline to articulate the building horizontally and vertically to provide clear separation of the building masses. He also mentioned the neighbor to the west who has developed up to property line and the applicant has not stated this is a site specific issue. The applicant prefers to have a good separation and the design reflects this situation. Mr. Bendon noted the Residential Design Standards (RDS) were created to make sure the lowest common denominator was lifted at some basic core design level. Regardless of style, the commission can provide flexibility to ensure horrible structures do not get approved for development. He stated the proposed structure is a nice design including articulation and they feel it is a nice addition to the neighborhood. Mr. Bendon stated they feel you can find intent behind the articulation standard. Multiple forms are used to break up the wall planes both horizontally and vertically as well as with materials. He displayed two pictures from Mr. Hoffman’s survey and discussed how the articulation standard was applied in past projects. One being the Studio B project which is on a corner lot and the garage represents the detached portion. He noted both of these examples are longer than the proposed structure and were approved within the last five to ten years. He displayed pictures of a building on Hallam St and 3rd St. He believes it recently received its Certificate of Occupancy (CO) and noted it has a more traditional look but with a similar dumbbell massing. He closed by displaying a picture of the current design and stated the applicant plans to live here and is committed to the neighborhood. Mr. Hoffman has taken additional steps to meet with neighbors independently of the required noticing. Mr. Goode asked if there were questions for the applicant. Mr. McNellis asked if the current design included changes to the setbacks, especially on 4th St. Mr. Bendon stated the only change was to the ridgeline of the roof structure. Mr. Hoffman pointed out the changes noting the height of the right side was raised a little bit to promote the separation. Mr. McNellis asked Staff if the standard speaks to creating the separation as the applicant has presented. Mr. Anderson feels the standard speaks to articulation clearly with three concrete options. The first design was based on a variation to option one. The last two design iterations have been based on option three to achieve the articulation requirement. Mr. Anderson stated there is the intent and P3 IV.A. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 4 then the hard numbers of what the forms should be under the options. Staff feels there was thought put behind the dimensions described in the code, but he agrees with the applicant there are aspects reflecting articulation. The question is whether or not the numbers defined within the standards are the measurements at which we achieve what the standards are pursuing. Staff can’t make this determination and it is up to P&Z to determine. Mr. Goode then opened for public comment. There were none appearing so he closed this portion of the hearing. Mr. Goode then opened for commissioner discussion. Ms. McNicholas Kury feels it clearly meets part of the standard but questions if it meets the traditional and historical neighborhood context part of the requirement. She feels the applicant has identified good examples of similar articulations existing within the neighborhood. Mr. Walterscheid stated he was inclined to vote in favor of the project. He feels they are meeting the intent of request to provide multiple forms and also believes it is in character with the surrounding neighborhood. He doesn’t feel the application should be judged on historic forms, and does not want to see a recreation of a Victorian home. In response to Ms. McNicholas Kury’s concerns, he wants to promote diversity over what may be deemed historic. Mr. McNellis agrees with Mr. Walterscheid. He feels the applicant has responded to P&Z’s comments and it comes down to intent for him. Because of their efforts to separate the two masses and shorten the building, he is inclined to approve the application. Mr. Morris is also inclined to move forward with the application. He doesn’t want to design the structure or make a determination regarding the historic character in the area. He feels they have moved to address the intent requirements. Mr. Goode agrees with the other commissioners. Mr. Walterscheid motioned to approve the resolution (Number 10, Series 2016) approving the requested variation. Ms. McNicholas Kury seconded the motion. Mr. Goode requested a roll call. Roll Call: Mr. Walterscheid, yes; Ms. McNicholas Kury, yes; Mr. McNellis, yes; Mr. Morris, yes; and Mr. Goode, yes; for a total five Yes votes and zero No votes (5-0). The motion passed. Mr. Goode then closed the hearing. P4 IV.A. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 5 Public Hearing – 230 E Hopkins (Mountain Forge Building) – Remand Hearing for Resolution 5, Series 2016 Mr. Goode opened the remand public hearing. Ms. Sara Nadolny, Planner Tech, noted she had provided the affidavits of notice to Ms. Bryan for review. Ms. Bryan responded she found the notices to be proper. Ms. Nadolny introduced Ms. Dana Ellis and Mr. John Rowland, Rowland & Broughton, as the applicant’s representatives. Ms. Nadolny reviewed the review history for the project. She noted it went before Council on the September 26, 2016 meeting and Council decided to remand the project for discussion on two aspects: 1. Asymmetrical roof forms found on the corners of the building 2. Massing of the building along Monarch St Ms. Nadolny then reviewed the options for P&Z and noted P&Z is the final review authority. 1. Uphold their previous decision and make no changes to Resolution 5, Series 2016 2. Request changes to the project 3. Continue the hearing to obtain further information from the applicant Ms. Nadolny reminded P&Z the building is located in a Mixed Use zone district and the height limitation is 28 ft and 32 ft can be achieved through commercial design review. The building as it exists today is nonconforming in measured height. The current height is 34 ft 8 in as measured with the existing sunken area next to the building. She then noted the nonconformity may be retained or lessened, but not expanded. She stated the applicant had previously proposed a gable form to replace the shred roof. The nonconforming area has been lessened and now measures at 34 ft 5.5 in. The applicant requested the 32 ft height variance on the other side to finish off the gable which P&Z previously granted. If the roof was to be completely symmetrical, there would be a height issue. The applicant has chosen to carry the asymmetrical gable to the alley side of the façade to create balance with the other end of the building. Ms. Nadolny then reviewed the massing of the project providing a slide of the current massing. She stated Council found the proposed massing to be too heavy, distracting from a comfortable pedestrian environment and scale. Council focused on the center element of the building and did not provide specific suggestions as to what they preferred. They did state they wanted the façade to be broken up somehow. She stated Staff has previously supported this design and have no specific concerns regarding the massing. Staff has met with the applicant to brainstorm on how to address Council’s concerns. They looked at setting back the second floor, re-dividing the building levels using dimensions and/or materials. Other ideas to be considered at final design to possibly address Council’s concerns included the following. P5 IV.A. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 6 1. Adding a mid-block door – She noted the proposed design currently has doors at each side of the building. 2. Change the Window size 3. Use of materials to soften the center module 4. Landscaping to help dictate the pedestrian experience with the building Staff’s recommendation is to not change the roof forms and they continue to support the current design. Staff is open to suggested changes. Mr. Goode asked if the commissioners had any questions for Staff. Mr. McNellis asked if the setbacks for the proposed building were the same as the existing building on Monarch St. Ms. Nadolny with the applicant filling in the window well, the nonconformity will be reduced. Mr. John Rowland, stated the proposed building is 18 in further back and the exterior wall will be in the same location. Mr. Goode then turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. Rowland stated they were left a bit sour by Council’s review, although he understands how they might perceive the massing of the proposed structure. He stated they have not prepared any changes for the P&Z hearing but are open to discussing any ideas or suggested changes. Ms. Ellis added they feel pretty strongly that a lot of their concerns can be addressed with window configurations and materiality. Mr. Rowland added first and foremost, community is number one and they want the community to be proud of the project. Ms. Ellis provided a slide exhibiting how changing the window configuration may provide the perception of a taller façade. Mr. Rowland stated because of the building’s location, they do not want a strong commercial look. He also noted they recently remodeled the interior for a tenant who plans to return after the structure remodel has been completed. Ms. Ellis pointed out the asymmetrical gables are a way to reference the gables in the direct vicinity without copying what already exists. They don’t want to copy the historic gables located nearby. Ms. Ellis provided a slide depicting possible changes with window configuration changes and proposed materials. She reminded P&Z it is a remodel and not a new building and felt perhaps Council may have been looking at it as redeveloped building. Ms. Ellis Dana reviewed how they approached gaining more sf without physically adding to the building. She hopes P&Z is supportive the small addition. She also provided examples of potential material approaches. Mr. Rowland concluded their presentation and asked for questions. Mr. Goode asked if the commissioners had any questions for the applicant. There was none. Mr. Goode asked for comment from the public. There was none so he closed this portion of the hearing. Mr. Goode then opened for commissioner discussion. Mr. Walterscheid stated he is in favor recommending approval and looks forward to the final review. P6 IV.A. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission December 13, 2016 7 Mr. Morris agrees. He sees where Council may feel the massing appears to be heavy and asked the applicant to look into addressing it in the final review. Mr. McNellis does not feel the need to change the design. He understands Council’s concerns and feels there should be some attempt to respond to the tension of the mid-block of the building. He thought the middle portion may look a bit institutional, but felt the applicant could address this with fenestration and materiality. Ms. McNicholas Kury respectfully disagrees with Council regarding their concerns of the asymmetrical roof forms. She also feels the massing is appropriate for this location. Ms. McNicholas motioned to uphold Resolution 5, Series 2016. Mr. Morris seconded the motion. Mr. Goode requested a roll call. Roll Call: Ms. McNicholas Kury, yes; Mr. Morris, yes; Mr. McNellis, yes; Mr. Walterscheid, yes; and Mr. Goode, yes; for a total five Yes votes and zero No votes (5-0). The motion passed. Mr. Goode then closed the hearing. OTHER BUSINESS None. Mr. Goode closed the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager P7 IV.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 1 of 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Justin Barker, Senior Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director RE: Aspen City Offices, 427 Rio Grande Place – Major Public Project Review Resolution No. __, Series of 2017 – Public Hearing DATE: January 3, 2017 APPLICANT /OWNER: City of Aspen REPRESENTATIVE: Lamont Planning Services Charles Cunniffe Architects LOCATION: 427, 455 & 480 Rio Grande Place CURRENT ZONING Public (PUB) w/ PD Overlay SUMMARY: The applicant requests P&Z recommend approval to City Council to merge two lots with a portion of a third, develop a new City office building and renovate the Rio Grande Building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends P&Z continue the hearing to January 17th. Locator Map Current image of ACRA offices on subject property P8 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 2 of 8 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning & Zoning Commission: • Major Public Project Review – (Chapter 26.500) for development proposed by a governmental entity. (See “Staff Evaluation” for full description of this review process). This is a two-step process, with P&Z making recommendation to Council. Council has the final decision-making authority. The expected hearing process includes an overview of the request on January 3rd, with responses to P&Z comments, staff recommendation and recommendation to Council occurring at the second meeting, with a potential third meeting if necessary. BACKGROUND: The proposed project site includes 3 lots from the Rio Grande Subdivision: Lot 2 (41,033 sf), Lot 4 (8,276 sf), and a portion of Lot 1 (25,744 sf). These lots are identified in Figure 1 below, with the proposed project site outlined in black. Lot 2 currently includes the public parking garage, ACRA offices and a portion of the Pitkin County Library. Lot 4 currently includes the Rio Grande building which houses Taster’s Pizza and various offices. Lot 1 is a large lot divided by the Rio Grande Place right-of-way that includes the Rio Grande Park, John Denver Sanctuary, recycling center and surface parking lots. The portion south of Rio Grande Place is included in this proposal and currently contains surface parking lots used by ACRA, Community Bank and the Mill Street Condos. All three lots are zoned Public (PUB). Figure 1 – Subject properties (project site in black) LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 4 P9 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 3 of 8 PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to merge Lots 2 & 4 with a portion of Lot 1, remodel the existing Rio Grande building, and construct a new 37,443 square foot office building. The proposed new office building will be located on top of and in front of (where ACRA currently is located) the parking garage. The building is one story from the Galena Plaza side and three stories from the Rio Grande side and will have a connection with the Rio Grande building beneath the new exterior stairway. The programming for the building includes: • 15,203 sq. ft. of offices for approximately 100 City of Aspen staff • 3,856 sq. ft. of meeting space • 2,400 sq. ft. innovation/training center • 15,947 sq. ft. of lobby, circulation, storage, mechanical The remodel of the Rio Grande building is mostly interior with potential minor upgrades to the north building entrance. The applicant also proposes to renovate the existing Galena Plaza space with new landscaping and pathways. The proposed dimensional requirements are provided in Table 1. Table 1: Proposed Dimensional Requirements Dimensions Proposed Lot size 1.723 acres (75,053 sq. ft.) Maximum height 45 ft. 3 in. Minimum floor heights 1st & 2nd floor-to-floor – 12 ft. 6 in. 3rd floor – 12 ft. 8 in. Gross square footage New structure – 37,443 sq. ft. Parking garage – 137,461 sq. ft. Rio Grande building – 6,800 sq. ft. Total – 181,704 sq. ft. Commercial net leasable 1,002 sq. ft. Off-street parking spaces 19 spaces STAFF EVALUATION: Public Project (Exhibit A): The proposed project is subject to Major Public Project review. The Public Project review process was adopted by City Council in December 2015 to bring the Land Use Code into compliance with Colorado Revised Statute §31-23-209. Public Project review is an alternative process for development projects submitted by governmental entities, quasi-municipal organizations, or public agencies providing essential services to the public. The review process includes a requirement to provide a decision within 60 days of application, however this time limitation is not applicable to City of Aspen projects. The following sections of the Land Use Code apply to the proposed project: Subdivision, Planned Development, Commercial Design and Growth Management. Staff responses to each section are detailed in Exhibits B-E, with specific highlights noted in the sections below. P10 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 4 of 8 Subdivision (Exhibit B): As part of the proposal, the applicant is requesting to merge Lots 2 & 4 with a portion of Lot 1 (see Figure 2 below). Lot 1 consists of a much larger area which covers most of the area between Mill Street, Rio Grande Place, and the Roaring Fork River. The resultant lot area would be approximately 75,053 sq. ft. (about 1.72 acres). The purpose of combining these into one lot is to retain all functions of the proposed development on one lot, as well as to simplify the building, zoning and other development review requirements. As part of the subdivision, the applicant is proposing a protected view corridor that is approximately 74 ft. wide to preserve the views north from Galena Plaza. Generally, it is appropriate to create lot lines that align with the Original Townsite Plat. These properties were not a part of the Original Townsite and have often been shaped according to the topography and/or development that has occurred over time in this area. Additionally, it is not typical to have a lot divided by right-of-way and would be better to separate these two distinct sections of Lot 1 to better reflect typical lot patterns. Staff supports the proposed subdivision as it will be beneficial to the function of this development and supports the review criteria. Figure 2 – Proposed subdivision (final lot boundary in black) LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 4 Approximate view corridor P11 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 5 of 8 Planned Development (Exhibit C): As a property within the Public zone district, the property is required to go through a Planned Development review to establish dimensional requirements. Typically, Planned Development is a two-step process including Project Review (uses, layout, mass scale, dimensions) and Detailed Review (landscape, fenestration, materials, lighting). As a Public Project, Project Review and Detailed Review are consolidated into one review, with a recommendation from P&Z and final approval on all aspects of the project from City Council. There are several criteria within Planned Development that are similar to those in Commercial Design. This section will focus on the site planning aspects. Overall, staff is supportive of the proposal. There are a few issues related to access and site planning that need to be addressed prior to final approval. There are several existing trees to be removed as part of this proposal. The Parks Department has suggested they would like to see more of the perimeter trees preserved. There are also no snow storage areas identified within the application. These will need to be identified and approved by Parks and Engineering prior to approval. The Engineering Department has also raised several concerns related to stormwater treatment and retention, and requested additional information related to the routing of stormwater, bioretention planting and the green roof materials. There are several improvement measures that are proposed as part of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Engineering has noted that the project still needs to mitigate for eight (8) more trips. They have requested additional information regarding the proposed Galena Street shuttle stop and suggested the applicant discuss additional options with them. There are also Engineering design guidelines that have not been met with the current proposal and there needs to be further discussion related to the Mill Street curb cut access and Complete Street improvements. Environmental Health and the Fire District do not support the proposed trash location and have requested the applicant relocate the trash to the first floor to be accessed from the parking lot. The applicant has indicated they will explore this option for feasibility. Fire has also expressed some concerns related to the parking garage access from the northwest corner. The new design has impacts to this emergency access that need to be addressed. The applicant is requesting an allowance to increase the allowable square footage of the new building by 10% to 41,300 square feet to provide design and programming flexibility. The applicant has indicated that the height of the building and the proposed view corridor would not be affected by any increase in square feet. Since Project Review and Detailed Review are consolidated under the Public Project review process, any allowance to increase square footage granted by Council would be memorialized in the Final approval. If any other dimensions are affected by the increased square footage, staff recommends Council require an amendment to address and memorialize any other changes. Commercial Design (Exhibit D): This project is subject to Commercial Design review. The project site is located within the River Approach Character Area of the “Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines”. P12 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 6 of 8 Staff’s main concerns are related to the details and materials. The Galena Plaza (south) side of the structure provides a successful perception of height variation from the pedestrian level through a large canopy over the entry, varied building heights, and set back forms (see Figure 3 below). The Rio Grande (north) side sets back the third floor, but the second-floor height is the same height for a significant length of about 2/3rds of a downtown block (see Figures 4 & 5 below), and lacks the variation suggested by the guidelines. The architect has used materials and building forms to help break up the scale of this façade, but some additional height variation on the Rio Grande side of the building is suggested to help better achieve the guidelines and deemphasize the width of the building. Figure 3 – East Galena Plaza elevation Figure 4 – South Rio Grande elevation Figure 5 – South Rio Grande perspective The proposed design provides a human scale at the Galena Plaza level by being a one-story mass, incorporating a large canopy over the entry, and varied masses and roof profiles. The Rio Grande side of the building starts to provide a human scale by including an arcade entry into the building. However, there is little else that is done to help reduce the scale of the building at the ground floor. Staff would like to see more variation in material and detailing on the ground floor that improve the human scale and provide a strong differentiation between levels, similar to the arcade. More horizontal separation and detailing could help reduce the perceived scale of the building and create a more approachable structure from the Rio Grande side. P13 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 7 of 8 The proposed materials include modular brick veneer, stone composite panel, and metal zinc panel. The brick veneer is intended to relate to the Victorian era development of the commercial core while using the stone panel as a way to denote hierarchy. Although these are all high quality, durable materials, the material combination seems to struggle between historic relationship and modern application without successfully accomplishing either. The combination results in a somewhat “institutional” appearance. As a new prominent civic building in a unique context, this presents an opportunity to showcase creativity and innovation and represent the spirit of the City government, while creating a strong architectural transition between downtown and nature. The new restrooms in Rio Grande Park (see Figure 6) are highly successful architecture in this area by using a modern application of native river rock while relating to the more industrial quality with rusted steel roofs and beams. Another example is the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District affordable housing (see Figure 7). This project uses wood as well as the rusted metal as siding. The materials for each of these projects soften the building appearance and allow it to blend in with the surroundings. Although the context is not exactly the same, staff suggests that the materials for the new building pull more inspiration from the river corridor and embrace the less formal context of this area vs. the downtown. Growth Management (Exhibit E): The proposed project has been determined as an essential public facility. There are two unique features of essential public facilities in terms of Growth Management: 1. There is no annual allotment limit. 2. Employee generation is determined by P&Z or HPC. City Council may then assess, waive, or partially waive any mitigation requirement. Although employee generation is determined by P&Z, the Public zone district provides for an employee generation rate of 5.1 employees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area. This is Figure 6 – photo courtesy of CCA Figure 7 – photo courtesy of Jeffrey Halferty Design P14 VI.A. Aspen City Offices – Staff Memo 1.3.17 Page 8 of 8 based on office type uses, which is the primary use of the proposed facility. Using this generation rate, the proposed addition would generate approximately 145 employees. The Land Use Code notes that “each Essential Public Facility proposal shall be evaluated for actual employees generated.” The applicant states that construction of the new building is designed to accommodate 100 employees according to the City’s Facilities Master Plan. The APCHA Board is scheduled to review the application on January 11th. The application analyzed the employee generation based on the number of employees that will work in the building based on future projections. It is anticipated that 100 FTEs will occupy the building at full capacity by 2030. There are currently 14 FTEs located within the ACRA offices, which would serve as credit and will likely be relocated to the Armory. This creates a net increase of 86 FTEs for the new development. This method is consistent with the approved project at 540 E. Main Street (Aspen Police Department) as well as typical growth management review which provides a credit for existing development. The applicant proposes to mitigate for 60% of the 86 employees generated (51.6 FTEs) through existing City-owned units that have not been provided as mitigation for other City projects. REFERRAL DEPARTMENTS: The application was reviewed by Engineering, Building, Zoning, Parks, Transportation, Environmental Health, Sanitation District, and the Fire District. The APCHA board will be reviewing the application on January 11th. All received comments are included in Exhibit F, with applicable comments included in the draft resolution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that P&Z continue the public hearing to January 17th. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to continue the public hearing for Aspen City Offices to January 17th.” EXHIBITS: A. Review Criteria – Public Project B. Review Criteria – Subdivision C. Review Criteria – Planned Development D. Review Criteria – Commercial Design E. Review Criteria – Growth Management F. DRC Comments G. Application P15 VI.A. Aspen City Offices Resolution No._, Series 2017 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2017) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL GRANT MAJOR PUBLIC PROJECT REVIEW APPROVAL FOR 427, 455 & 480 RIO GRANDE PLACE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2 & 4, RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-06-851, 2737-073-06-852, 2737-073-06-854 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application for the Aspen City Offices (the Application) from the City of Aspen (Applicant) for Major Public Project Review for Lots 1, 2 & 4, Rio Grande Subdivision according to the Plat thereof recorded October 18, 1993 Reception No. 362199 and as amended by Rio Grande Subdivision and Pitkin County Center Lot Line Adjustment recorded July 5, 2002 at Reception No. 469504; and, WHEREAS, all code citation references are to the City of Aspen Land Use Code in effect on the day of initial application – November 14, 2016, as applicable to this project; and, WHEREAS, this property is located in the Public (PUB) zone district; and, WHEREAS, as a governmental agency, the Applicant has requested this Application to be reviewed as a Public Project, pursuant to Chapter 26.500.030 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department referred the Application to Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building Department, Fire Protection District, Environmental Health Department, Parks Department, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, Public Works Department, and the Transportation Department, and received comments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the proposed Application and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, a summary of public outreach was provided by the applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304.035, and the public was provided full access to review the Application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed the Application at a duly noticed public hearing on January 3, 2017, during which the recommendations of the Community Development Director and comments from the public were heard by the Planning & Zoning Commission, and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of ____ to ____ (_ – _). P16 VI.A. Aspen City Offices Resolution No._, Series 2017 Page 2 of 4 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Approvals Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends City Council grant the Aspen City Offices Major Public Project review approval, subject to the recommended conditions of approval as listed herein. The proposed project includes reconfiguration of three (3) parcels to create two (2) new parcels, renovate the Rio Grande Building, demolish the existing office structure and construct a new office building. The recommended dimensions are attached as Exhibit I. Section 2: Subsequent Reviews Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant is required to obtain Public Project Review approval from the City Council. Prior to second reading of the ordinance by the City Council, applicant shall: 1. Further study the use of materials that relate to the river corridor and reinforce a less formal context. 2. Further study providing height variation at the second floor on the north façade. 3. Further study additional variation in material and detail on the ground floor of the north façade to provide more human scale and a strong differentiation between levels. 4. Further study relocating the trash and recycle area to the first floor. 5. Provide an exterior accessible route located near the exterior grand stairway. 6. Revise the Mill Street and Rio Grande Place rights-of-way in accordance with Parks and Engineering requirements. 7. Provide additional documentation related to the proposed stormwater techniques and materials. 8. Determine all necessary infrastructure upgrades with Engineering and Utilities. 9. Resolve access and egress issues related to the northwest corner of the parking garage with the Fire District. 10. Identify snow storage areas. 11. Provide a revised Transportation Impact Analysis. 12. Provide a revised tree removal plan. Section 3: Employee Generation The Planning & Zoning Commission has determined that the Employees Generated, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.100 for the new development is eighty-six (86) employees. The rate of affordable housing mitigation required for the new development is determined by the City Council. Section 4: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development P17 VI.A. Aspen City Offices Resolution No._, Series 2017 Page 3 of 4 approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 5: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6: 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. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 3rd day of January, 2017. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: _______________________________ ___________________________________ Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Keith Goode, Chair Attest: _______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Attachments: Exhibit I: Recommended Dimensional Requirements P18 VI.A. Aspen City Offices Resolution No._, Series 2017 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit I – Recommended Dimensional Requirements Dimensions Proposed Lot size 1.723 acres (75,053 sq. ft.) Maximum height 45 ft. 3 in. Minimum floor heights 1st & 2nd floor-to-floor – 12 ft. 6 in. 3rd floor – 12 ft. 8 in. Gross square footage New structure – 37,443 sq. ft. Parking garage – 137,461 sq. ft. Rio Grande building – 6,800 sq. ft. Total – 181,704 sq. ft. Commercial net leasable 1,002 sq. ft. Off-street parking spaces 19 spaces P19 VI.A. Exhibit A – Public Project Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT A PUBLIC PROJECT 26.500.070 General review standards The following review standards shall be used in review of any application for Public Projects: 1. The proposed project complies with the zone district limitations, or is otherwise compatible with neighborhood context; and Staff Findings: The project site is located within the Public (PUB) zone district. The proposed use as a government office building is an allowed use within the zone district. The Public zone district establishes all dimensional requirements for a project through the adoption of a Planned Development approval. Detailed responses to neighborhood context are in Exhibits B-E. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed project supports stated community goals; and Staff Findings: The proposed project supports several community goals found within the Civic Master Plan (detailed responses in Exhibit C) and the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). AACP goals supported by this project include: Aspen Idea II.1. Maintain the legacy of the Aspen Idea by enhancing and preserving our non-profit and quasi-public facilities and spaces, and ensuring that development of new facilities is consistent with community goals. Managing Growth for Community & Economic Sustainability VI.2. Public sector development should be a model for the ideals reflected in this plan, and should comply with the Land Use Code. Managing Growth for Community & Economic Sustainability VI.3. Preserve and enhance our non-profit and quasi-public facilities and spaces. Transportation II.2. Expand and improve bicycle parking/storage in the UGB. Transportation II.3. Improve the convenience, safety and quality of experience for bicyclist and pedestrians on streets and trails. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed project complies with all other applicable requirements of the Land Use Code; and Staff Findings: See detailed responses to applicable Code sections in Exhibits B-E. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed project receives all development allotments required by Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. P20 VI.A. Exhibit A – Public Project Page 2 of 2 Staff Findings: The proposed project is requesting allotments for 37,044 sq. ft. of essential public facility. See detailed responses in Exhibit E. Staff finds this criterion to be met. P21 VI.A. Exhibit B –Subdivision Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT B SUBDIVISION 26.480.040. General subdivision review standards. All subdivisions shall be required to conform to the following general standards and limitations in addition to the specific standards applicable to each type of subdivision: A. Guaranteed Access to a Public Way. All subdivided lots must have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed subdivision shall not eliminate or obstruct legal vehicular access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Subdivision retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Staff Findings: The proposal is to merge two lots with a portion of a third. The resultant lot will still retain access from public ways, including Rio Grande Place, Mill Street, and Galena Street. No legal access points are proposed to change as part of this proposal. No streets are retained under private ownership. The only security gates in the proposal are the existing gates for the public parking garage. These are existing and are not proposed for change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Alignment with Original Townsite Plat. The proposed lot lines shall approximate, to the extent practical, the platting of the Original Aspen Townsite, and additions thereto, as applicable to the subject land. Minor deviations from the original platting lines to accommodate significant features of the site may be approved. Staff Findings: The project site is located just outside the Original Aspen Townsite area to the north. This lot configuration in this area does not contain a consistent pattern, largely due to the topography and ownership transfers. Alignment with the Townsite is not necessary within this area and would be difficult given the adjacent lot alignments. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. C. Zoning Conformance. All new lots shall conform to the requirements of the zone district in which the property is situated, including variations and variances approved pursuant to this Title. A single lot shall not be located in more than one zone district unless unique circumstances dictate. A rezoning application may be considered concurrently with subdivision review. Staff Findings: All of the subject lots are located within the Public (PUB) zone district. The proposed lot merge is in conformance with all zone district requirements. All changes to these properties will be documented within the Planned Development Approval Documents. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Existing Structures, Uses, and Non-Conformities. A subdivision shall not create or increase the non-conformity of a use, structure or parcel. A rezoning application or other mechanism to correct the non-conforming nature of a use, structure, or parcel may be considered concurrently. P22 VI.A. Exhibit B –Subdivision Page 2 of 4 In the case where an existing structure or use occupies a site eligible for subdivision, the structure need not be demolished and the use need not be discontinued prior to application for subdivision. If approval of a subdivision creates a non-conforming structure or use, including a structure spanning a parcel boundary, such structure or use may continue until recordation of the subdivision plat. Alternatively, the City may accept certain assurance that the non-conformities will be remedied after recordation of the subdivision plat. Such assurances shall be reflected in a development agreement or other legal mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney and may be time-bound or secured with a financial surety. Staff Findings: The proposed development will not create any nonconformities. All dimensional requirements will be established through the Planned Development Approval. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.480.070.A. Land Subdivision. The division or aggregation of land for the purpose of creating individual lots or parcels shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied according to the following standards: 1. The proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of Section 26.480.040 – General Subdivision Review Standards. Staff Findings: See responses above. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed subdivision enables an efficient pattern of development that optimizes the use of the limited amount of land available for development. Staff Findings: The proposed lot merger allows the new development to be contained within one lot and the creation of a protected view corridor. Having all development on one lot simplifies the approval and legal documents as well as the building, zoning and other development review requirements. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed subdivision preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. Staff Findings: There are no important geological features on the site. There are several existing trees proposed for removal which are discussed in the Planned Development Review Criteria (Exhibit A). There is a prominent existing view from Galena Plaza toward the north. A 74 ft.-wide protected view corridor is proposed as part of the subdivision plat to retain a large portion of that view. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed subdivision prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City P23 VI.A. Exhibit B –Subdivision Page 3 of 4 Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted with specific design details and timing of implementation addressed through a Development Agreement pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. Staff Findings: The project site does not contain any land that is unsuitable for development due to hazards. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that the proposed development will meet the requirements of the URMP and the Engineering Design Standards. The Engineering Department has raised several concerns related to stormwater treatment and retention, and requested additional information related to the routing of stormwater, bioretention planting and the green roof materials. These issues are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. 6. The proposed subdivision shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the subdivision. Improvements shall be at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Findings: The application includes ability to serve letters from utility providers. The applicant believes there is adequate capacity for the development and will provide upgrades if determined necessary through final design. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition to determine any necessary upgrades prior to Council approval. 7. The proposed subdivision is exempt from or has been granted all growth management approvals pursuant to Chapter 26.470 – Growth Management Quota System, including compliance with all affordable housing requirements for new and replacement development as applicable. Staff Findings: The existing Rio Grande is exempt from growth management review. The new development to be located in the subdivision is being reviewed for growth management concurrently as part of a consolidated application through the Public Project review process. Staff findings for Growth Management are located in Exhibit C. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. The proposed subdivision meets the School Land Dedication requirements of Chapter 26.620 and any land proposed for dedication meets the criteria for land acceptance pursuant to said Chapter. Staff Findings: The proposed subdivision does not include any residential dwelling units. Only residential development is subject to School Land Dedication requirements. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. P24 VI.A. Exhibit B –Subdivision Page 4 of 4 9. A Subdivision Plat shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. Staff Findings: The application includes a draft subdivision plat to be recorded upon final approval. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 10. A Development Agreement shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that a Development Agreement will be drafted upon final approval and will be recorded. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that a Development Agreement is provided to Community Development for review and approval following Council approval. P25 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 1 of 12 EXHIBIT C PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 26.445.050. Project Review Standards. The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The underlying zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. Staff Findings: The proposed development is subject to the Civic Master Plan, a regulatory document adopted in 2006. Core principles include the following: • “Civic & Arts/Cultural uses belong in the heart of downtown.” • “Mixed use buildings and mixed use areas create vibrant, memorable places.” • “Focus on creating great people places.” • “Affordable housing and affordable commercial space ensures viability of civic functions and vitality of town.” • “Civic planning must address the need for parking while not inducing additional traffic.” • “Pedestrian orientation creates connections between neighborhoods.” Within Section I, Locally Serving, Locally Owned Businesses, the advisory group identify the City-Owned Parking Lots as needing a clear demarcation as the end of an urban block and may be an ideal site for neighborhood commercial uses and affordable housing, or a shared- use arts facility if it is determined that such a facility is needed. Although the proposal does not include new commercial or affordable housing, the development is successful in helping to define the urban edge. Additionally, the parking lot on the corner is still retained and could serve as a future location for the identified uses. Within Section II, The Arts in Aspen, the Galena Plaza site was identified as a potential location for a shared arts facility. This section also identifies a portion of the parking lots as an option for a performing arts facility. The advisory group recommended that if a shared-use arts facility is not constructed that a one-story building and either a shared Public Meeting Hall or a future Visitors Center at the north edge of Galena Plaza would be appropriate. The P26 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 2 of 12 proposal includes a one-story building height on the Galena Plaza side that contains multiple public meeting spaces. The large public meeting hall fronting Galena Plaza is intended to serve as a temporary meeting space until renovations at the Armory are completed. Staff suggests that this space could be later converted into a more multi-function space that could be used for arts or perhaps a neighborhood commercial space or visitor center. Section III, Local Government, identifies the meeting space needs for the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as an issued. Pitkin County is currently constructing a new facility to improve space allocation and a new meeting room has been developed at the adjacent Library. The proposed development includes more meeting space to support this space need. The advisory group also identified the former Youth Center (Rio Grande building) as appropriate for a range of civic and/or cultural uses. This section also identifies the current ACRA visitors center as inadequate and suggests an optimal location would be close to parking and the downtown, and includes the former Youth Center or north edge of Galena Plaza as potential locations for this use. Final location for ACRA is not yet determined, but will be further vetted when the Armory Building renovation is further detailed. Section IV, Public Open Space, supports creating a demarcated edge for Rio Grande Park through development on the city-owned parking lots. The plan also supports the expanded library onto Galena Plaza and development of a one-story building (potentially a Visitor Center or Public Meeting Hall) on the north edge with the bulk of the building extending down to Rio Grande Place. The advisory group recommended that a building on the north edge could be a welcoming and interactive destination point and feature a range of civic and/or cultural uses. The plan supports renovation of the Rio Grande building, retaining and enhancing the open space at the center of Galena Plaza and improving the pedestrian way from Main Street through to Rio Grande Park, which are all part of the proposed development. Section V, Pedestrian Movement, recommends that buildings within the civic core should incorporate elements to enhance the pedestrian experience. It also includes recommendations for improving the existing stairwell, including a building at the north edge of the plaza and creating a clear edge and demarcation between urban blocks. Staff finds that the proposed development is consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan. B. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. P27 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 3 of 12 Staff Findings: The project site is not located within the Aspen mudflow or debris zone or 100- year floodplain. The geotechnical report included in the application did not identify any potential hazards. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features. Staff Findings: The proposed structure responds to the topography by starting as a three-story building from the Rio Grande side and reducing to a one-story building from the Galena Plaza side. The renovated staircase follows the topography down the hill as it heads north. There are a number of existing trees to be removed as part of this proposal. The Parks Department has suggested they would like to see more of the perimeter trees preserved. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that a tree removal plan is provided that is acceptable to the Parks Department prior to Council approval. 2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. Staff Findings: There are no important structures or features that have historic cultural, visual or ecological importance. The applicant has proposed a protected view corridor that serves as an extension of Galena Street as a method to preserve the views from Galena Plaza toward Red Mountain and Smuggler Mountain. There are also several existing trees as noted in the staff response to Criterion 1 above that are proposed for removal. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that a tree removal plan is provided that is acceptable to the Parks Department prior to Council approval. 3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Staff Findings: The Rio Grande building will retain the existing orientation and access points. The new office building provides two main access points: Rio Grande Place and Galena Plaza. Both of these entrances are oriented toward public areas and respond to the neighborhood context. The building arrangement allows for emergency access from both Rio Grande Place and Galena Plaza. Service vehicles are proposed to access from the alley behind the Library. Environmental Health and the Fire District do not support this proposal and have requested the applicant relocate the trash to the first floor to be accessed from the parking lot. The applicant has indicated they will explore this option for feasibility. Fire has also expressed some concerns related to the parking garage access from the northwest corner. The new design has impacts to this emergency access that need to be addressed. Staff finds this criterion to be not met until an acceptable trash plan and access/egress plan for the parking garage have been established. P28 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 4 of 12 D. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: 1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. Staff Findings: The project site includes three properties which are all located within the Public (PUB) zone district. The Public zone district establishes all dimensional requirements for a project through the adoption of a Planned Development approval. The proposed dimensions are listed below: Dimensions Proposed Lot size 1.723 acres (75,054 sq. ft.) Maximum height 45 ft. 3 in. Minimum floor heights 1st & 2nd floor-to-floor – 12 ft. 6 in. 3rd floor – 12 ft. 8 in. Gross square footage New structure – 37,443 sq. ft. Parking garage – 137,461 sq. ft. Rio Grande building – 6,800 sq. ft. Total – 181,704 sq. ft. Commercial net leasable 1,002 sq. ft. Off-street parking spaces 19 spaces Since there are no established dimensions, the application does not require a variation. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. Staff Findings: The primary use of the project is for government offices and public meeting space. The City Asset Department performed a space need calculation on the anticipated programming for the space using industry office space standards. The proposed square footage is an appropriate amount to accommodate the proposed programming, which includes offices, public meeting space, storage, mechanical and circulation. As a civic building, it is important that there are adequate floor-to-ceiling heights that convey the use and are more in line with traditional civic building heights, which are often taller than residential or lodge uses and more comparable to ground floor commercial spaces (12-15 ft.). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. Staff Findings: Estimates of surrounding development include: Library – 19’ 6” tall, 34,743 sq. ft. Jail – 28’ tall, 190,433 sq. ft. Courthouse – 40’ tall, 200,658 sq. ft. P29 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 5 of 12 Mill St. Condos/Community Bank – 25-31’ tall, 13,688 sq. ft The proposed new structure measures about 17 ft. from the Galena Plaza side and 42 ft. from the Rio Grande side, although the upper floor is set back more than 15’ from the second floor, which measures 28’ 5” in height. The proposed gross area for the new structure is 37,443 sq. ft. The mass and height of this project represents the range that is found in the immediate vicinity and is organized in a manner that reduces the perceived size of the project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. 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, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement Staff Findings: There are currently 30 surface parking spaces on the project site. The new development and reconfiguration of the parking lots will retain 19 surface parking spaces for public use. The application also shows 6 parallel spaces located on Rio Grande Place that can be used for short-term public parking for a total of 25 spaces within the vicinity. The project is also located directly adjacent to and on top of the existing public parking garage, which contains 320 parking spaces. The first 20 minutes in the garage are free, however staff has suggested the applicant discuss the possibility of a free parking pass validation system with the Parking Department for business related to the city offices. In addition, the City provides several incentives for their employees to encourage alternative transportation to work including free bus passes and value cards, commuter incentive rewards program, CAR TO GO memberships, free We-Cycle passes, and flexible work schedules. These incentives help reduce the amount of employees that would otherwise require a parking space. The City also provides funding for RFTA, We-Cycle and the CAR TO GO program. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110 – Amendments. Staff Findings: The applicant is requesting an allowance to increase the allowable square footage by 10% to 41,300 square feet to provide design and programming flexibility. The applicant has indicated that the height of the building and the proposed view corridor would not be affected by any increase in square feet. Since Project Review and Detailed Review are consolidated under the Public Project review process, any allowance to increase square footage granted by Council would be memorialized in the Final approval. If any other dimensions are affected by the increased square footage, staff recommends Council require an amendment to address and memorialize any other changes. P30 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 6 of 12 E. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. Staff Findings: See responses in Exhibit D. Staff finds this criterion to be generally met. 2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. Staff Findings: See responses in Detailed Review Standards, Section D, below. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Findings: The proposal improves the pedestrian access through the site by reconstructing the existing staircase that connects from Galena Plaza down to Rio Grande Park. The proposal also includes new intersection bulb-outs, crosswalks and sidewalks to improve the pedestrian access along Rio Grande Place. There are several improvement measures that are proposed as part of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Both Transportation and Engineering Departments have review the TIA. Engineering has noted that the project still needs 8 more trips to mitigate the requirement. They have requested additional information regarding the proposed Galena Street shuttle stop and suggested the applicant discuss additional options with them. There are also Engineering design guidelines that have not been met with the current proposal. These design modifications are incorporated into the proposed resolution to be revised prior to Council approval. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that the applicant provide an updated TIA and design that is acceptable to Engineering prior to Council approval. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. P31 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 7 of 12 Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that the proposal will meet the requirements of the URMP and Engineering Design Standards. The Engineering Department has raised several concerns related to stormwater treatment and retention, and requested additional information related to the routing of stormwater, bioretention planting and the green roof materials. These issues are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Findings: The application includes ability to serve letters from all utility providers. At this time the applicant believes there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. The Engineering Department does not support connecting to the water line on Mill Street without further information and recommends a connection to Rio Grande Place. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. I. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Staff Findings: The proposal includes unobstructed vehicular access from Rio Grande Place. No legal access points are proposed to change as part of this proposal. No streets are retained under private ownership. The only security gates in the proposal are the existing gates for the public parking garage. These are existing and are not proposed for change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.445.070. Detailed Review Standards. Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review. Staff Findings: Project Review and Detailed Review have been consolidated into one review through the Public Projects review process. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. B. Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments. P32 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 8 of 12 Staff Findings: The Rio Grande building renovation does not require any GMQS allotments since there is no new square footage proposed. The applicant is requesting allotments for 37,044 sq. ft. of essential public facility for the new structure. This is being requested as part of the same consolidated review. See Exhibit C for staff responses related to GMQS. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well-designed 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. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space. Staff Findings: Landscaped areas include Galena Plaza with a planting area that wraps around the new structure, new trees along the edge of the Rio Grande building and staircase, and landscape buffers along the edge of Rio Grande Place and Mill Street. The plant list includes a variety of species suitable for the climate. As noted before, there are a number of existing trees to be removed as part of this proposal. The Parks Department has suggested they would like to see more of the perimeter trees preserved. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that a tree removal plan is provided that is acceptable to the Parks Department prior to Council approval. 2. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated. Staff Findings: The proposed development includes simple, at-grade entrances, either at the Rio Grande Place level or the Galena Plaza level and meets ADA requirements. There are no snow storage areas identified within the application. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that snow storage areas are identified and approved by Parks and Engineering prior to Council approval. 3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner that enhances the site. Staff Findings: There are no energy efficiency or production features that are proposed for the landscape. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 4. All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Staff Findings: Site lighting includes path lights along Rio Grande Place, step lights along the renovated staircase and an integrated bench light at the edge of Galena Plaza. The proposed site lighting is minimal in design and generally intended for safety and wayfinding purposes. P33 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 9 of 12 All proposed lighting is either downcast or concealed from view and will not create direct glare or hazardous interference. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Findings: Drainage has been designed to treat runoff and connect to the City storm systems. The Engineering Department has raised several concerns related to stormwater treatment and retention, and requested additional information related to the routing of stormwater, bioretention planting and the green roof materials. These issues are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. D. Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history. Staff Findings: Staff appreciates that the proposed design works to break down the perceived mass of the building through various forms and materials applications. The variation also helps to respond to the topography and create a transition between the downtown context on Galena Plaza toward the more natural context approaching Rio Grande Park. However, staff would like to see details that create a better interaction with the public realm, particularly on the Rio Grande side. This is the side of the building that a large portion of the public will interact with, particularly with the short-term parking accessed from this side. The detailing of this side of the building should create more visual interest and interact more with Rio Grande Park through a more clearly defined entry that faces the park, additional human-scaled detailing or perhaps some usable open space. The proposed materials include modular brick veneer, stone composite panel, and metal zinc panel. The brick veneer is intended to relate to the Victorian era development while using the stone panel as a way to denote hierarchy. Although these are all high quality, durable materials, the material combination seems to struggle between historic relationship and modern application without successfully accomplishing either. The combination results in a more “institutional” appearance that could be located anywhere. As a new prominent civic building in a unique context, this presents an opportunity to showcase creativity and innovation while creating a strong transition between downtown and nature. The new restrooms in Rio Grande Park are highly successful architecture in this area by using a modern application of native river rock while relating to the more industrial quality with rusted steel roofs and beams. The materials soften the building appearance and allow it to blend in with the surroundings. Although the context is not exactly the same, staff suggests that the materials pull more inspiration from the river corridor. Staff finds this criterion to be not met. P34 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 10 of 12 2. Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. Staff Findings: The proposed materials are high quality, durable, and comply with the applicable standards. Staff finds this criterion to be met, although there are concerns related to the use of materials outlined in Section 1 above. 3. Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects. Staff Findings: The two public entrances are both covered and protected from icing and snow shedding. Roof forms are also predominately flat, reducing the possibility of snow shedding from occurring at these locations. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that enhances the architecture. Staff Findings: The project includes solar panels on the roof, set back from the parapets to minimize the visual impact. The project also includes a geothermal heat system which will be completely invisible from both the interior and exterior of the building. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Staff Findings: Structure lighting includes wall mounted downcast lights near non-public entrances for safety purposes and recessed ceiling downcast lights near the covered public entries. These are all downcast lights focused at entry points and will not create direct glare or hazardous interference. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future development is required. Staff Findings: The applicant proposes a 74 ft.-wide protected view corridor across Galena Plaza to preserve the views from Galena Plaza to the north and from Rio Grande Park toward Aspen Mountain. This view corridor location and purpose will be incorporated into the Final Subdivision Plat and Development Agreement. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. P35 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 11 of 12 Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Staff Findings: The proposal improves the pedestrian access through the site by reconstructing the existing staircase that connects from Galena Plaza down to Rio Grande Park. The proposal also includes new intersection bulb-outs, crosswalks and sidewalks to improve the pedestrian access along Rio Grande Place. There are several improvement measures that are proposed as part of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Both Transportation and Engineering Departments have review the TIA. Engineering has noted that the project still needs 8 more trips to mitigate the requirement. They have requested additional information regarding the proposed Galena Street shuttle stop and suggested the applicant discuss additional options with them. There are also Engineering design guidelines that have not been met with the current proposal. These design modifications are incorporated into the proposed resolution to be revised prior to Council approval. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that the applicant provide an updated TIA and design that is acceptable to Engineering prior to Council approval. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that the proposal will meet the requirements of the URMP and Engineering Design Standards. The Engineering Department has raised several concerns related to stormwater treatment and retention, and requested additional information related to the routing of stormwater, bioretention planting and the green roof materials. These issues are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. P36 VI.A. Exhibit C – Planned Development Review Page 12 of 12 Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Staff Findings: The application includes ability to serve letters from all utility providers. At this time the applicant believes there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. The Engineering Department does not support connecting to the water line on Mill Street without further information and recommends a connection to Rio Grande Place. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. I. Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. All 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 Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Findings: The applicant does not propose phasing as part of this development plan. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. P37 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 1 of 11 EXHIBIT D COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS 26.412.050. Review Criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. Staff Findings: See staff findings from Section 26.412.060 below. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the façade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Findings: The proposed development does not convert an existing structure to commercial use. The only proposed commercial use is within the lower level of the Rio Grande building, which is proposed to remain. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. Staff Findings: See staff findings under River Approach Area below. 26.412.060. Commercial Design Standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public Amenity Space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method P38 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 2 of 11 or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff Findings: This project is not located within a zone district that requires public amenity space. Staff finds these criteria to be not applicable. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. Staff Findings: There is some discrepancy on whether the new structure and Rio Grande building show be considered separate buildings, as there is an underground corridor that connects them. This needs to be determined prior to City Council review. If the structures are considered separate, the proposed trash and recycle area meets the minimum size requirements. If the structures are considered the same building, the proposed trash and recycle area would need to be increased to 300 sq. ft. In either scenario, the proposal requires Special Review approval since there is no alley access. The enclosure must also provide 10’ of height clearance which is not clearly indicated in the application. Environmental Health and the Fire District are not supportive of the proposed trash and recycle location and operations. The applicant has indicated that they will pursue relocating this area to the ground floor to be accessed from the surface parking area. Staff finds this criteria to be not met at this time. P39 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 3 of 11 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. Staff Findings: The proposed transformer location is on the west side of the building between the new structure and the Mill Street Condos with access from the surface parking area including a proposed 10 ft. access easement. Utilities has requested that the plans show 10 ft. clearance in the front and 3 ft. clearance on all other sides of the transformer for the final plan set. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition to indicate clearances on the final plan set. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. Staff Findings: See discussion on utility, trash and recycle areas in subsections 1 & 2 above. Currently these are two separate areas with different access points. Relocation of the trash area to the lower level would consolidate access to all services from the same area. Staff finds this criterion to be not met at this time. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Staff Findings: The property does not adjoin a public alley. There is only an ingress easement across the library property into the parking garage. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Staff Findings: The proposed trash and recycle area is completely enclosed within the parking garage in the current submission. The transformer location is not fenced off, as Utilities prefers direct access. However, it is hidden behind the building and will not be visible from the public right-of-way. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. Staff Findings: The property is not adjacent to an alleyway, and will require Special Review approval. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the P40 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 4 of 11 extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Staff Findings: The proposed location for the transformer pedestal is on private property. The proposed draft subdivision plat includes a 10 ft. easement along the property boundary with Mill Street Condominiums for service provider access. There are no proposed encroachments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Staff Findings: The proposed new development does not contain a commercial or lodging component. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. Staff Findings: Although there is not technically a commercial tenant, the proposed public entrances both include vestibules. The existing commercial space on the lower level of the Rio Grande building also includes an existing vestibule. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 10. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that all mechanical exhaust will either be retained as existing or comply with this requirement. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that proposed venting locations are identified prior to Council approval. 11. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Staff Findings: The applicant has indicated that the design will accommodate this requirement. Staff finds this criterion to be met, with the condition that any proposed rooftop mechanical equipment locations are identified prior to Council approval. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be P41 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 5 of 11 varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). Staff Findings: Since this property is not adjacent to an alley, the application will require Special Review approval for an alternative location for the trash and recycle area. No other variations are requested. Commercial Design Guidelines – River Approach Area This parcel is designated as in the River Approach Character Area in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines. The River Approach consists of sloping topography and a more ‘organic’ street system. Existing buildings are relatively low in scale and lot coverage. The form of new development should respond to this setting, which is more natural and open in character. The falling terrain toward the river enhances the importance of this area, both as the introduction to the downtown as one approaches from the north and to areas of public open space. The design objectives for this character area are: 1. Establish an attractive gateway to the city center, as one approaches downtown from the north. 2. Establish street edges that invite pedestrian activity and promote an urban/industrial character along established street edges. 3. Highlight natural resources along edges of developed areas. 4. Provide an interconnected system of sidewalks and internal walkways that facilitate pedestrian circulation. Conceptual Review includes the following guidelines: Street & Alley System Staff Findings: The existing site includes an outdoor staircase that connects Galena Plaza to Rio Grande Place. The proposal improves the staircase by increasing the width and visibility and shortening the length. The staircase is directly accessible from pedestrian paths on both ends. The proposed design includes improved sidewalks, new bulb-outs and additional pedestrian crossings across Rio Grande Place. There are existing street trees which the applicant proposes to replace with new street trees. The proposal eliminates one curb cut to help reduce the number of potential conflicts for pedestrians. Staff finds these guidelines to be met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 3.1 Provide pedestrian connections through properties that link to public sidewalks and trails. • Also provide connections to outdoor use areas. 3.2 Define street edges with public sidewalks. • These should be of sufficient width to invite their use. • Street trees should be provided where space permits. 3.3 Minimize crossing conflicts for pedestrians. • Locate driveways and curb cuts to avoid crossing conflicts. P42 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 6 of 11 Parking Staff Findings: There are two existing surface parking areas located on the north portion of the project site. One of the parking areas is being eliminated to accommodate the new construction. The parking area at the intersection of Mill Street and Rio Grande Place is being reconfigured to accommodate additional spaces lost from the other parking area. Although the guidelines require surface parking to be located to the interior of the property, retaining parking in this area allows for that corner to be developed in the future with a different use that is in alignment with the Civic Master Plan (see Exhibit A). Additionally, the retained surface parking will be externally buffered with landscaping and internally planted to soften the design and minimize visual impacts. There is also an existing entrance to the public parking garage on Rio Grande Place, which will be retained. There are no feasible options to relocate entrances or create alley parking access. The parking garage contains over 300 parking spaces integrated into the hillside and underground. The parking garage entrance is better incorporated into the architecture by extending a portion of the building over the entrance and adding additional landscaping on both sides. Staff finds these guidelines to be met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 3.4 Minimize the visual impacts of parking. • Parking shall be placed underground wherever possible. • Where surface parking is permitted, it shall be located to the interior of the property. • Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and landscaped to soften design of parking area and provide solar shade. 3.5 Structured parking access should not have a negative impact on the character of the street. The access shall be: • Located on a secondary internal street where feasible. • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building façade. • Integrated into the building design • Where redevelopment occurs, alley parking access should be created. 3.6 Minimize the visual impacts of surface parking. • On small lots where limited surface parking in front of the building might be considered, it should be designed and screened to minimize the visual impacts. Topography Staff Findings: The project site drops over 20 ft. in elevation from south to north. The proposal responds to this topography change by retaining a one-story building element on the south side of the property. From the north side, the building is three stories tall, although the top floor is set back over 15 ft. to help reduce the perceived mass and create a garden patio overlooking the park. The building faces the open landscapes of Rio Grande Park and Galena Plaza and contains public access through the site with the renovated staircase. P43 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 7 of 11 The height of the Galena Plaza (south) side is successfully varied through a large canopy over the entry and varied building heights and forms. The Rio Grande (north) side sets back the upper floor as mentioned, but the second floor height is the same height all the way across the building and lacks the variation suggested by the guidelines. The use of varied materials and building forms helps to break up the scale of this façade, but some additional height variation on the Rio Grande side of the building is suggested to help better achieve the guidelines. Staff finds these guidelines to be not met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not met: 3.7 A building on a sloping site shall be designed to reduce its perceived mass and scale and reflect the natural slope of the site. This shall be achieved in one or more of the following ways: • Step sections of the street façade(s) in relation to the street slope. • Vary the height of the street façade. • Vary the plane and height of the street façade to express the slope of the site when present and continue the varied form in the roof profile(s). • Use the roof form and profile to reduce the perceived scale of the street façade(s) and roof. • Include a range of materials to express the modulation of the façade. 3.8 Design a building to integrate with and blend into the natural landscape. This shall be achieved in one or more of the following ways: • Face the building(s) toward the open landscape as well as the primary street. • Create public access through and adjacent to the site. • Reduce the height and scale of individual building modules. • Reduce the building footprint and/or use smaller buildings adjacent to the open area. Public Amenity Space Staff Findings: Walkway links consist of several paths within Galena Plaza, the new staircase, and sidewalks along Rio Grande Place. All of the paths will be at least 8 ft. wide. The new staircase will be widened to over 30 ft. in width. The sidewalks on Rio Grande are proposed at 6 ft. wide. Engineering has requested that this width be increased to 8 ft. Staff finds this guideline to be conditionally met, provided the sidewalks are increased to 8 ft. in width. Staff finds the following Guideline is conditionally met: 3.9 Walkway links should be a minimum of 8 ft. wide. Building Placement Staff Findings: The proposal incorporates a variety of setbacks at all levels of the building. The use of the setbacks helps to reduce the building scale, particularly from the Rio Grande side, and enhances the public access and landscaping, particularly from the Galena Plaza side. The building is oriented toward both Galena Plaza and Rio Grande Park, creating a double frontage and two access points. Staff finds these guidelines to be met. P44 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 8 of 11 Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 3.10 Varied setbacks are appropriate. • Aligning a building at the sidewalk edge is preferred, but some variation is appropriate where this provides enhanced outdoor spaces and pedestrian circulation routes. 3.11 Use varied setbacks to reduce building scale, enhance public access and accommodate landscaping. All of the following should be considered: • Front setbacks should provide for additional or widened sidewalk and landscaping of the front yard space. • Side setbacks should provide the opportunity to create or reinforce public walkways or through courts to adjacent streets and public trails. • Setbacks adjacent to a public street should accommodate the planting of street trees. 3.12 Buildings should orient to street edges, inter nal open spaces and the river edge. • A building occupying a corner site should face both streets. • The building should be “double fronted.” Building Height, Mass & Scale Staff Findings: Generally, the proposal provides a variety of building heights and roof profiles. Staff suggests incorporating more variation in the second floor height on the Rio Grande side (see Topography above), however the design varies the setbacks and wall planes of different modules. Staff finds this guideline to be generally met. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 3.13 Provide variation in building height and roof profile through one or more of the following: • Vary the heights for different sections of the development • Vary the setbacks and wall planes of different building “modules.” Building Design & Articulation Staff Findings: Although there is no proposed commercial component to the new structure, the first floor height is 12 ft. 6 in. and is retained for the entire depth of the building. The second floor height is 12 ft. 6 in. and the third floor height is 12 ft. 8 in. All entrances are located at either the Rio Grande sidewalk level or Galena Plaza level and are ADA compliant. Both public entries incorporate an airlock. The proposed design provides a human scale at the Galena Plaza level by being a one story mass, incorporating a large canopy over the entry, and varied masses and roof profiles. The Rio Grande side of the building starts to provide a human scale by including an arcade entry into the building. However, there is little else that is done to help reduce the scale of the building at the ground floor. Staff would like to see more variation in material and detailing on the ground floor that improve the human scale and provide a strong differentiation between levels, similar to the arcade. More horizontal separation and detailing could help P45 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 9 of 11 reduce the perceived scale of the building and create a more approachable structure from the Rio Grande side. Staff finds these guidelines to be generally met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 3.15 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level retail frontage and other stories. • This should be a minimum of 11 ft. in floor to floor height on the first floor. • The minimum required first floor height must be maintained for at least the first 50 foot depth of the lot, and may only be dropped to a lower height beyond that point for areas that are devoted to storage, circulation, offices, restaurant kitchens, alley commercial spaces, or similar secondary uses. 3.16 Any new building shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet floor to ceiling on all floors. 3.17 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. • All entrances shall be ADA compliant • On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible 3.18 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. • An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. • Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. • Using a temporary vinyl or fabric “airlock” to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. Staff finds the following Guideline is not met: 3.14 To reduce the perceived mass of a building, th e design should respect the natural setting and reflect the human scale and character o f the city. This shall be achieved through all of the following: • The massing of building forms • The articulation of the façade(s) through a varied roof profile • The use of a variation in architectural materials and detailing The distinction between the first floor and the upper floors of the building also plays a key role in creating a sense of human scale and is therefore an important consideration. The design of a new building should respect the stature of the first floor, and its visual role as the tallest floor of the building. Roofscape Staff Findings: The proposal includes varied roof profiles for the top story through the use of setbacks, an entrance canopy and a circular glass staircase and daylighting element. The top floor is set back from the second floor and creates a garden patio as well as the Galena Plaza area. This area does not reinforce the traditional lot widths and is unnecessary to reflect in the design. The applicant has indicated that there will be green roof elements and that the proposed geothermal system will not require rooftop mechanical equipment. The green roofs P46 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 10 of 11 will be hidden behind parapet walls. There will likely be some venting required. Staff is recommending the locations of venting should be identified prior to Council approval. Staff finds these guidelines to be met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 3.19 Variation in roof profile should be reflected in both the width and the depth of the roofscape of the building(s). This should be achieved through the following: • A set back of the top floor from the front façade. • Reflect the traditional lot width in the roof plane. 3.20 The roofscape should be designed with the same attention as the secondary elevations of the building. • Group and screen mechanical units from view. • Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. • Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building. • Use materials which complement the design of the building façades. • Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street. • Use ‘green roof’ design best practices where feasible. Architectural Materials Staff Findings: The proposed materials include modular brick veneer, stone composite panel, and metal zinc panel. The brick veneer is intended to relate to the Victorian era development while using the stone panel as a way to denote hierarchy. Although these are all high quality, durable materials, the material combination seems to struggle between historic relationship and modern application without successfully accomplishing either. The combination results in a more “institutional” appearance that could be located anywhere. As a new prominent civic building in a unique context, this presents an opportunity to showcase creativity and innovation while creating a strong transition between downtown and nature. The new restrooms in Rio Grande Park are highly successful architecture in this area by using a modern application of native river rock while relating to the more industrial quality with rusted steel roofs and beams. The materials soften the building appearance and allow it to blend in with the surroundings. Although the context is not exactly the same, staff suggests that the materials pull more inspiration from the river corridor. Staff finds these guidelines to be not met. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 3.21 High quality, durable materials should be empl oyed. • The palette of materials proposed for all development should be specified and approved as part of the general and detailed development approvals process, including samples of materials as required. Staff finds the following Guideline is not met: P47 VI.A. Exhibit D – Commercial Design Standards Page 11 of 11 3.22 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen historically • Reduce the perceived scale of the building and enhance visual interest of the façade. • Convey human scale. Paving & Landscaping Staff Findings: The proposal incorporates and enhances the existing Galena Plaza space through additional landscaping. There is also a proposed garden patio that wraps around the building at the Galena Plaza level and improved streetscape along Rio Grande Place. The proposed sidewalk along Rio Grande Place is not detached. In addition to Guidelines 3.24 below, Engineering has suggested incorporating this element for their TIA. Staff finds these guidelines to be conditionally met, provided the Rio Grande sidewalk is detached. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 3.23 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: • Enhance the street scene • Integrate the development with its setting • Reflect the quality of the architectural materials Staff finds the following Guideline is not met: 3.24 Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and sidewalk. • Sidewalks should be detached from the street edge to allow for a landscaped buffer. P48 VI.A. Exhibit E – Growth Management Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT E GROWTH MANAGEMENT 26.470.050. General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Findings: The Rio Grande building renovation does not require any GMQS allotments since there is no new square footage proposed. The applicant is requesting allotments for 37,044 sq. ft. of essential public facility for the new structure. There is no annual limit on allotments for essential public facilities. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, as well as with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan. Staff Findings: Surrounding land uses include the public library and lofts to the south, a bank and condos to the west, several civic uses (courthouse, jail, county offices) to the east, and a public park to the north. As a new civic office and public meeting building the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area, as there are several other public/civic buildings and uses nearby. The proposed development is subject to the Civic Master Plan, a regulatory document adopted in 2006. See staff findings related to the Civic Master Plan in the Planned Development Review Criteria (Exhibit A). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Findings: The proposed development is located within the Public (PUB) zone district. The proposed use as a government office building is an allowed use within the zone district. All dimensional requirements are established through the Planned Development review process. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable. P49 VI.A. Exhibit E – Growth Management Page 2 of 5 Staff Findings: This application is reviewing Growth Management concurrently with Commercial Design and Planned Development reviews as part of a consolidated review through the Public Projects review process. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. Staff Findings: The proposed project is an essential public facility and does not propose any additional commercial or lodge development. The commercial area within the Rio Grande building is proposed to remain the same as the existing. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee/Square Footage Conversion. Staff Findings: The proposed project is an essential public facility and does not propose any net livable area. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. Staff Findings: The application includes ability to serve letters from utility providers. The letters indicate that some upgrades to existing facilities may be required at the applicant’s expense, however it seems that the additional demand overall to the infrastructure can be P50 VI.A. Exhibit E – Growth Management Page 3 of 5 accommodated and will be mitigated through the new development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.470.090.4. Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. Staff Findings: The proposed project includes government offices and public meeting spaces, which the Community Development Director has determined to be an essential public facility that meets the definition: “A facility which serves an essential public purpose, is available for use by or benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. Staff Findings: c. The applicant has made a reasonable good-faith effort in pursuit of providing the required affordable housing through the purchase and extinguishment of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. Staff Findings: The applicant did not pursue Affordable Housing Credits as there are several City-owned affordable housing units that have not been provided as mitigation for any other city project which the applicant is proposing as mitigation for this development. This is consistent with the approved project for 540 E. Main (Aspen Police Station). Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. The proposal furthers affordable housing goals, and the fee-in-lieu payment will result in the near-term production of affordable housing units. Staff Findings: No fee-in-lieu is requested, all mitigation is proposed as physical units. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. The City Council may accept any percentage of a project's total affordable housing mitigation to be provided through a fee-in-lieu payment, including all or none. Unless otherwise required by this Title, the provision of affordable housing mitigation via a fee-in-lieu payment for 0.25 FTEs or less shall not require City Council approval. 26.470.100.1 Employee generation. Applicants may request an employee generation review with the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Growth management review procedures, and according to the following criteria. All essential public P51 VI.A. Exhibit E – Growth Management Page 4 of 5 facilities shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine employee generation. In establishing employee generation, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following: a) The expected employee generation of the use considering the employment generation pattern of the use or of a similar use within the City or a similar resort economy. Staff Findings: The Land Use Code suggests an employee generation rate of 5.1 FTEs per 1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable space for the Public zone district. This rate was evaluated on office-type public uses, which is similar to the proposed use of the site. The proposal includes 35,106 sq. ft. of “net leasable” space (essential public facilities are generally calculated by gross square footage). If the public meeting spaces and associated circulation are subtracted from this total (see discussion in subsection b) below), the new net leasable amount is 28,370 sq. ft. Using the suggested generation rate, this totals 145 FTEs. This is higher than the 100 FTEs analyzed in the application (also in subsection e) below), although there are additional characteristics to government office function that require additional space including more conference rooms and separate reception areas for each department. The additional space needs related to these functions would likely account for the difference between the suggested generation rate and the Facility Master Plan calculation of actual employees to occupy the building. b) Any unique employment characteristics of the operation. Staff Findings: The proposed use for this project is government offices, which is fairly consistent with traditional office uses. The development does include large public meeting spaces that are not typical of an office use, but provide an essential service that demands additional square footage. It is staff’s perspective that the square footage associated with these public meeting spaces should be taken into consideration when evaluating the employee generation. City offices also often necessitate separate reception areas for each department which can often lead to additional space requirements that would not be typical for an office- type use. c) The extent to which employees of various uses within a mixed-use building or of a related off-site operation will overlap or serve multiple functions. Staff Findings: The proposed new development on site is completely government office and public meeting space uses. There are no other uses proposed that might overlap. d) A proposed restriction requiring full employee generation mitigation upon vacation of the type of business acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff Findings: There is no proposed restriction for the proposal as this is anticipated to serve as government offices indefinitely. e) Any proposed follow-up analyses of the project (e.g., an audit) to confirm actual employee generation. Staff Findings: The application analyzed the employee generation based on the number of employees that will work in the building based on future projections. It is anticipated that 100 FTEs will occupy the building at full capacity by 2030. There are currently 14 FTEs located within the ACRA offices, which would serve as credit and will likely be relocated to the P52 VI.A. Exhibit E – Growth Management Page 5 of 5 Armory. This creates a net increase of 86 FTEs for the new development. This method is consistent with the approved project at 540 E. Main Street (Aspen Police Department) as well as typical growth management review which provides a credit for existing development. f) For lodge projects only: An efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for the lodging component of the project may, at the discretion of the Commission as a means of incentivizing a lodge project, be applied as a credit towards the mitigation requirement of the free-market residential component of the project. Any approved reduction shall require an audit to determine actual employee generation after two (2) complete years of operation of the lodge. Staff Findings: There is no lodge component to this project. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. P53 VI.A. Exhibit F – DRC Comments Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT F DRC COMMENTS Engineering Pedestrian Improvements: 1. An 8’ Sidewalk shall be provided along Rio Grande Pl due to the high pedestrian activity that is anticipated in and out of this building. A 5’ buffer between the sidewalk and road is required along the extents of the property. 2. The project shall meet the design of the Mill St Complete Street along the property boundary. The Complete Street planset and CAD files can be released upon request. This includes removal of the existing curb cut on Mill St. Per COA Engineering standards, access to properties must be off the minor road. The existing access easement to Mill St Condos is not altered by the alteration to the curb cut. This configuration needs to be further vetted with the Fire Department for emergency vehicle access. A meeting with the applicant, Engineering, and Fire Departments is needed to talk through the goals of the pedestrian walkway, bike lane, and emergency vehicle access to Mill St Condos. 3. Stairs will not be permitted in the ROW as is shown crossing over the bioretention area. 4. A direct accessible route shall be provided along the grand staircase. 5. A pedestrian easement is needed along Mill St where the property juts out beyond the sidewalk and into the street. Traffic Movements: 6. The project will need to look more closely at turning movements from the parking garage. Is there potential to narrow the curb cut and make the crossing more pedestrian friendly? 7. The project shall work with the Engineering Department to look closely at turning movements from the Mill St intersection and the parking lot entrance. The location of the drive and existing center island is not the ideal configuration. The one way configuration shall be a part of this discussion. Drainage 1. Due to the size of the lot and proposed construction, the Rio Grande Building will need to be retrofitted to treat stormwater runoff. 2. More information is needed on the routing of stormwater. Where are downspouts located, how does runoff move through the site and multiple levels, where are greenroofs utilized as a BMP etc.? This can be further vetted at Detailed Review. 3. Coordination will be crucial in how the proposed Rio Grande Pl stormline ties in to City Hall. The proposed stormline improvement in Rio Grande Pl would need to be altered to connect to the bioswale. The BMP in the ROW shall treat a significant portion of the ROW. 4. The Engineering Department discourages the use of chase drains due to icing issues and required maintenance. The configuration of the bioretention area will need to be more closely examined. 5. The project will need to work with Parks Department to determine acceptable method for tree plantings in a bioretention area. P54 VI.A. Exhibit F – DRC Comments Page 2 of 6 6. The Engineering Department will need more info on the upper planter and green roof material to determine applicability for use as a BMP for the area that drains to it. 7. The Engineering Departments goal with the new City Hall is to showcase and celebrate stormwater. We would like the drainage design to keep this goal in mind and for the Engineering Department to work closely with RFE to come up with creative, artistic, and functional ways to manage the site drainage. Utilities: 1. The proposed water tap location on Mill St is not approved and shall be further discussed. The project needs to take into consideration existing utility conflicts in Mill St, the existing main line sizes in Mill and Rio Grande, and the service line alignments. With the information at hand tapping on Rio Grande Place appears to be the better alternative. 2. The water service line size has not yet been determined. At Building Permit the project shall provide Fire Flow calcs to verify line size. 3. Show on the planset the appropriate clearance area for the proposed transformer. Provide a transformer easement with adequate area to allow 3’ clearance on each side and back of the transformer and 10’ clear area at the front. Conceptual and Final Review Design Guidelines: 1. The following guidelines are not met: 3.3 Minimize crossing conflicts for pedestrians. – The curb cut to Mill St could be removed to avoid pedestrian crossing conflicts. The configuration of the drives on Rio Grande Pl could be reconfigured to improve pedestrian crossings. 3.9 Walkway links should be a minimum of 8 ft wide. – The sidewalk along Rio Grande Pl is proposed 6’ and should be 8’. 3.24 Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and sidewalk. - The proposed site plan does not show a buffer on either Mill St or Rio Grande Pl. This buffer needs to be incorporated into the design. Transportation Impact Analysis MMLOS: The TIA analysis is well prepared and thorough. The clear explanations and site plan are much appreciated. The following are a couple of comments and items for discussion. 1. Measure 1 - This measure can be selected. The project will receive 5 points for detaching the sidewalks along Mill St and Rio Grande. 2. Measure 14 – This measure can be selected. The project will receive 5 points for correcting and enhancing the access points via ADA ramps along Rio Grande Pl. 3. Measure 16 - The applicant will need to look at the site plan and determine a way to decrease the pedestrian directness factor down to 1.5. 4. Measure 19 - The rapid flash beacon is not necessary across Rio Grande Place by the staircase. An alternative enhanced pedestrian crossing should be proposed at this location (potentially colored concrete, raised crosswalk, etc.). 5. Measure 28,29,30,37 - The proposed Galena Street shuttle stop on Galena Plaza needs to be further vetted and discussed with the Transportation Department. A site plan is needed showing the proposed bus stop location and configuration. How is the current stop relocated to improve transit accessibility or roadway operations? At this time there is not sufficient information to grant credit in this category. P55 VI.A. Exhibit F – DRC Comments Page 3 of 6 6. There are 40 confirmed MMLOS mitigation points. This is after the removal of the Rapid Flash Beacon, addition of detached sidewalks, addition of improved access points, correction to the site plan to get a 1.5 directness factor, and removal of the bus stop relocation measure. The project will need to mitigate an additional 8 trips and should discuss other options with the Engineering Department. Building 1. The building is an addition to the parking garage and Library which is a type IIA building. The Addition will need to address the allowable area, uses and stories. 2. The building will be a Category III based on the combined occupant load. 3. Provide further detail to verify exiting from rooms and spaces. 4. The open entry stairway will have to show compliance with the provisions shaft or atrium. 5. The openings into the parking garage will need to show positive pressure to the garage. 6. The exterior grand stairway is required to have an exterior accessible route located adjacent in the same area. Zoning Please provide the following with the building permit: • Interpolated grade • Net leasable calculations and diagrams – both existing and proposed • FA diagrams for existing structures – ACRA offices, Parking garage, and Rio Grande building. • Copy of the plat/ agreement to combined lots. • Height over topography drawing and chart. • Include deck totals in the FA calculations • A roof plan that includes mechanical or plumbing items on the roof(s) including AC units, Air handlers, etc. If these items are not included in the approval drawings, then please make sure you show how they are code compliant Parks 1. Parks needs to see more conservation efforts on the trees around the perimeter of the project. 2. The large trees that are on the south side of Rio Grande Place in between the parking area and the sidewalk need to remain. 3. It is also Parks desire to keep the maple trees by the proposed stairwell on the east side of the project. We understand that the removals of trees in the footprint of the building will have to occur, but it is our duty to preserve as much of the urban forest as we can. Newly planted trees would take years to create a look and feel, not to mention all they do for the environment, that these established trees have done for the previous 20 plus years. Transportation P56 VI.A. Exhibit F – DRC Comments Page 4 of 6 1. The locker/shower facilities and transit access improvements are good options for project TDM measures. These meet the requirements for selection of a minimum of two TDM selections. 2. The remaining selections on the TDM tool cannot be used to calculate trip reduction as they are already underway and therefore do not constitute improvements or new measures as the TIA requires. Should additional measures be desired, staff is happy to assist with alternatives. However, the requirement for TDM is met as mentioned above. Environmental Health 1. The space requirements for this Commercial building project must provide a minimum of 200 square feet (Municipal Code 12.10.030(A) a), if the building housing the restaurant is considered a separate building. a. The current submission meets this requirement in square footage, but requires Special Review since there is no alley access. b. The submitted drawings place the trash access within the Rio Grande parking garage and this will not be approved, as it does not allow adequate clearance for the trash equipment to service that location. c. The Fire department is concerned about having the trash located in the garage because the fire trucks cannot access it due to low clearance and space constraints of the parking garage. 2. Applicant has agreed to pursue moving the trash to the first floor, where there would be access to the trash and recycling from the parking lot. 3. All waste enclosures must provide 10’ of height clearance, which is not indicated on the current submission. 4. If the building housing the restaurant is to be considered as part of this building, then the space requirements are increased to 300 square feet (Municipal Code 12.10.030 (A) b). a. This would also necessitate Special Review, since there is no alley access. b. Environmental Health prefers the trash and recycling for the restaurant to be located in close proximity to the restaurant, rather than co-located with the main building’s trash and recycling. This bundling configuration would benefit from two separate trash and recycling areas (each meeting the requirements of code). 5. Applicant was informed that the proposal of a system wherein the waste haulers manually push the dumpster up-slope is not acceptable. 6. Environmental Health recommends an overhead metal door to access these areas. Sanitation Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) are required for all food processing establishment. Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit. Even though the P57 VI.A. Exhibit F – DRC Comments Page 5 of 6 commercial space is tenet finish, interceptors will be required at this time if food processing establishments are anticipated for this project. ACSD will not approve service to food processing establishments retrofitted for this use by small under counter TRAPS at a later date. Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. Elevator shaft drains must flow thru o/s interceptor Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements. Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. A new sanitary sewer service will be required to serve this application. One tap is allowed for each building. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. Glycol heating and snow melt systems must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. Soil Nails are not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line. Fire Need to discuss how we view the inter-connection between City Hall, the parking garage, and the Rio Grande building. From my view point once they start sharing openings, access, and systems they start to take on the appearance of a single building or an interconnected complex. For the safety of those in the building(s) we need to start looking at interconnected fire systems or system consolidation. This issue would best be addressed with a conversation with the building department and asset. Another concern is access to the parking garage from the northwest corner. Currently we have direct access to the stairwell but the new design pushes us away from that stairwell and the parking lot reconfiguration may create other access issues. We might need to look at how egress P58 VI.A. Exhibit F – DRC Comments Page 6 of 6 may be impacted by any alteration to that stairwell to insure a safe exit. We also need to look at how the parking lot reconfiguration may impact the Community Bank building and the apartments next door. This issue would best be addressed with a conversation with both the building department, engineering, and asset. P59 VI.A. Charles Cunniffe Architects & Lamont Planning Services Aspen City Offices Public Projects Review Submittal November 2016 11/14/2016 P60 VI.A. Table of Contents Aspen City Offices Public Projects Review I. Introduction………………………………………………..…………………..…...1 II. History of the Project…………………………………………………….…..……1 III. Project Site……………………………………………………………….………4 IV. Current Proposal…………………………………………..……………………..5 V. Land Use Review Process………………………………….…………………….7 A. General Review Procedures Chapter 26.304…………..…………………7 B. Public Projects Review Chapter 26.500……….……………………….…8 C. Subdivision Chapter 26.480……………………………………………....9 D. Planned Development Chapter 26.445…………………………………...12 E. Commercial Design Review Chapter 26.412……………………….….....25 F. Growth Management Quota System Chapter 26.470……………………..35 G. Off-Street Parking Chapter 26.515………………………………….........37 H. Common Development Review Procedures Chapter 26.304…………….40 Appendices A. Standard Submittal Documents B. Plan Sheets C. Engineering Report/Service Provider Letters D. Drainage Report/Geotechnical Report E. Transportation Impact Analysis F. Affordable Housing Credits/Space Analysis P61 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 1 Aspen City Offices Public Project s Review I. Introduction The City of Aspen Capital Asset Department and the design team headed by Charles Cunniffe Architects are pleased to submit this land use application to begin the review process for the development of a new City Office building located at the north edge of Galena Plaza at 425 Rio Grande Place and the renovation of the Rio Grande building located at 455 Rio Grande Place. For clarity of review the new building proposed to be constructed at 425 Rio Grande Place is referred as “the new City Offices”; the existing City Hall located at 130 South Galena is “the Armory building”; and the renovation at 455 Rio Grande Place is the “Rio Grande building”. The properties are zoned Public with a Planned Development overlay. This land use application includes the following sections of review: Public Project Review, Planned Development Review, Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility, Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for parking. In addition, Subdivision is required because Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 4 of the Rio Grande Subdivision are proposed to be merged into one lot. This application is submitted pursuant to Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code (Code). The Capital Asset Department is represented by Charles Cunniffe of Charles Cunniffe Architects (CCA) and Leslie Lamont of Lamont Planning Services, LLC (LPS). Consent to submit the application on behalf of the owner of the property is included in Appendix A with other relevant documentation of ownership. The Applicant endeavored to address the pertinent provisions of the Aspen Municipal Code and to provide sufficient information to facilitate a thorough review of this development proposal. Should questions arise during the course of the review the Applicant will provide information as required. II. History of the Project A high concentration of public services and civic spaces are located in Aspen’s urban core notably, the Pitkin County Administrative building, the County Courthouse, Aspen’s City Hall and the headquarters of the Aspen Fire Protection District. These community buildings are all clustered in and around the intersections of Galena and Main and Galena and Hopkins. The Pitkin County Library, public parking garage and other public amenities such as the Rio Grande playing field, The John Denver Sanctuary, Theater Aspen and the skate board park edge this civic center to the north and west. Starting in 2000, various master planning exercises have been pursued to guide future improvements to this civic space as well as planning for the expansion of governmental offices P62 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 2 to improve the provision of public services for residents, visitors and staff. Currently, the primary hub of city services is City Hall located at 130 South Galena Street in the historic Armory Hall but the expansion of services has caused the relocation of some departments to satellite office space. For example, departments such as Engineering and Building are located in leased space across the street. In other situations, some departments are located in space that is inappropriate such as Special Events and Transportation in the basement of the Yellow Brick building under the same roof as the Early Learning Center child care facility. For security reasons this shared space is inappropriate. The Aspen City Council is ready to review concrete plans that utilize existing city owned property and are in the best interests of the community. A. 2006 Civic Master Plan The purpose of the City of Aspen Civic Master Plan is to “provide guidance for the future use of publicly-owned properties between Aspen Mountain and the Roaring Fork River.” The Plan developed over six years by a 24 member advisory group outlines the importance of retaining civic functions in the core of Aspen which support the year-round community integrated with the resort: CORE PRINCIPLE #1 Civic and arts/cultural uses belong in the heart of town. Many communities develop a “big glass box” on the outskirts of town surrounded by parking and a drainage feature and call it their Civic Center. Aspen has the fortune of an integrated civic core in the heart of downtown and the substantial community character that has resulted. This planning effort builds on that tradition. At the beginning of the Civic Master Plan process, all local government agencies conducted space needs studies and the City of Aspen identified a need for additional space. An examination of office and meeting space in the 2006 Plan found: The existing meeting space for the City of Aspen and Pitkin County is not adequate. The capacity of meeting space currently used by the City and the County do not reflect the importance of the discussions, debates and decisions being made. The Civic Master Plan Advisory Group not only envisioned retaining the civic core in the downtown but extending Galena Street past the “barrier” of Main Street inviting people into the Galena Plaza and the Rio Grande park to revitalize the Plaza. B. 2015 Aspen Facilities Master Plan In 2014 the City of Aspen hired a consultant team to conduct a Facilities Master Plan for all city owned property. The intent of the study was “to develop an accurate inventory of currently occupied space, understand existing site and facility conditions, and define future space needs.” The consultant team worked with a city staff steering committee and a larger group of city employee stakeholders. The following vision statements were developed: Any planning and project solutions should represent the City of Aspen’s values. P63 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 3 The civic core should be enhanced in order to function as a “campus”, with improved way finding, sense of place, visibility, and customer service. Incorporate long term sustainability into all solutions, both in terms of impact on the environment and in providing a healthy workplace for city employees. To operate City functions and services efficiently from City owned properties. Incorporate the values and concepts noted in the Aspen Area Community Plan 2012. Improve operations for the City, and implement well defined real estate strategies. Mission Statement for City Core Functions To replace all lost rental space with permanent owned offices and improve existing facilities so that all direct communication with citizens and visitors will offer better public service, improved business processes, and more interactive exchanges. The study found that there are three issues driving possible solutions: The imminent loss of leased space: 24,158 gross square feet of current office space will be lost or represents an inadequate space for the current purpose. The loss of core operational space will create a critical space shortage for the City…This represents nearly 50% of the total space occupied today in the City core. Necessary improvements to public service: the current Armory Building was not designed to support the full range of services that have grown to occupy City Hall; a number of spaces (other than the Armory Building) are currently not code compliant or ADA accessible; there is an overall lack of public meeting space; service to the public is compromised by scattered services throughout the community; and lack of quality operational space for the Police Department. Business and Operational Efficiency: the number of departments that occupy alternative office space throughout town cause inefficiencies in the day to day running of the City; and the cost to lease non-city owned space is not the best use of the city’s budget. The consultant team recommended four options for evaluation. The City Council narrowed this to two options for further evaluation: Option 1: Renovate the Armory building with a two-story addition and build a new building at 540 E. Main Street (the Zupancis property); or Option 4: build a new building at Galena Plaza and Mill and build a new police department at 540 E. Main Street. P64 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 4 C. Further Evaluation & Advisory Vote After consideration of the findings from the Aspen Facilities Master Plan, the city staff began an in-depth analysis of the recommended options. This work included at least six public open houses and numerous meetings with the city staff steering committee and work sessions with City Council. On August 3, 2015, the majority of City Council members directed city staff to pursue a new City Hall at Galena Plaza and to vacate City Hall and repurpose the building for community use. In addition, the Council unanimously supported a new Police Department to be constructed at 540 E. Main Street. City Council also decided to ask the voters, in an advisory vote, to advise City Council on the Armory building repurpose: community use or city offices. The November 2015 election results were +51% in favor of using the building as a community center. D. 2016 City Council Direction After the November 2015 vote, the City of Aspen staff continued to pursue development of 540 E. Main Street for the Police Department and review design and programming for the new office building at Galena Plaza. Approximately five public meetings were held to review the project’s progress. In September of 2016, City Council directed staff to renew plans to renovate the Armory building for City Hall purposes, pursue a smaller building at the Galena Plaza, and renovate the Rio Grande building for continued office use. III. Project Site In 1973, the majority of the 18+ acres between Main Street and the Roaring Fork River was purchased by the City of Aspen using “7th penny” funds to protect the property from commercial development and preserve it for future transportation purposes. In 1977, a Rio Grande SPA Plan was filed that schematically identified land uses for the whole site. However, that plan expired after two years. In 1982, the City and County entered into a land exchange agreement. The exchange included the horse stable property west of the Court House (the Plaza and parking garage), the Aspen One Property (a piece of land next to the river) and the Oden Property (the site of the Pitkin County Library). In 1988, a conceptual SPA plan was approved and included a parking facility, library, new access road connecting Mill and Spring Streets, and paving the surface parking. The snow melt facility and “Arts Usage” were also included in the plan. The center of the site, the playing field remained unprogrammed and a trail and shuttle corridor extended through the site. The 1988 plan included other recommendations: Galena Street should be a pedestrian corridor to the Rio Grande parcel; P65 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 5 a shuttle traveling north from Galena and next to the parking garage should be developed to decrease traffic on Mill Street; and installation of a snow melt machine at the snow dump site although, relocation of the operation was encouraged. Final SPA plan approval was granted in 1989 for the library and the parking garage and again in 1990 for the Youth Center (the Rio Grande building). In 1998, the bank building at 210 North Mill Street was built and in 2001 the Mill Street Condominiums were built. Both replaced Cap’s Auto on this corner. Today, the site includes: Lot 1 - 25,744 square feet: 30 surface public parking spaces, an access easement, access to the Aspen Chamber Resort Association (ACRA) offices and access to the parking garage. Lot 2 - 41,033 square feet: the City of Aspen public parking garage which is 122,350 square feet and 320 spaces, 4,650 square feet of ACRA offices, and the Galena Plaza open space on top of the garage. Lot 3 - 24,922 square feet: the Pitkin County Library which is 34,743 square feet Lot 4 - 8,276 square feet: the Rio Grande Building and Taster’s Restaurant for a total of 7,120 square feet IV. Current Proposal Based upon City Council’s direction from the September 13, 2016 work session, the city’s Capital Asset staff directed their design/development team to pursue schematic design and programming for the new City Offices and renovation of the existing Rio Grande building. Renovation and reuse of the Armory building will follow in a separate land use application next year. A. New City Offices The proposal for the new City Offices is a newly constructed building adjacent to the north edge of Galena Plaza. The footprint of the building will replace the existing ACRA offices and 16 surface parking spaces located between the parking garage and Rio Grande Place. The footprint of the new building will sit at the west edge of Lot 2 of the Rio Grande subdivision and is tucked next to the Mill Street Condominiums and the Pitkin County Library. There is a planned connection between the new City Offices and the existing Rio Grande building beneath a P66 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 6 redesigned stair from Galena Plaza to Rio Grande playing field. A new Galena Street view corridor is defined and mapped on the draft subdivision/PD plat in order to preserve the views. The building will be three stories tall as viewed from Rio Grande Place but only one story tall when viewed from Rio Grande Plaza. The new building will include public meeting space, offices for approximately 10 City of Aspen staff, and an innovation center for public meetings and training: 15,203 square feet of office space 3,856 square feet of meeting space 2,400 square foot innovation/training center 15,947 square feet of lobby, circulation, storage, mechanical Total Gross Square Feet: approximately 37,406. However, because this application presents a schematic/conceptual design it is anticipated that the gross square footage might increase by 10% to 41,300 square feet. But, if this minor increase in square footage were to occur, it would not compromise the Galena Street view corridor or the height of the building. There are some nooks in the building’s footprint or below grade space that could be expanded to provide more square footage. Height as viewed from the Galena Plaza: 17’-0” for the majority of structure; 19’-8” to top of daylighting structure at building core. Height as viewed from the street, Rio Grande Place: 42’-0” for the majority of structure; 44’-8” to top of daylighting structure at building core. The new City Offices are intended to provide capacity for the provision of public services for the City of Aspen to the year 2030 as identified by the Facilities Master Plan consultant RNL and the City of Aspen steering committee. The new building’s footprint will absorb 16 surface parking spaces but the reconfiguration of the parking lot and access will leave 19 spaces in this area. Approximately 12-13 will be short term spaces. Up to 30 potential spaces may be added within the unfinished space of the existing parking garage. The final number of potential spaces to be added will be determined after further surveying of the existing space is completed. Delivery and trash service will occur through the alley between the Pitkin County Library and the Mill Street Condominiums and the Community Bank. P67 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 7 B. Renovation of the Rio Grande Building Renovation The Rio Grande building was built in 1991 as the Aspen Youth Center. The Youth Center occupied the site via a lease agreement with the City of Aspen and the Board of County Commissioners. Currently the building is owned by the City of Aspen and has evolved into public meeting/activity space and City of Aspen offices. A restaurant also occupies the ground floor and operates on a month to month lease with the City of Aspen. Originally, the eating space and full kitchen were developed as support for Youth Center activities such as cooking classes and meal preparation for field trip events. It is the intent of the Capital Asset Department to maintain the current uses of this building but renovate the interior to improve the building’s efficiency and provide a facelift to the exterior and below grade connections between the two buildings. At this point in time Taster’s restaurant will remain in the building and will not be expanded although the front door/public access will be improved. The existing square footage of the building is 7,120 square feet which will remain the same after the renovation. C. Amendment to the Rio Grande Subdivision As part of this application it is proposed that the three City of Aspen owned Rio Grande parcels: Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 4 will be merged into one lot. This has been recommended by the Community Development Department staff to simplify building code requirements associated with lot lines and setbacks. V. Land Use Review Process Utilization of the Rio Grande property for public facilities has been an objective since 1973 when the City first acquired the majority of the land. The land is zoned Public and the new City Offices, an essential governmental and pubic facility, is a Permitted use within the Public zone district. Pursuant to Section 26.710.250 site specific development and dimensional requirements for improvements in the Public zone district are established via a Final Planned Development approval. A. General Review Procedures Chapter 26.304 Section 26.304.060.B Modification of Review Procedures For the development of this project more than one development review and approval is required: Public Project Review process, Amendment to a Planned Development, Subdivision, GMQS for an Essential Public Facility, Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for Parking. The Community Development Director has determined that the associated reviews may be combined into one application for review and approval for the project as a whole. The Director P68 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 8 has also determined that the proposed development shall proceed as a Public Project Review in accordance with Section 26.500.040 and the timeline for completion of review and gaining approval has been waived in order to provide a full review of the project. B. Public Projects Review Chapter 26.500 Section 26.500.040 C Major Public Project Review This project is consistent with the definition of a major public project because the new City Offices at this location is a significant change to the property. The history of this project and the various design iterations related to the discussion of Aspen’s City Hall facility has been well vetted by the public for the last two years. In addition, a steering committee comprised of city staff has been considering various design concepts, organizational flow, and departmental adjacencies. Therefore, the applicant has elected not to form an Advisory Group. Section 26.500.070 General Review Standards The following review standards shall be used in review of any application for Public Projects: 1. The proposed project complies with the zone district limitations, or is otherwise compatible with neighborhood context; Response: The new City Offices’ building is compatible with the surrounding land uses in this neighborhood. This application has documented the various planning exercises related to the Rio Grande property and long range plans for civic purposes. There are numerous public facilities on the property including the Rio Grande building which is proposed to be renovated improving the efficiency of use of the building. The proposed building’s footprint is on the north side of the parking garage on the surface parking lot in front of the garage. This location and design of the new building integrates into the public open space of the Galena Plaza while preserving the majority of the Plaza’s open space. The Galena Street views from downtown to Red Mountain and from the Rio Grande playing field to Ajax Mountain are also preserved. A connector to the Rio Grande building will be constructed underneath the stair that leads from Galena Plaza to the Rio Grande playing field. This corridor will be mapped on the Subdivision/PD plat to preserve the view. The new City Offices will further energize the Plaza space and fits nicely with the other civic uses in this area: the Library, the Rio Grande playing field, the skate park, the Rio Grande building, county jail, Pitkin County Courthouse and the parking garage. As recommended in the Civic Master Plan, the Advisory Group supported retaining the civic core in the down- P69 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 9 town and believed that extending Galena Street past the “barrier” of Main Street would invite people into the Galena Plaza and the Rio Grande playing field to revitalize the Plaza. Governmental offices are a Permitted use in the Public zone district and any improvements will be reviewed and approved via Planned Development review. 2. The proposed project supports stated community goals; Response: As outlined above, the Rio Grande property was purchased with public funds to preserve this area for public uses. Additionally, the need for improved governmental facilities and public meeting space has been evaluated for the last 16 years. The new City Offices will include much needed office space and meeting space for the provision of public services as identified in the 2006 Civic Master Plan and the 2015 Master Facilities Plan. Public outreach in the last two years related to new facilities consistently included improvements in the vicinity of Galena Plaza. Although the details were schematic, the building proposed in 2015 at Galena Plaza was 51,900 square feet. Today, the size of the building has been reduced by 14,494 square feet unless it is necessary to increase the size up to 10% by final approval. In that case, the new building would still be smaller than the original 2015 building by 10,600 square feet. 3. The proposed project complies with all other applicable requirements of the Land Use Code; and Response: This application is a consolidated application of all the review standards that apply to this project at this location. It is the intent of the Applicant to address all the application review standards within this application. 4. The proposed project receives all development allotments required by Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Response: The applicant purposes a GMQS review for an Essential Public Facility. Pursuant to Section 26.470.030 (D) there is no annual allotment for an Essential Public Facility. C. Subdivision Chapter 26.480 The Rio Grande Subdivision includes four Lots. Lots 1, 2, and 4 are owned by the City of Aspen. Lot 3 is owned by Pitkin County and is the Pitkin County Library. Lot 1 consist s of surface parking, and access to the ACRA offices and the parking garage. Lot 2 is the public parking garage, the ACRA offices, storage, public restrooms, access stairways and two elevators. Lot 4 is the Rio Grande building which includes Taster’s restaurant and City of Aspen offices. P70 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 10 This proposal requests a subdivision review to aggregate Lots 1, 2 and 4 into one parcel for the purposes of development of the new City Offices building and minor renovation of the Rio Grande building. This has been suggested to eliminate property boundaries that could complicate application of the building code. All setbacks and other dimensional requirements shall be established via the Planned Development review and recorded on the Subdivision/PD plat. Section 26.480.070.A Land Subdivision The division or aggregation of land for the purpose of creating individual lots or parcels shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied according to the following standards: 1. The proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of Section 26.480.040 – General Subdivision Review Standards. Response: This subdivision proposal is to merge three lots. No new lots are being created and this subdivision is not part of the Original Townsite Plat. Merging the lots will not affect access to public ways. Access to Rio Grande Place will be maintained from the parking garage, the new City Offices and the Rio Grande building. Access to the Galena Plaza and Main Street will not change and the alley between the library and the Community Bank building will remain as a secondary access to the parking garage and will serve as delivery and trash removal for the new City Offices. The subdivision is zoned Public and the merging of the lots will not affect the zoning. The subdivision will not create or increase the non-conformity of a use, structure or parcel and all dimensional requirements will be established via the Planned Development review process. 2. The proposed subdivision enables an efficient pattern of development that optimizes the use of the limited amount of land available for development. Response: The proposed development of the new City Offices is located to take advantage of existing infrastructure while preserving the Galena Plaza open space and the Galena Street view corridor. 3. The proposed subdivision preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. Response: There are no important geologic features on the site. There are some trees along Rio Grande Place and in the surface parking lot in front of the ACRA offices but new landscaping will replace these trees as part of the construction of the new building and reconfiguration of the surface parking lot. Please see the attached site plan Appendix B. P71 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 11 4. The proposed subdivision prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted with specific design details and timing of implementation addressed through a Development Agreement pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. Response: The property is not within the Aspen mudflow or debris zone. It is also outside the 100-year floodplain as defined by FEMA. The CTL Thompson Geotechnical investigation did not identify any potential hazard from rock slides, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Please see the Geotechnical Report Appendix D. The CTL report identifies ground water at an elevation of 7858 feet. The basement level is at an elevation of 7877 feet, and anticipated maximum excavation elevation is 7871 feet, which is approximately 13 feet above groundwater. On the lowest floor of the parking garage, there is an underdrain system which collects groundwater and diverts it to the Roaring Fork River through a 24-inch pipe. The top of the pipe elevation is 7858.75, approximately 13 feet below the anticipated maximum excavation. 5. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined and documented within a Development Agreement. Response: The design will meet the requirements of both the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) and the Engineering Design Standards. Drainage mitigation techniques have been designed throughout the site consistent with the URMP. 6. The proposed subdivision shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the subdivision. Improvements shall be at the sole cost of the developer. P72 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 12 Response: The design team has contacted utility providers and has received ability to serve letters. Upgrades will be determined at final design if the analyses of the offsite systems require upsizing of facilities. At this time, the design team believes there is adequate capacity in utilities surrounding the site. Please refer to Appendix C to review Service Provider letters. 7. The proposed subdivision is exempt from or has been granted all growth management approvals pursuant to Chapter 26.470 – Growth Management Quota System, including compliance with all affordable housing requirements for new and replacement development as applicable. Response: The renovation of the Rio Grande building is exempt from the provisions of Chapter 26.470 because no new square footage is being added to the building. The development of the new City Offices, an essential public facility, is not exempt and does comply with Chapter 26.470. Please refer to part V (F) of this application for the GMQS review. 8. The proposed subdivision meets the School Land Dedication requirements of Chapter 26.620 and any land proposed for dedication meets the criteria for land acceptance pursuant to said Chapter. Response: No residential dwelling units are proposed in this project therefore this standard does not apply. 9. A Subdivision Plat shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. Response: Upon final approval a Subdivision/PD Plat shall be drafted, reviewed with City staff, and recorded per Section 26.490. 10. A Development Agreement shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. Response: Upon final approval a Subdivision/PD Agreement shall be drafted, reviewed with City staff, and recorded per Section 26.490. D. Planned Development Chapter 26.445 The Rio Grande Subdivision is zoned Public with a Planned Development Overlay. Therefore any improvements to property require planned development review. Dimensional requirements shall be established for the new development based upon a site specific development plan that is approved and recorded on a Planned Development plat. P73 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 13 Section 26.445.050 Project Review Standards A. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. Response: Renovation of the existing Rio Grande building and the location of the new City Offices are consistent with the civic uses of this area as identified in the 2006 Civic Master Plan and the 2015 Master Facility Plan. As well, the consolidation of city services within a specific area in Aspen’s downtown core and the provision of quality services were goals identified in both plans. Many design elements and public review efforts are consistent with the following Goals and Policies of the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan: Aspen Idea I.4. Support and encourage activities and community infrastructure, both social and physical, that enable and sustain the Aspen Idea. II.1. Maintain the legacy of the Aspen Idea by enhancing and preserving our non-profit and quasi-public facilities and spaces, and ensuring that development of new facilities is consistent with community goals, including: • Use by a diverse range of people. • An emphasis on renovation and adaptation of current structures. • Multi-purpose space. Managing Growth for Community & Economic Sustainability VIII.1. Restore public confidence in the development process VIII.3. Ensure that PUD and COWOP processes result in tangible, long-term community benefits and do not degrade the built or natural environment through mass and scale that exceeds Land Use Code standards. For the last two years, the City of Aspen conducted an extensive public process related to the concept of City Hall at Galena Plaza. The public process included an advisory election in November of 2015. The mass and scale of the new building complements the other essential public facilities in this area as the new building is shorter and a similar size. The Galena Street view corridor will be preserved and the majority of the Galena Plaza open space will be maintained as public open space. P74 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 14 Environmental Stewardship I.4. All new development and uses should minimize their greenhouse gas emissions. II.4. All new development and uses should minimize their air pollution emissions. V.4. Require new development and redevelopment to minimize their energy usage… The City of Aspen is committed to developing a building that meets the environmental sustainability and wellness goals of the community. The new City Offices building is proposed to be LEED Gold and Well Silver. B. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Response: The property is not within the Aspen mudflow or debris zone. It is also outside the 100-year floodplain as defined by FEMA. The CTL Thompson Geotechnical investigation did not identify any potential hazard from rock slides, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Please see the Geotechnical Report Appendix D. The CTL report identifies ground water at an elevation of 7858 feet. The basement level is at an elevation of 7877 feet, and anticipated maximum excavation elevation is 7871 feet, which is approximately 13 feet above groundwater. On the lowest floor of the parking garage, there is an underdrain system which collects groundwater and diverts it to the Roaring Fork River through a 24-inch pipe. The top of the pipe elevation is 7858.75, approximately 13 feet below the anticipated maximum excavation. C. Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: P75 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 15 1. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features. Response: The new City Offices takes advantage of the topography as it descends from Galena Plaza down to Rio Grande Place. The building starts at the Rio Grande Place and from the vantage of the street appear as a three story building but from Galena Plaza it is a one story building. The open space of the Plaza will be preserved and the reconfigured surface parking lot in front of the parking garage will be enhanced. There are no man-made hazards on the site. 2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. Response: There are no important geologic features on the site. There are some trees along Rio Grande Place and in the surface parking lot in front of the ACRA offices but new landscaping will replace these trees as part of the construction of the new building and reconfiguration of the surface parking lot. Please see the attached site plan Appendix B. 3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Response: The renovation of the Rio Grande building will not change the building’s orientation or access. For the new City Offices emergency access is provided at the Plaza level and street level. In addition, delivery and service vehicles will access the new building via the alley behind the Library. The new City Offices will provide two primary entry points. One takes advantage of the Galena Plaza open space and the pedestrian oriented focus of that public open space and the other is on the front façade with the front door oriented to Rio Grande Place. This is similar with the other buildings around the Plaza. D. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: P76 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 16 1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. Response: All dimensions will be established through the Planned Development review process as required in Chapter 26.445 of the Code. An essential governmental facility is a Permitted use in the Public zone district and this application does not request a use variation to the zone district. 2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. Response: The proposed dimensions of the new building reflect the function of the building for the provision of public services and critical public meeting space. The new building’s mass and scale have been designed to complement the existing public buildings in the neighborhood as well as the public open space of the Galena Plaza and the Rio Grande playing field. 3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. Response: As discussed previously in this application, the location of the new City Offices is consistent with the intended use of the property and integrates with the other essential public facilities on the property. The scale and massing of the new building have been designed to complement the existing public buildings each of which reflects different design eras The majority of the new building is 17’ tall as viewed from Galena Plaza and 42’ as viewed from Rio Grande Place (a building core daylighting structure adds roughly 3 more feet to the height). The height of the Library addition is 19’ 6” and the clock tower is 32’ viewed from Galena Plaza. The County Courthouse is approximately 40’ tall and the jail is 28’ tall. The gross square footage of the new building, 37,406 square feet, which is 10,600 square feet less than the building proposed in 2015 (this number might shift if the gross square footage of the building increases up to 10% between submittal and final approval). The size of the Pitkin County Library is 34,743 square feet, the County Court House is 200,658 square feet and the Pitkin County jail is 190,544 square feet. 4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. 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, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement. P77 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 17 Response: The number of off street parking spaces for essential public facilities is established by Section 26.515.040 Special Review. Currently, there are 30 public surface parking spaces on site plus 320 spaces in the parking garage. Sixteen surface parking spaces` will be lost due to the development of the new City Offices. However, reconfiguration of the surface parking lot and access will leave 19 surface parking spaces available for users of the building and the existing parking garage is currently being studied to verify the ability to add up to 30 more spaces located in currently unused space for a net gain of 19 parking spaces in the vicinity of the new City Offices. The City of Aspen is on the leading edge of businesses in Aspen and in the Roaring Fork Valley with their rigorous Travel Demand Management program for their employees. City employees are encouraged to use commute alternatives and are not provided with free parking. The City is an active partner in RFTA and funds the local RFTA bus routes including the seasonal Galena Street Shuttle; is a partner in the EOTC; financially supports We-Cycle and the CAR TO GO rideshare program. The employee commute benefits are: Zone passes - - for this upcoming winter 60 employees will receive free zone passes. For summer season 2016, 69 zone passes were provided. Value cards – in 2016 so far, 346 value cards have been issued. Approximately 60 employees participate in a monthly commuter rewards program, qualifying them for prizes for walking, biking, carpooling, riding the bus, etc. There are currently six departments participating in the CAR TO GO program. Application fees are waived for City employees and a specific department may offer a membership for work-related trips. The City supports flexible work schedules when appropriate. 5. The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110 – Amendments. Response: Project Review and Detailed Review have been consolidated into one application for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. The gross square footage of the new building is proposed for 37,406 square feet but the Applicant requests consideration to increase that square footage by 10%, 41,300 square feet, to provide design and programming flexibility. If an increase were to occur it would be in an area that would not affect the height of the building or the preserved Galena Street view corridor. It could be an increase in below grade space or filling in some of the nooks of the building’s footprint. E. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: P78 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 18 1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. Response: Please review the commercial design standards in part V (E) of this application. 2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. Response: The predominate cladding of clay brick veneer draws from the context of the vernacular Victorian era. The entries and elements of the public lobby areas utilize a vertical buff composite stone panel appointing these areas with a visual hierarchy appropriate to public facilities and wayfinding. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Response: The plan enhances the pedestrian flow throughout the site. A reconstructed staircase connects pedestrians from downtown Aspen to Rio Grande Park. Pedestrian flow along the streetscape of Rio Grande Place is also enhanced using curb extensions and crosswalks. Please refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis for other details, Appendix E. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Response: The design will meet the requirements of both the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) and the Engineering Design Standards. Drainage mitigation techniques have been designed through the site consistent with the URMP. P79 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 19 H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Response: The design team has contacted utility providers and has received ability to serve letters. Upgrades will be determined at final design if the analysis of the offsite systems requires upsizing of facilities. At this time, the design team believes there is adequate capacity in utilities surrounding the site. I. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. Response: The building is designed to accommodate all vehicular and pedestrian ways with no modifications or obstructions and is clearly defined within the architectural and site documentation within the submission, Appendix B. Section 26.445.070 Detailed Review Standards Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review. Response: Project Review and Detailed Review have been consolidated into one application for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. B. Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments. Response: The renovation of the Rio Grande building is exempt from the provisions of Chapter 26.470 because no new square footage is being added to the building. The development of the new City Offices, an essential public facility, is not exempt and does comply with Chapter 26.470. Please refer to part V (F) of this application for the GMQS review. P80 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 20 C. Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well-designed 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. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space. Response: The landscape plan proposes planting areas of trees, shrubs and perennials both on the Galena Plaza level and along Rio Grande Place. The landscaping plan of Galena plaza is an extension of the existing roof top garden and continues the plaza character through form-giving, planting zones, paving and walls. The landscaping plan along Rio Grande Place follows a streetscape character with street trees and ornamental plantings to highlight this level’s main entry. Planting areas are used to store and treat stormwater runoff. 2. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated. Response: The plan exceeds ADA requirements for grading and ramps to allow the best entrance access to the buildings. 3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner that enhances the site. Response: No energy production features are proposed into the landscape. However, solar panels will be placed on the roof of the structure set in from the roof parapets to minimize and eliminate view. The heating system will be geothermal and visually there are no elements of this feature that are visible inside or outside of the building. 4. All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Response: Exterior lighting is recessed beneath the overhangs and canopies and is placed strategically and conservatively for pathway and wa yfinding purposes and will utilize down light and low glare lamps and fixtures. Site lighting will comply with the City’s lighting standards, using approved lighting fixtures. Site lighting is minimized to pedestrian safety only. P81 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 21 5. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Response: Drainage has been designed to treat runoff and connect to the City storm systems downstream so as to avoid impacting the surrounding properties. D. Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history. Response: The massing of the building is broken up both horizontally and vertically creating more appropriate scale from the plaza and especially on the Rio Grande level. The masses are also cladded in a variation to further define elements of the building and produce appropriate massing. The predominate use of clay brick veneer for the cladding draws from the context of the vernacular Victorian era. The entries and elements of public lobby areas utilize a vertical buff composite stone panel appointing these areas with a visual hierarchy appropriate to public facilities and wayfinding and creating further contrast and massing breakdown for scale purposes. 2. Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. Response: Public amenity space within and surrounding the building includes a public plaza in front of the building on Galena Plaza connecting to a day lit lobby. These spaces connect directly to public meeting rooms and the multi-use conference area. The multi-use space will be open to the public and contains a food preparation and serving area. Extensive planting and hardscape is designed to integrate these spaces, interior to the exterior, in a suitable and appropriately scaled public pedestrian plaza which is welcoming and allows outdoor gathering and leisure. 3. Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects. Response: The Galena Plaza entry and adjacent meeting room and multi-use spaces are consistently covered for protection from snow and ice by way of deep flat overhangs and an entry covered colonnade. The entry from the west parking and Rio Grande Place is also fully covered by the recessed walkway under the second story from the parking to the entry vestibule. P82 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 22 4. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that enhances the architecture. Response: Solar panels will be placed on the roof of the structure set in from the roof parapets to minimize and eliminate view. The heating system will be of geothermal and visually there is no element of this feature that is visible inside or outside of the building. 5. All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Response: Exterior lighting is recessed beneath the overhangs and canopies and is placed strategically and conservatively for pathway and wayfinding purposes and will utilize down light and low glare lamps and fixtures. E. Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future development is required. Response: N/A F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Response: The plan enhances the pedestrian flow throughout the site. An enhanced and reconstructed staircase connects pedestrians from downtown Aspen to Rio Grande Park. Pedestrian flow along the streetscape of Rio Grande Place is also enhanced using curb extensions and crosswalks. Please refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis for other details, Appendix E. P83 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 23 G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Response: The design will meet the requirements and intent of both the URMP and Engineering Design Standards. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Response: The design is upgrading public infrastructure in the ROW and following the Low Impact Design Principals of the URMP. I. Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. All 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 Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Response: Phasing is not proposed for this project. P84 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 24 E. Commercial Design Review Chapter 26.412 Section 26.412.050 Review Criteria A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. Response: Refer to narrative in Section 26.412.060. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the façade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Response: NA C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. Response: Refer to the narrative in Section 26.412.060. Section 26.412.060 Commercial Design Standards The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public Amenity Space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of- way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the P85 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 25 provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. Response: Public amenity within the building includes a day lit lobby. These spaces connect directly to public meeting rooms and the multi-use conference area. The multi-use space will be open to the public and contains a food preparation and serving area. Extensive planting and hardscape is designed to integrate these spaces, interior to the exterior, in a suitable and appropriately scaled public pedestrian plaza which is welcoming and allows outdoor gathering and leisure. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. Response: The Galena Plaza was recently upgraded. The new City Offices will add more trees to the Plaza in specific locations. The new building has two primary access points and the public entry on the Plaza level will further enhance the vitality of this public space with increased pedestrian activity. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. Response: The approach to the projects pedestrian and landscape areas is to connect and continue the current established landscape and pedestrian atmosphere. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. Response: These spaces are an extension of the current Galena Plaza and Rio Grande streetscape and only enhance the current conditions in a vital way by way of design and seating elements and vegetation. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F. promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. P86 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 26 Response: There are no designed obstructions, walls, or other design items that impede on the open use and view of the open space and pedestrian connections. The design and layout adheres to the standards which govern this code section. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: Response: The utility trash and delivery location for this structure resides within the compatible location within the west entry of the Mill Street approach at the parking garage mid-level and coincides with the adjacent Library Facility. This allows for a site consolidation of uses which utilize existing locations for utility, delivery and trash facility. 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. Response: See plan dimensions, Appendix B. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. Response: The proposed transformer has the required clearances on all sides. An easement will be granted to allow for service. See plan dimensions, Appendix B. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. Response: See plan dimensions, Appendix B and Response to paragraph B above. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Response: See plan dimensions, Appendix B and Response to paragraph B above. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences P87 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 27 shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Response: This facility area is within a complete enclosure. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. Response: See plans, Appendix B. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Response: The project will set a transformer onsite to supply the electrical needs of the building. A 10-foot wide electrical easement is proposed along the property boundary with the Mill Street Condominiums. Communication pedestals already exist on the Mill Street side of the property. Water, Sewer and Gas are services and do not require easements, as they are the Owner’s responsibility to maintain. See plans. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Response: N/A 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. Response: Comply, see plans, Appendix B. P88 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 28 10. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Response: The ventilation of the existing garage is not impeded by the proposed structure. The addition of increased ventilation for areas of the existing garage which is enclosed by the proposed structure will comply with this requirement. 11. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right- of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Response: The mechanical design forthcoming has provisions for this requirement within the proposed architectural development plans in this submission. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). Response: N/A River Approach District Design Objectives: These are the key design objectives for the River Approach. The City must find that any new work will help to meet them. In sum, the following objectives apply: 1. Establish an attractive gateway to the city center, as one approaches downtown from the north. The River Approach area should have an identity which is distinct from the Commercial Core. This should draw upon its industrial heritage (albeit in contemporary ways), and also reflect its location near and public access to the river. It should not simply repeat the design traditions of downtown. Response: The proposed enlarged grand stair from Rio Grande Street to the Plaza and the expansion of the Galena Plaza provides an improved and highly invigorated approach to the city center from the river corridor. 2. Establish street edges that invite pedestrian activity and promote an urban/ industrial character along established street edges. In general, street edges should be more "urban" with storefronts abutting sidewalk edges. This should result in a well defined street wall; this in turn should be punctuated with spaces between buildings that lead to walkways and activities within a site and along the river banks. P89 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 29 Response: The buildings north facade is established at the Rio Grande Place right of way which activates and connects to the street by way of appropriate glazing and entries with landscape and pedestrian elements, engaging the pedestrian in a defined and established configuration. The design of the new buildings establishes a continuation of the street pattern of existing developments and unifies existing fragmented areas within the site. The plan proposes an enhanced streetscape along Rio Grande Place including curb extensions, planting areas, sidewalks, and connections to adjacent amenities. 3. Highlight natural resources along edges of developed areas. Buildings and outdoor use areas should orient to the river and public parks. In essence, developments should be "double-fronted," looking both to the river and to the street. Response: The Galena Plaza level of the new building provides frontage of pedestrian access and patios, as well as interior orientation directed to the river in the north direction. The Rio Grande Place level abuts the street and interior spaces have an orientation and glazing pattern which directs interior views and outdoor spaces to the river north. The proposed treatment of the connection between Galena Plaza and Rio Grande Place is oriented to provide a stronger link between the elevated plaza and the street level Rio Grande Park. 4. Provide an interconnected system of sidewalks and internal walkways that facilitate pedestrian circulation. Walkway and river access should frame the edges of properties and also provide internal connections within a parcel. Connections among properties, in addition to those provided by external sidewalks, are also encouraged. Recognize the nature of service/commercial activity through the design of safe and efficient vehicle delivery routes, while providing a system of walkways that safely facilitate pedestrian circulation to and through the site. Response: The internal circulation patterns of the building are in axis, and visually connect to the river and also on the edges of the building’s north façade, directing view and activity to the park open space and river. As well, the pedestrian access to and around the building gives prominence to the river view from Galena Plaza and Rio Grande Place. The proposed internal pedestrian connections include the grand staircase between Galena Plaza and Rio Grande Place, plaza and walkways between Galena Plaza and the plaza level entrances to City Hall, and sidewalk connections between the Mill Street Lot and the street level entrances to City Hall. This extensive internal circulation system is linked to existing pedestrian walkways to adjacent properties and amenities, including connections to the Library, Main Street, and the Rio Grande Building. P90 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 30 Conceptual and Final Review Design Guidelines: Street & Alley System 3.1 Provide pedestrian connections through properties that link to public sidewalks and trails. • Also provide connections to outdoor use areas. 3.2 Define street edges with public sidewalks. • These should be of sufficient width to invite their use. • Street trees should be provided where space permits. Response: These requirements are addressed and are reinforced by the development. See Proposed Site Plan, Appendix B. 3.3 Minimize crossing conflicts for pedestrians. • Locate driveways and curb cuts to avoid crossing conflicts. Response: There are no proposed curb cuts or driveways within this development proposal. The proposal utilizes existing curb cuts and eliminates existing curb cuts on Rio Grande Place at the location of ACRA. The plan complies with street and alley guidelines. Parking 3.4 Minimize the visual impacts of parking. • Parking shall be placed underground wherever possible. • Where surface parking is permitted, it shall be located to the interior of the property. • Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and landscaped to soften design of parking areas and provide solar shade. Response: Parking for this development utilizes existing parking locations, see TIA document Appendix E. 3.5 Structured parking access should not have a negative impact on the character of the street. The access shall be: • Located on a secondary internal street where feasible • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building façade. • Integrated into the building design • Where redevelopment occurs, alley parking access should be created. Response: Proposed development has no impact on existing structured parking access and configuration. 3.6 Minimize the visual impacts of surface parking. • On small lots where limited surface parking in front of the building might be considered, it should be designed and screened to minimize the visual impacts. P91 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 31 Response: Proposed existing redesigned surface parking is proposed to be tree planted and provided with vegetative islands. See landscape plan. Proposed parking is designed to minimize visual impact: in addition to the existing Mill Street Lot, angled parking and on-street parking is added. External landscape buffers are used, in compliance with parking guidelines. Topography 3.7 A building on a sloping site shall be designed to reduce its perceived mass and scale and reflect the natural slope of the site. This shall be achieved in one or more of the following ways: • Step sections of the street façade(s) in relation to the street slope. • Vary the height of the building modules to convey a human scale. • Vary the plane and height of the street façade to express the slope of the site when present and continue the varied form in the roof profile(s). • Use the roof form and profile to reduce the perceived scale of the street façade(s) and roof. • Include a range of materials to express the modulation of the façade. Response: The Galena Plaza building element is one story in height, and contains a lower scale entry and façade canopy along the east facing plaza. This allows for a protective covered approach to the building and entry, as well as a covered element over the Sister Cities meeting room with glazing which can be opened to the Plaza. The Rio Grande Place three story elements of the building steps back from the east, west and north creating a garden patio which opens to the River Approach Corridor, and diminishes the scale of the structure from the park and street. The appropriate and vernacular predominate brick material is intersected and broken by a larger scale composite stone panel, glazing elements, and metal clad overhangs and steel canopies. 3.8 Design a building to integrate with and blend into the natural landscape. This shall be achieved in one or more of these ways: • Face the building(s) toward the open landscape as well as the primary street. • Create public access through and adjacent to the site. • Reduce the height and scale of individual building modules. • Reduce the building footprint and/or use smaller buildings adjacent to the open area. Response: The upper Galena Plaza story of the building faces and engages the open Plaza to the east. To the north, the public spaces of the building step back from the lower stories diminishing the scale of the north façade and engaging the open River Approach Corridor with patios and planted roof elements. Public access to the Galena Plaza and Rio Grande Place faces of the building are achieved through open passage ways from all directions of adjacent properties and public pedestrian streets and corridors. P92 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 32 Planting areas are used to reduce the perceived mass and scale of the proposed building where sloping occurs along the Rio Grande Place level. Public Amenity Space 3.9 Walkway links should be a minimum of 8 ft. wide. Response: Walkway links at the plaza level exceed the requirement of 8’ wide. (Our sidewalks along Rio Grande Place are 6’ wide.) See site plans, Appendix B. Building Placement 3.10 Varied setbacks are appropriate. • Aligning a building at the sidewalk edge is preferred, but some variation is appropriate where this provides enhanced outdoor spaces and pedestrian circulation routes. Response: The building is aligned with the Rio Grande Place right of way and sets back at the first floor and the third floor diminishing the scale and creating pedestrian approaches on the lower Rio Grande Place Level and pedestrian open space and patio on the Galena Plaza Level. 3.11 Use varied setbacks to reduce building scale, enhance public access and accommodate landscaping. All of the following should be considered: • Front setbacks should provide for additional or widened sidewalk and landscaping of the front yard space. • Side setbacks should provide the opportunity to create or reinforce public walkwa ys or through courts to adjacent streets and public trails. • Setbacks adjacent to a public street should accommodate the planting of street trees. Response: The building is aligned with the Rio Grande Place right of way and sets back from the street allowing pedestrian passage and landscaping in front of the entry façade. The Galena Plaza Level sets back and is justified to the west allowing for a view plane and expanded open space of the Plaza. 3.12 Buildings should orient to street edges, internal open spaces and the river edge. • A building occupying a corner site should face both streets. • The building should be "double fronted." Response: This double fronted approach is naturally achieved by the third floor plaza element which is set back from the façade of the Rio Grande massing. Each element is a major public face and entry to the building and connected by the internal vertical circulation light well and stair. 3.13 Provide variation in building height and roof profile through one or more of the following: • Vary the heights for different sections of the development • Vary the setbacks, and wall planes of different building "modules." P93 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 33 Response: The building is set up in modules, respectfully Galena Plaza is a one story module set back from the north Rio Grande Place module, the Rio Grande Place module is a three story mass set back on the first and third floors and set of this module is a 2 story element set back to the south from the main Rio Grande Place element. Further articulation occurs within the modules and set back by the varied and appropriately hierarchical distribution of brick and composite stone elements and glazing elements. The plan proposes for landscaping, reinforced public walkways, and street trees as a result of the building’s setback. Building Design & Articulation 3.14 To reduce the perceived mass of a building, the design should respect the natural setting and reflect the human scale and character of the city. This shall be achieved through all of the following: • The massing of building forms • The articulation of the façade(s) through a varied roof profile • The use of a variation in architectural materials, and detailing Response: The massing of the building is broken up both horizontally and vertically creating more appropriate scale from the plaza and especially on the Rio Grande Place level. The masses are also cladded in a variation to further define elements of the building and produce appropriate massing. Predominate use of clay brick veneer for the cladding draws from the context of the vernacular Victorian era. The entry’s and elements of public lobby areas utilize a vertical buff composite stone panel appointing these areas with a visual hierarchy appropriate to public facilities and wayfinding and creates further contrast and massing breakdown for scale purposes. 3.15 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level retail frontage and other stories. • This should be a minimum of 11 ft. in floor to floor height on the first floor. • The minimum required first floor height must be maintained for at least the first 50 foot depth of the lot, and may only be dropped to a lower height beyond that point for areas that are devoted to storage, circulation, offices, restaurant kitchens, alley commercial spaces, or similar secondary uses. Response: The first floor height is 12 feet floor to floor. From an articulation standpoint, the proposed development adheres to these standards. See plans and Elevations, Appendix B. 3.16 Any new building shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to ceiling on all floors. Response: See above floor to floor heights. P94 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 34 3.17 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. • All entrances shall be ADA compliant. • On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. Response: The plan complies with ADA requirements; please see Plans and Elevations, Appendix B. 3.18 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. • An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. • Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district • Using a temporary vinyl or fabric "airlock" to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. Response: Complies with requirements, please see Plans and Elevations, Appendix B. 3.19 Variation in roof profile should be reflected in both the width and the depth of the roofscape of the building(s). This should be achieved through the following: • A set back of the top floor from the front façade • Reflect the traditional lot width in the roof plane Response: The upper Galena Plaza story of the building faces and engages the open Plaza to the east, and to the north the public spaces of the building step back from the lower stories diminishing the scale of the north façade and engaging the open river approach with patios and planted roof elements. The lot width is reflected in the Rio Grande Place north façade and set back in the third level to the west and reduced to 2 stories in the east to retain the view plane. 3.20 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building. • Group and screen mechanical units from view. • Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. • Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building. • Use materials which complement the design of the building façades. • Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street. • Use 'green roof' design best practice, where feasible. Response: Green roof elements are incorporated in the set back patio areas of the Galena Plaza level and on the third level above the Plaza. The mechanical system geothermal will not require roof top equipment and enclosures. Roof gardens or green roof elements within patios and behind the building wall parapets. P95 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 35 Architectural Materials 3.21 High quality, durable materials should be employed. • The palette of materials proposed for all development should be specified and approved as part of the general and detailed development approvals process, including samples of materials as required. Response: Clay Brick Veneer, Composite stone cladding, Zinc metal cladding at canopies and copings, all require no maintenance and are durable and of derived of natural properties and materials. 3.22 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen historically • Reduce the perceived scale of the building and enhance visual interest of the facade. • Convey human scale Response: The proposed design incorporates exterior material predominantly clay brick widely prevalent in vernacular Victorian Era Aspen, decorative detailing at windows sills and heads to further convey scale and relate to visual interest. Massing of the building is developed to create lower scale stories and break down mass. Windows and glazing areas further break the scale down and create facades and entry elements which convey human scale. Paving & Landscaping 3.23 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: • Enhance the street scene • Integrate the development with its setting • Reflect the quality of the architectural materials 3.24 Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and sidewalk. • Sidewalks should be detached from the street edge to allow for a landscaped buffer. Response: The site plan responds to the site’s context including the existing Galena Plaza, the streetscape along Rio Grande Place, and the existing and proposed buildings. Landscape buffers are placed along and in front of the façade of the proposed building. F. Growth Management Quota System Chapter 26.470 Section 26.470.090.4 Remodel Existing Commercial or Lodge Development Remodeling or replacement after demolition of existing commercial or hotel/lodge buildings and portions thereof shall be exempt from the provisions of growth management, provided that no additional net leasable square footage or lodge units are created and there is no change in use. If redevelopment involves an expansion of net leasable square footage or lodge units, only the replacement of existing development shall be exempt. Existing, prior to demolition, net leasable P96 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 36 square footage and lodge units shall be documented by the City Zoning Officer prior to demolition. Also see definition of net leasable commercial and office space, Section 26.104.100. Response: The Rio Grande building will be remodeled to provide for a more efficient use of the building. No net leasable square footage will be added in the remodel. Section 26.470.090.4 Essential Public Facilities The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. Response: The new City Offices is consistent with the definition of an Essential Public Facility: a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by or benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community (Section 26.104.100). b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. Response: The Applicant has elected to analyze the function and programming of the new City Offices to calculate the number of employees that will work in the building for GMQS employee generation purposes. According to the Space Needs analysis attached to Appendix F, 100 full time employees (FTEs) will occupy the building at full capacity. Currently, there are 14 employees working in the ACRA offices. These offices will be eliminated with the development of the new building (it is assumed that the ACRA will move into the Armory building). There- fore, the Applicant proposes to reduce the number of FTEs generated in the new building by 14 FTEs for a total of 86 FTEs generated in the new building. This method is similar to the GMQS criteria that allows employee generation to be calculated based upon the new net leasable square footage that is being added to a project while existing square footage is not counted. Consistent with the requirement that a minimum of 60% of employees generated shall be mitigated, this project requires mitigation for 51.6 FTEs: 100 – 14 = 86; 86 x .6 = 51.6. Historically, the City of Aspen has been proactive in providing employee housing for essential public employees. The City has an inventory of housing units that equals 127.5 FTEs housed. P97 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 37 Appendix F includes the Affordable Housing Credits Generated by 505 Fund chart listing the City of Aspen employee housing units, the number of FTEs housed. The Capital Asset Department proposes that the employees generated by new City Offices are mitigated using the City’s current employee housing inventory. A couple of projects such as the Aspen Recreation Center and the Park Maintenance Facility used the inventory as credits to meet employee mitigations requirements and recently, the Aspen Police Department project’s approved mitigation includes on-site housing and credits from the City’s inventory. In a similar fashion, Aspen Valley Hospital’s Master Facilities Plan approval utilized credits from employee housing that was built or purchased and deed restricted prior to the Plan that increased the size of that essential public facility. Given the inventory, there are enough credits to mitigate 60% of employees generated: inventory balance = 82.95 FTEs; FTEs to be mitigated = 51.6; remaining balance = 31.35. c. The applicant has made a reasonable good-faith effort in pursuit of providing the required affordable housing through the purchase and extinguishment of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. Response: This is not necessary due to the City’s current inventory. d. The proposal furthers affordable housing goals, and the fee-in-lieu payment will result in the near-term production of affordable housing units. The City Council may accept any percentage of a project's total affordable housing mitigation to be provided through a fee-in-lieu payment, including all or none. Unless otherwise required by this Title, the provision of affordable housing mitigation via a fee-in-lieu payment for 0.25 FTEs or less shall not require City Council approval. Response: A fee-in-lieu payment is not necessary if the City Council approves the employee generation calculation of 51.6 FTEs and uses the current housing inventory to mitigate those employees. G. Off-Street Parking Chapter 26.515 Section 26.515.040 Special Review Standards Whenever the off-street parking requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review, an application shall be processed as a special review in accordance with the common development review procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 and be evaluated according to the following standards. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. P98 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 38 A. A special review for establishing, varying or waiving off-street parking requirements may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: 1. The parking needs of the residents, customers, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, any shared parking opportunities, expected schedule of parking demands, the projected impacts on the on-street parking of the neighborhood, the proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees. Response: The renovation of the Rio Grande building does not increase the square footage of the building or change the uses within the building so there is no requirement to provide on- site parking. The building’s traffic/pedestrian patterns should not be affected by this renovation. Construction of the new City Offices will affect the amount of surface parking spaces in the lot on Rio Grande Place. The building will eliminate some surface parking spaces but the reconfiguration of the remaining area and access will result in 19 surface parking spaces in front of the new building. These spaces will serve as short-term parking for visitors doing business in the building. The parking garage has 320 parking spaces and the construction of the new building and demolition of the current ACRA offices will provide an opportunity to create up to 30 more spaces in the existing parking garage. This approach is currently being studied to verify the ability to add these spaces in currently unused space in the existing parking garage. A program for how these spaces will be allocated, if differently than the current program, was not defined at the time of the writing of this application. A net of 19 new parking spaces will be added as a result of the new City Offices. For occupants of the building, City of Aspen employees, the City does not provide free parking. As described in part V (D) Planned Development review of this Application, the City has implemented various auto disincentive measures to reduce traffic and congestion within the City. For City of Aspen Employees the commute benefits are: Zone passes - - for this upcoming winter 60 employees will receive free zone passes. For summer season 2016, 69 zone passes were provided. Value cards – in 2016 so far, 346 value cards have been issued. Approximately 60 employees participate in a monthly commuter rewards program, qualifying them for prizes for walking, biking, carpooling, riding the bus, etc. There are currently six departments participating in the CAR TO GO program. Application fees are waived for City employees and a specific department may offer a membership for work-related trips. P99 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 39 The City supports flexible work schedules when appropriate. As well, the location of the new City Offices building is within the central civic core of Aspen. The valley local RFTA bus stops at the corner of Galena and Main Street, there are two Hunter Creek route bus stops on Mill Street: one near the Library and one on the Rio Grande playing field. The seasonal Galena Shuttle traverses the downtown from the base of Ajax Mountain to the Galena Plaza. One of the priorities of locating the new City Offices adjacent to the Galena Plaza is to consolidate the daily function of the public’s business in a central location within walking distance of Aspen’s downtown, transit routes, and the public parking garage. Finally, this area of Aspen bustles during the weekday from 8-5. At the close of the business day and on the weekend most governmental offices are closed. This creates a parking supply for other activities in the area: night meetings, weekend events at the Library or the Galena Plaza or playing field, Theatre in the Park, etc. There are no residential neighborhoods within proximity to this area. 2. An on-site parking solution meeting the requirement is practically difficult or results in an undesirable development scenario. Response: This area is fairly built out and the open space in this area is actively used public space. The Galena Plaza has recently been improved and serves as an important green space in the center of this civic area. Although the Rio Grande playing field was purchased with 7th penny money for future transportation uses, the City has no development plans to change this recreational space. The Rio Grande playing field also serves as an important transition to the river corridor. Adding more parking in either of these areas would be an undesirable development. 3. Existing or planned on-site or off-site parking facilities adequately serve the needs of the development, including the availability of street parking. Response: The design development team believes that the potential increase in the number of spaces in the parking garage, the ability to provide short term parking for visitors to the building and the existing transit infrastructure around the site all combine to adequately serve the needs of the new building. As well, other pedestrian amenities and transit amenities are being incorporated in this project. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis, Appendix E. Currently, many City offices are scattered throughout the city. The new building, with a carefully planned program, will create departmental adjacencies to encourage one stop business errands and reduce the amount of short term parking activity around Armory Hall. This could free up parking for downtown businesses. Consolidation of offices back to the central business core of Aspen should reduce cross town vehicular business trips as well. P100 VI.A. Application: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building November 2016 Page 40 H. Common Development Review Procedures Chapter 26.304 Section 26.304.035 Neighborhood Outreach There are several elements to the public outreach effort that have preceded this Application. As outlined in previous sections there has been at least two years of review related to the need for more city offices to consolidate services while providing quality work space and meeting space. New development at the Galena Plaza was considered by a City of Aspen staff steering committee, a larger group of employee stakeholders. Approximately 15 neighborhood meetings were organized and four public open houses were held related to this planning and design work. In addition the City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and Historical Preservation Committee all received numerous presentations. Finally, the City Council held an advisory election on November 3, 2015 seeking the community’s advice on repurposing the Armory building based upon the plan to build a new building at Galena Plaza. The project that has been submitted for review and approval in this Application is very similar to the project that was considered in the last two years except that the new City Offices proposed in this Application is smaller and shorter. Another public open house will be organized prior to the first public hearing at the Planning and Zoning Commission. The focus of this open house will be to review with the public the changes in the new City Offices proposal. P101 VI.A. Charles Cunniffe Architects & Lamont Planning Services Aspen City Offices Public Projects Review Submittal November 2016 Addendum 12-14-2016: Response to the Civic Master Plan P102 VI.A. Addendum: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building Page 2 The Civic Master Plan (Plan) was approved by the Aspen City Council in December of 2006. The Plan process started in 2000 with oversight by the Civic Master Plan Advisory Group (CMPAG). Group members represented Pitkin County and City of Aspen governments, the Fire District and Aspen Water and Sanitation District, and various non-profit groups and locally serving businesses. The Plan focused on several distinct areas of downtown such as the Wheeler Opera House, Obermeyer Place, the Sanitation District, the Galena Plaza, Parking Garage and Rio Grande Park including the river. The #1 Core Principle of the Civic Master Plan is: Civic and arts/cultural uses belong in heart of town. In review of the Plan, it is exciting to see the improvements in the civic/public sector arena that are consistent with Plan: · Completion of Obermeyer Place · A new Fire District headquarters including the Thrift Shop · The Library expansion · The new Art Museum · The renovation of the Wheeler · The new and improved Theatre Aspen tent · The John Denver Sanctuary · Sanitation District Housing · Major stormwater runoff improvements · Construction of the Aspen Police Department on the Zupancis property · Future County Administrative offices on Main Street · Parking garage roof repairs · Pedestrian friendly improvements on the Galena Street extension · Submittal of the new City Offices at Rio Grande The new City Office Public Project Review application is one of the remaining pieces to be developed. There are four sections of the Plan that pertain to this application. P103 VI.A. Addendum: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building Page 3 Section I: Locally Serving, Locally Owned Businesses The CMPAG found that the city parking lots along Rio Grande Place would be appropriate for neighborhood commercially zoned businesses or affordable housing. Although, the proposed use of this building is for City of Aspen governmental purposes verses locally serving businesses, the building integrates into the governmental services that are already concentrated in this area providing services for the Aspen community. The parking lot on the corner of Mill and Rio Grande Place will remain a parking lot and could be a site for future affordable housing. Section II: The Arts in Aspen This section identifies the Galena Plaza as an area for a performing arts center. However, in 2006 the groups pursuing that concept stopped their analysis. Since then, Theater Aspen has greatly improved their performance venue at the edge of the river, the Aspen Art Museum lost the public vote to move to the Rio Grande building but built a new museum at the corner of Spring Street and Hyman Avenue. The CMPAG recommended that either a shared Public Meeting Hall or a future Visitors Center would be an “appropriate” use for the north edge of Galena Plaza. The new City Offices Public Project includes two public meeting spaces and numerous staff meeting space. Although most of the programming of the building is temporary while the Armory Building renovation is being considered, the ultimate use of the building is a public building for the provision of services for City residents. The building’s space and function will complement the existing civic uses on the site such as the Library and the renovated Rio Grande building. Section III: Local Government The CMPAG found that “Aspen was a traditional mining town that ultimately evolved into a resort, and the traditional functions of a small municipality still remain in the heart of the downtown.” This is the number one Principle of the Civic Master Plan, “a primary goal of the Civic Master Plan process is to build upon the intrinsic asset of a civic core that remains integrated into downtown Aspen.” The new City Offices Public Project directly supports this principle and the findings of the CMPAG. Location of the new building is within a collection of civic and governmental offices. Not only is this consistent with the Plan but it creates affinities of service and is user-friendly for citizens conducting city business. P104 VI.A. Addendum: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building Page 4 The Plan identifies a civic meeting hall as one solution to the meeting space crunch and the north edge of the Galena Plaza was identified as an appropriate site. Since the approval of the Plan, the Library has expanded which includes a meeting space and Pitkin County has started development of a new County building and renovation of the Court House to improve space allocation for the County. The new City Offices Public Project proposes more meeting space for staff and two public meetings rooms that are designed to accommodate many types of gatherings. However, final programming of the space will not be settled until the Amory Building renovation is detailed. In the interim and long-term the new City Offices Public Project does provide quality work areas and is a long-term solution for the space issues faced by the City. The Plan identified the former Youth Center, aka Rio Grande building, as important to keep within the civic public service realm. This application includes an interior renovation of the Rio Grande building. The existing meeting room on the top floor will be relocated and enhanced in the new City Offices building. The Plan found that the ACRA offices and visitor center currently located at the north edge of Galena Plaza are inadequate for their function. They are not highly visible and wayfinding can be difficult. The Plan recommends that an appropriate location for this important Aspen function be retained within the civic area of downtown. Final programming and location of the ACRA will be determined when the Armory Building renovation is detailed early next year. Section IV: Public Open Space The Civic Master Plan considers quality open space within an urban context as having a clear edge between public parks and buildings. There should be a demarcation between the urban blocks and public parks. In this section the CMPAG found that the city owned parking lots between the ACRA offices and Rio Grande Place to the corner of Mill Street could be improved. The unraveled edge of the parking lots does not “demarcate the end of an urban block and the beginning of a public park.” The new City Offices Public Project’s site plan and landscape plan include an improved street edge along Rio Grande Place. New trees and drainage bio-swales will parallel Rio Grande Place and pedestrian flow along the streetscape of Rio Grande Place is enhanced using curb extensions and crosswalks. The current staircase will be reconstructed into a stronger design element of the civic space connecting pedestrians from downtown Aspen to Rio Grande Park. The footprint of the new City Offices Public Project will be located on the parking lot in front of the parking garage and will create the clear edge. There is a primary entrance to the building located on this level as well as on the Galena Plaza level. P105 VI.A. Addendum: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building Page 5 The CMPAG found that “if a shared-use arts facility is not constructed at Galena Plaza/Rio Grande Place, a building at the north edge of Galena Plaza could be a welcoming and interactive destination point that capitalizes on the vista, creates vitality and could feature a range of civic and/or cultural uses.” The new City Offices Public Project’s location creates a defined edge to the north end of Galena Plaza, provides a primary public entry point to the building, and includes a public terrace around the north and west edges of the building to capture the views. The CMPAG recommended that Galena Plaza be maintained as open space. The new City Offices Public Project not only preserves this open space on top of the parking garage but expands the space as the top of the parking garage is extended over the lower two floors of the building. The new building creates “built edges” that “frame” the open space. This project provides an opportunity for the new open space integrating with the existing open space on top of the parking garage designed to animate the site in relation to new uses. For the Rio Grande building which provides a built edge on the east side of Galena Plaza, the CMPAG recommend a renovation or a reconstruction of this building to enhance the public space. The application includes a renovation of the Rio Grande building. The CMPAG found that a stronger connection from Main Street to the Galena Plaza through to the Rio Grande Park could be achieved with “compelling architecture” drawing pedestrians to the river. This proposal includes a grand staircase replacing the existing stairs which are squeezed in-between the parking garage wall and the Rio Grande building. Currently they are fairly uninviting, icy in the winter, and not ADA compliant. Section V: Pedestrian Movement The focus of this section is improving pedestrian connections across Main Street to the Rio Grande Park and the river corridor. Since the approval of the Civic Master Plan the Galena Street extension between Main Street and the Plaza has been significantly improved and is more pedestrian friendly. The relocation of the Aspen Police Department will alleviate the emergency vehicles parked in this area. The development of the new City Offices Public Project will replace the existing stairway that connects pedestrians to Rio Grande Place with a grand stairway. The sidewalk along Rio Grande Place in front of the new building will be improved as well. The footprint of the new building is located in the parking lots in front of the parking garage and is consistent with a CMPAG finding: “Replacing these parking lots with an urban edge would create a more visible and inviting pedestrian experience that would serve as an important link between Galena Plaza and North Mill Street.” P106 VI.A. Addendum: New Aspen City Offices & Renovation of the Rio Grande Building Page 6 The proposed improvements to the Galena Plaza open space on top of the parking garage are designed to integrate the buildings at this open space edge and integrate with the pedestrian movements throughout this important civic space. P107 VI.A. Table of Contents Appendices A. Standard Supplemental Documents B. Plan Sheets C. Engineering Report/Service Provider Letters D. Drainage Report/ Geotechnical Report E. Transportation Impact Analysis F. Affordable Housing Credits/Space Analysis P108 VI.A. APPENDIX A P109 VI.A. ASLU Public Project Galena Plaza 273707306852 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Justin Barker, 970.429.2797 DATE: 9.8.1 PROJECT: Galena Plaza Updated: 10.18.16 (JP) REPRESENTATIVE: Jack Wheeler, City of Aspen Capital Asset REQUEST: Public Project/Planned Development, Growth Management, Commercial Design Review DESCRIPTION: The applicant (City of Aspen) is proposing the development of a new municipal office building on three lots, located at 425 & 455 Rio Grande Place. All three lots are zoned Public (PUB) with a Planned Development (PD) overlay, and are part of the Rio Grande Subdivision, which was originally created in 1993. The current development on these properties includes a 3-story mixed use building, a partially subgrade parking garage with offices, a park, and surface parking. As a government entity, the applicant is eligible to pursue a Public Project review, pursuant to Chapter 26.500, but will not be held to the review timeframe outlined in the chapter. Staff believes the scope of the proposed development would qualify as a Major Public Project, allowing for a two-step public hearing process before P&Z (recommending body) and City Council (decision maker). The applicant shall respond to the review standards for Public Projects, as well as the other reviews listed below to ensure a robust consideration of the proposal and to meet one of the general review standards for Public Projects (26.500.070 (3)). The review criteria include all sections of the Land Use Code that would otherwise be applicable to the project in a standard review process, which are listed below. Planned Development (amendment) All dimensional requirements for this site, including floor area, height, and parking shall be approved by City Council, with recommendation from P&Z, on a site specific basis through a Planned Development Review. Since there are no baseline dimensions for the Public Zone District, the applicant should consider the use, context and surrounding development for proposed dimensions. Due to the highly varied topography of the site, staff recommends the applicant consider the use of an elevation point as the maximum overall height. The initial design shall be detailed enough to respond to both Project Review and Detail Review standards. Major Subdivision The proposed development would span three lots. In order to simplify the Planned Development dimensional requirements and building code requirements associated with lot lines, staff suggests the applicant apply for Subdivision approval to create one unified lot for the proposed development. Growth Management The Community Development Director has determined the proposed development to be an “essential public facility”. City Council is the decision-making body on required mitigation for an essential public facility, with recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. According to Section 26.470.100.A(1), The Public Zone District has an employee generation rate of 5.1 employees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space for office-type public uses. However, this rate should be used as a reference, and the applicant is expected to provide both existing and anticipated employment numbers associated with the proposed development. P110 VI.A. 2 Affordable housing mitigation requirements may be assessed, waived, or partially waived as deemed appropriate by City Council. At this time, the applicant is not proposing any affordable housing associated with the project. Staff recommends the applicant include a strategy for affordable housing mitigation for any proposed or future net increase in employees associated with the proposed development. Additionally, the applicant stated that a commercial component shall be part of the application, if there is an increase in net leasable, employee generation will need to be considered. The applicant will need to include details of this proposed use including size, operational characteristics, etc. in the application to determine employee generation associated with this use. Commercial Design Review The proposed development will be subject to Commercial Design Review and the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives. A link to the objectives is found below. These properties are located within the River Approach Area. Commercial Design Review is a two-step public hearing process, with Conceptual and Final Review both before P&Z. This review may also be combined with the Planned Development Review. Additional Requirements A Transportation Impact Analysis is required for this project. A link is provided below. Given the close proximity to several important civic buildings nearby, including the Pitkin County Courthouse, Jail, and Library, Pitkin County will serve as a referral on this application. Neighborhood Outreach is required for this application prior to the first public hearing. A sketch-up model is required prior to Step 1. REVIEW PROCESS: Step 1: P&Z Review Step 2: Council Review Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.304.035 Neighborhood Outreach 26.304.060.B.1 Combined Reviews 26.412 Commercial Design Review (26.412.050 and 26.412.060) 26.445 Planned Development 26.445.050 PD – Project Review Standards (26.445.050 and 26.445.00) 26.470 Growth Management (26.470.050-General Requirements, 26.470.060(6) - minor commercial expansion, 26.470.090 – Essential Public Facilities, 26.470.100.A - Employee generation and mitigation) 26.480 Subdivision (26.480.040 and 26.480.070) 26.500 Public Projects 26.515 Parking 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.630 Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines 26.710.250 Public (PUB) Zone District Land Use App: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/2013%20land%20use%20app%20form.pdf Land Use Code: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-Land-Use-Code/ P111 VI.A. 3 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Current-Planning/ Review by: Staff for complete application and recommendation Development Review Committee for technical considerations P&Z City Council Public Hearing: P&Z for Major Public Project Review City Council for Major Public Project Review Neighborhood Outreach: Yes, prior to 1st public hearing at P&Z Planning Fees: Planning Deposit – Planned Development ($10,400 for 32 hours) Referral Fees: Housing, Parks, Environmental Health @ $1,625 each Engineering (per hour) - $275 Total Deposit: $15,550 (additional planning hours over deposit amount are billed at a rate of $325/hour; additional engineering hours over deposit are billed at a rate of $275/hour) To apply, submit the following information: X Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. X Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). X Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, cons isting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. X Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the nam e, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. X HOA Compliance form (Attached) X Documentation showing the proposal meets all Transportation Mitigation Requirements as outlined in the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and Mitigation Tool, available online at: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Recent-Code- Amendments/. A copy of the tool showing trips generated and the chosen mitigation measures should be included with the application. P112 VI.A. 4 X A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or mode l form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property. X A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado. X Written responses to all review criteria. X An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. X 1 Complete Copy. If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted: 20 Copies of the complete application packet and, if applicable, associated drawings. Number of copies correlates to referral agencies and review boards. Total deposit for review of the application. A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format. A sketch up model will be required for the public hearing. 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. P113 VI.A. P114 VI.A. CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050 Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Phone No.: Owner (“I”): Email: Address of Billing Property: Address: (Subject of (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application complete ness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $.___________flat fee for __________________. $.____________ flat fee for _____________________________ $.___________ flat fee for __________________. $._____________ flat fee for _____________________________ For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that addit ional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impract icable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no -payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director Name: _______________________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________ City Use: Fees Due: $____Received $_______ P115 VI.A. CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050 ATTACHMENT 2 – LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Location:_______________________________________________________________________________________________ Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) APPLICANT: Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone #: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone#: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Please check all that apply): EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (Description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) 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 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5” X 11” must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. GMQS Exemption Conceptual PUD Temporary Use GMQS Allotment Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Special Review Subdivision Conceptual SPA ESA – 8040 Greenline, Stream Subdivision Exemption (includes Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Condominiumization) Mountain View Plane Final SPA (&SPA Commercial Design Review Lot Split Amendment) Residential Design Variance Lot Line Adjustment Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion Conditional Use Other: P116 VI.A. CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050 ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: ______________________________________________________________________________ Applicant: ______________________________________________________________________________ Location: ______________________________________________________________________________ Zone District: ______________________________________________________________________________ Lot Size: _______________________________________________________________________________ Lot Area: _______________________________________________________________________________ (For the purpose of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high-water mark, easement, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _________________________________ Number of residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _________________________________ 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/F: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________ Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed _____________ Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________ Combined Sides: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________ Distance between Bldgs. Existing: _____________ Required: ___________ Proposed _____________ Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed: _____________ Existing non-conformities or encroachments: __________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Variations requested: _____________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Aspen City Hall Public Project Review City of Aspen - Capital Asset Department 427, 455, 480 Rio Grande Place Public Lot 2 - 41,033 sq.ft.;Lot 1 - 25,744 sq. ft.;Lot 4 - 8,276 sq. ft.=75,053 1.72 acres 75,053 sq.ft. 37,406 new offices; 7,120 Rio bldg.11,700 0 0 0 0 Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan Per approved plan 23' / 28' / 25' n/a 350 Per approved plan Per drawings n/a Up to 369 13.9% Per approved plan Properties are zoned public; therefore dimensions are set upon approval + 13.3% = 27.2% total See Survey See Survey See Survey See Survey See Survey See Survey See Survey See Survey See Survey P117 VI.A. P118VI.A. P119VI.A. P120VI.A. CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FEE WAIVER POLICY Fee waiver requests may be made by the Community Development Director and fees may be waived according to the criteria stated below. All remaining fees due shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit or upon submittal of a land use application. The fee waiver form shall contain a description of the project, the fee amount to be waived, and a statement of eligibility for fee waiver. The request will be approved, denied, or referred to the City Manager or City Council as needed. The Director shall not waive fees charged by other City Departments or other organizations. Unless otherwise agreed to, a fee waiver request must be approved prior to submission of a building permit application or land use application. Alternatively, an applicant may submit all fees due with their application and receive a refund for any subsequent waiver. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA 1. City Projects – General Fund Departments, with the exception of Capital Projects, shall not pay Community Development fees. 2. City Projects – Non-General Fund Departments and Capital Projects shall receive a 50% fee waiver of Community Development fees. 3. Projects granted a waiver or partial waiver by City Council. Applicants must provide documentation of the waiver or have the Director verify that a waiver was granted. All fees waived for these projects will be tracked by the Community Development Department; journal entries are not required. All waivers must be documented with an approved form. General Fund Departments include: General Fund Departments FUND.DEPT General Fund Departments FUND.DEPT Non-Departmental 001.00 Streets Department 001.41 City Council 001.03 Parks Department 001.55 City Manager 001.05 GIS Department 001.60 Personnel 001.06 IT Department 001.61 City Clerk 001.07 Special Events 001.70 City Attorney 001.09 Recreation Activities 001.71 Risk Management 001.10 Aspen Recreation Center (ARC) 001.72 City Finance Department 001.11 Ice Garden Operations 001.74 Community Development 001.13 Cons. Trust FD/Lottery 001.75 Engineering Department 001.15 *Capital Projects 001.90 Building Department 001.21 Asset Management Plan (AMP) 001.91 Environmental Health 001.25 *Tabor Capital Projects 001.94 Police Department 001.31 Outgoing Transfers 001.95 Records 001.33 Communications 001.39 NOTE* Capital Projects are not exempt from fees P121 VI.A. Fee Waiver Request Form City of Aspen Community Development Department This form must be submitted to the Community Development Director. You will be notified when a decision has been made. For what fees are you requesting waiver? BUILDING PLANNING Applicant Name: Contact Ph.# Department or Mailing address: E-mail address: Project address: Project description: Fee Breakdown: BUILDING & PLANNING FEES Fee Description Fee Amount Requested Waiver Fee Description Fee Amount Requested Waiver Energy Code Fee REMP Fee Excavation Foundation Fee Zoning Review Fee Inspection Fee Planning Application Fee Permit Fee HPC Application Fee Plan Check Other: Total of Request: $ Reason for Waiver: City General Fund Department – 100% waiver City Capital or Other Department – 50% waiver Waived or decreased by City Council (please provide documentation) Other – Please explain with attached letter of request Applicant Signature Date For office use only: APPROVED DISAPPROVED Total fees waived: $ Community Development Director Date P122 VI.A. APPENDIX B P123 VI.A. P124VI.A. P125VI.A. P126VI.A. PROPOSED CITY OFFICES (PLAZA) RIO GRANDE BUILDING LAND USE APPLICATIONNOVEMBER 2016 PROPOSED CITY OFFICES (LOWER LEVELS) APPENDIX B P127VI.A. 1AP128VI.A. P129VI.A. P130VI.A. P131VI.A. P132VI.A. P133VI.A. P134VI.A. P135VI.A. P136VI.A. PROPOSED CITY HALL RIO GRANDE BUILDING COUNTY BUILDING COMMUNITY BANK MILL STREET HOUSING EXISTING MILL STREET LOT PARKING GARAGE ACCESS PARKING GARAGE ELEVATOR GALENA STAIRCASE CITY HALL PLAZAENTR Y P A T H CURB EXTENSIONS RIO GRANDE PARKRIO G R A N D E P L A C EN MILL STREETPITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY GALENA PLAZA ASPEN CITY HALL SITE PLAN CONCEPTUAL DESIGNNOVEMBER 2016 0 20 40 CITY OFFICES CITY OFFICES PLAN APPENDIX B P137VI.A. C DESIGN DATE#DESCRIPTION ISSUE DATE: SHEET NUMBER REVIEWED: PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWN: 1 WORKSHOP REVISIONS 5139 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E CITY OF ASPENRIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COLORADOC O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C. F 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M Landscape Architecture · Land Planning Urban Design · Tourism Planning Facsimile (970) 920-1387 (970) 925-8354 Aspen, CO 81611 120 E. Main St. Asheville · Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Dubai · Houston · Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Shanghai November 4, 2016 DC/ MP RWSCITY OFFICESNORTH 0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 10 20 40 1"=20'-00" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED CITY OFFICES PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY GALENA PLAZA RIO GRANDE BUILDING COUNTY BUILDING R I O G R A N D E P L A C E RIO GRANDE PARK MILL STREET LOT MILL STREET HOUSING BANKN MILL STREETLIGHTING PLAN L0-01 LIGHTING LEGEND PROPOSED PATH LIGHT PROPOSED STEP & RAMP LIGHT PROPOSED INTEGRATED BENCH LIGHT STEP LIGHTS PATH LIGHT PATH LIGHT PATH LIGHT PATH LIGHT PATH LIGHT INTEGRATED BENCH LIGHTP138 VI.A. S icb S icb icb SS icb C DESIGN DATE#DESCRIPTION ISSUE DATE: SHEET NUMBER REVIEWED: PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWN: 1 WORKSHOP REVISIONS 5139 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E CITY OF ASPENRIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COLORADOC O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C. F 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M Landscape Architecture · Land Planning Urban Design · Tourism Planning Facsimile (970) 920-1387 (970) 925-8354 Aspen, CO 81611 120 E. Main St. Asheville · Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Dubai · Houston · Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Shanghai November 4, 2016 DC/ MP RWSCITY OFFICESNORTH 0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 10 20 40 1"=20'-00" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY GALENA PLAZA RIO GRANDE BUILDING COUNTY BUILDING R I O G R A N D E P L A C E RIO GRANDE PARK MILL STREET LOT MILL STREET HOUSING BANKN MILL STREETTREE REMOVAL PLAN L1-01 1 Existing tree to remain. Do not disturb. Protect in place. PLANT PROTECTION AND REMOVAL REFERENCE NOTES 2 Existing tree to be removed, including roots and stump, and legally dispose of off site. 3 Existing planting area to be removed, including but not limited to: irrigation system, vegetation, river cobble and edging. NOTE: Total caliper removed: 129" 8" Species 6" Species 6" Species 7" Species 6" Species 6" Species 6" Species 6" Species 12" Species 6" Species 6" Species 12" Species 6" Species 6" Species 8" Species 8" Species 8" Species 6" Species xx" Species xx" Species xx" Species xx" Species 1 1 3 2 TYP P139VI.A. 7884'7882'7880'7878' 7880'7882'7884'7886'788 8 ' 789 4 ' 7896'7908'7908'7894'7892'7906 ' C DESIGN DATE#DESCRIPTION ISSUE DATE: SHEET NUMBER REVIEWED: PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWN: 1 WORKSHOP REVISIONS 5139 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E CITY OF ASPENRIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COLORADOC O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C. F 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M Landscape Architecture · Land Planning Urban Design · Tourism Planning Facsimile (970) 920-1387 (970) 925-8354 Aspen, CO 81611 120 E. Main St. Asheville · Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Dubai · Houston · Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Shanghai November 4, 2016 DC/ MP RWSCITY OFFICESNORTH 0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 10 20 40 1"=20'-00" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED CITY OFFICES PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY GALENA PLAZA RIO GRANDE BUILDING COUNTY BUILDING R I O G R A N D E P L A C E RIO GRANDE PARK MILL STREET LOT MILL STREET HOUSING BANKN MILL STREETPA LANDSCAPE PLAN L8-01 ABBR. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE TREES SHRUBS PLANT LIST Pt Populus tremuloides Quaking Aspen 2.5" CAL. Turf PERENNIALS & GROUND COVERS GRASSES Go Galium odoratum Sweet Woodruff 1 GAL Am Achillea 'Moonshine'Moonshine Yarrow 1 GAL. Pa Populus angustifolia Narrowleaf Cottonwood (cottonless) 3" CAL. Sj Spirea japonica 'Froebelii'Froebel Spirea 5 GAL. Ptm Populus tremuloides Quaking Aspen 3" CAL. Csi Cornus sericea 'Isanti'Red Twig Dogwood 5 GAL. Tp Thymus praecox Mother of thyme 1 GAL Db Delphinium 'Blue bird'Pacific Giant Delphinium 1 GAL Gj Geranium 'Johnson's Blue' Johnson's Blue Cranesbill 1 GAL Sa Sedum acre evergreen Golmoss-Utah Stonecrop 1 GAL Hs Helictotrichon sempervirens Blue Avena Grass 1 GAL Dc Deschampsia cespitosa Tufted Hairgrass 1 GAL Vs Veronic Spicata 'Tall Blue'Blue Spiked Speedwell 1 GAL Ls Leucanthemum x superbum x 'Alaska'Shasta Daisy 1 GAL Li Lonicera involucrata Twinberry Honeysuckle 5 GAL. Ra Ribes alpinum Alpine Currant 5 GAL. (4) Tree (1) Tree (1) Tree (6) Tree (5) Tree (5) Tree (3) Tree (3) Tree (5) Tree PLANTING LEGEND TURFPROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREE PROPOSED SINGLE-STEM ORNAMENTAL PROPOSED MULTI-STEM ORNAMENTAL PROPOSED PLANTING AREAS PROPOSED GRASSES PA PA PAPA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA P140VI.A. UP UP UP UPUP UP 3,180 BASEMENT LEVEL 13,837 MIDDLE LEVEL 2,986 MIDDLE LEVEL - RIO GRANDE 13,073 MAIN LEVEL 1,629 MAIN LEVEL - RIO GRANDE 7,353 UPPER LEVEL 2,666 UPPER LEVEL - RIO GRANDE 1,002 NET LEASABLE - RIO GRANDE CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/14/2016 6:12:13 PMA0.3 1506 GROSS BUILDING AREASASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 1 BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 3 MIDDLE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 2 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 4 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN GROSS SF. CALCULATIONS - EXISTING SITE ACRA BUIDLING LEVEL 03 4,522 SF 4,522 SF PARKING GARAGE LEVEL 01 15,205 SF LEVEL 01 (CRAWL SPACE) 15,838 SF LEVEL 02 38,611 SF LEVEL 03 32,799 SF LEVEL 04 35,008 SF 137,461 SF RIO GRANDE BUILDING LEVEL 01 1,148 SF LEVEL 02 2,986 SF LEVEL 03 2,666 SF 6,800 SF TOTAL:148,783 SF GROSS SF. CALCULATIONS - PROPOSED SITE ASPEN CITY OFFICES BASEMENT LEVEL 3,180 SF MAIN LEVEL 13,073 SF MIDDLE LEVEL 13,837 SF UPPER LEVEL 7,353 SF 37,443 SF PARKING GARAGE LEVEL 01 15,205 SF LEVEL 01 (CRAWL SPACE) 15,838 SF LEVEL 02 38,611 SF LEVEL 03 32,799 SF LEVEL 04 35,008 SF 137,461 SF RIO GRANDE BUILDING LEVEL 01 1,148 SF LEVEL 02 2,986 SF LEVEL 03 2,666 SF 6,800 SF TOTAL:181,704 SF RIO GRANDE BUILDING LEVEL 01 (NET LEASABLE) 1,002 SF RIO GRANDE BUILDING NET LEASABLE SF (EXISTING)P141VI.A. MILL STREET CONDOS PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY ADDITION COMMUNITY BANKS OF COLORADO RIO GRANDE BUILDING LOFT APARTMENT BUILDING PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE PITKIN COUNTY JAIL GALENA PLAZA EXISTING MILL STREET LOT RIO GRANDE PARK AMENDED ACCESS EASEMENT 20' INGRESS & EGRESS EASEMENT 25' TRAIL & FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY 5' NEGATIVE EASEMENT AIR & LIGHT EASEMENT TRANSIT EASEMENT TERMINABLE ACCESS & MAINTENANCE EASEMENT FOR SUSPENSION BRIDGEN. MILL STREETAIR & LIGHT EASEMENT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:14:35 PMA1.1 1506 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: 1" = 20'-0"1 SITE PLAN NORTH 0 10 20 40P142 VI.A. MILL STREET CONDOS PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY COMMUNITY BANKS OF COLORADO RIO GRANDE BUILDING LOFT APARTMENT BUILDING PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE PITKIN COUNTY JAIL GALENA PLAZA EXISTING MILL STREET LOT RIO GRANDE PARK N. MILL STREETPOINT 05 POINT 01 POINT 02 POINT 03 POINT 04 POINT 06 POINT 09 POINT 10 POINT 08 POINT 07 POINT 11 POINT 12 POINT 13 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/14/2016 6:12:14 PMA1.2 1506 INTERPOLATED ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: 1" = 20'-0"1 SITE PLAN WITH INTERPOLATED GRADE NORTH 0 10 20 40 BUILDING HEIGHT TABULATION LOCATION EXISTING GRADE AT LOCATION BUILDING HEIGHT AT LOCATION PROPOSED GRADE AT LOCATION HEIGHT LIMIT AT LOCATION POINT 01 7881' - 4" 32' - 1" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 02 7884' - 0 1/2" 29' - 5 1/2" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 03 7884' - 6 1/2" 42' - 5 1/2" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 04 7891' - 11" 35' - 1" 7910' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 05 7901' - 9 1/2" 25' - 2 1/2" 7910' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 06 7888' - 3" 38' - 9" 7910' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 07 7883' - 4" 43' - 9" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 08 7882' - 2" 44' - 10" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 09 7902' - 0" 22' - 6" 7910' - 0" 7927' - 0" PONIT 10 7884' - 7" 37' - 11" 7910' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 11 7883' - 9" 41' - 1" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 12 7883' - 7 1/2" 29' - 10 1/2" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0" POINT 13 7884' - 5 1/2" 45' - 2 1/2" 7885' - 0" 7927' - 0"P143VI.A. UP A3.22 A3.1 1 A3.2 1 A3.1 2 MILL STREET CONDOS PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY RIO GRANDE BUILDING ABOVE 1 A4.1 1 A4.1 2 A4.1 2 A4.1 MECHANICAL DATA CENTER STORAGE ELECTRICAL ELEVATOR BUILDING ABOVE PITKIN COUNTY JAIL CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:14:36 PMA2.1 1506 BASEMENT LEVEL - REFERENCE FLOOR PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN NORTH 0 10 20 40P144 VI.A. UPUP UP A3.22 A3.1 1 A3.2 1 A3.1 2 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY MILL STREET CONDOS 1 A4.1 1 A4.1 2 A4.1 2 A4.1 OFFICE ELEVATOR OFFICE LOCKER/SHOWER LOCKER/SHOWER STORAGE STORAGE STORAGEPRINT/COPY/MAIL ELEVATOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT PITKIN COUNTY JAIL NOTE: 1. FURNITURE LAYOUT INDICATED IS REPRESENTATIVE (FLEXIBLE CONFIGURATION) CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:14:38 PMA2.2 1506 MAIN LEVEL - REFERENCE FLOOR PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN NORTH 0 10 20 40P145 VI.A. UP REF. UP DN A3.22 A3.1 1 A3.2 1 A3.1 2 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY EXISTING COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT (BELOW) MILL STREET CONDOS 1 A4.1 1 A4.1 2 A4.1 2 A4.1 OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE 20'-0"12'-5"TRASH/RECYCLE SHIP/RECEIVING ELEVATOR PITKIN COUNTY JAIL ELEVATOR NOTE: 1. FURNITURE LAYOUT INDICATED IS REPRESENTATIVE (FLEXIBLE CONFIGURATION) CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:14:44 PMA2.3 1506 MIDDLE LEVEL - REFERENCE FLOOR PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 MIDDLE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN NORTH 0 10 20 40P146 VI.A. DN A3.22 A3.1 1 A3.2 1 A3.1 2 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY ADDITION MILL STREET CONDOS 1 A4.1 1 A4.1 2 A4.1 2 A4.1 PITKIN COUNTY JAIL OFFICE MEETING ROOM MEETING ROOM ELEVATOR ELEVATOR NOTE: 1. FURNITURE LAYOUT INDICATED IS REPRESENTATIVE (FLEXIBLE CONFIGURATION) CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:14:48 PMA2.4 1506 UPPER LEVEL - REFERENCE FLOOR PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN NORTH 0 10 20 40P147 VI.A. A3.22 A3.1 1 A3.2 1 A3.1 2 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY ADDITION RIO GRANDE BUILDING MILL STREET CONDOS 1 A4.1 1 A4.1 2 A4.1 2 A4.1 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY ADDITION MILL STREET CONDOS PITKIN COUNTY JAIL CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:14:49 PMA2.5 1506 ROOF PLAN - REFERENCE PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 ROOF PLAN NORTH 0 10 20 40P148 VI.A. T.O. SLAB @ MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O. SLAB @ MIDDLE LEVEL 112' - 6" T.O. SLAB @ UPPER LEVEL 125' - 0" T.O. PLATE 137' - 8"12'-6" 12'-6" 12'-8"42'-0"RIO GRANDE BUIILDING METAL PANELGLASS CURTAIN WALLCHANNEL GLASS IRON SPOT FACE BRICKMETAL PANEL GLASS CURTAIN WALL IRON SPOT FACE BRICK COMPOSITE STONE PANELSVIEW CORRIDOR (INTERPOLATED GRADE SURVEY) EL. = 7883' - 7 1/2"29'-10 1/2"28'-6"EL. = 7882' - 2"44'-10"42'-0"EL. = 7881' - 4"32'-1"28'-6"T.O. SLAB @ MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O. SLAB @ MIDDLE LEVEL 112' - 6" T.O. SLAB @ UPPER LEVEL 125' - 0" T.O. PLATE 137' - 8"44'-8"42'-0"12'-6" 12'-6" 12'-8" IRON SPOT FACE BRICKMETAL PANELGLASS CURTAIN WALL EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE EL. = 7881' - 4"28'-5"32'-1"EL. = 7884' - 5 1/2" EL. = 7887' - 0" EL. = 7882' - 2"44'-10"42'-0"45'-2 1/2"EL. = 7884' - 0 1/2" (INTERPOLATED GRADE SURVEY) CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/15/2016 9:36:46 AMA3.1 1506 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION 3/32" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATIONP149 VI.A. T.O. SLAB @ MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O. SLAB @ MIDDLE LEVEL 112' - 6" T.O. SLAB @ UPPER LEVEL 125' - 0" T.O. PLATE 137' - 8"12'-8"12'-6"12'-6"19'-8"RIO GRANDE BUIILDING IRON SPOT FACE BRICK LANDSCAPED PLAZA EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE PROPOSED CITY HALL PLAZA EL. = 7891' - 11"35'-1"17'-0"EL. = 7901' - 9 1/2"25'-2 1/2"EL. = 7902' - 0"22'-6"14'-6"(INTERPOLATED GRADE SURVEY) EL. = 7899' - 1" (INTERPOLATED GRADE SURVEY)42'-0"T.O. SLAB @ MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O. SLAB @ MIDDLE LEVEL 112' - 6" T.O. SLAB @ UPPER LEVEL 125' - 0" T.O. PLATE 137' - 8"42'-0"12'-6" 12'-6" 12'-8" METAL PANELGLASS CURTAIN WALLCHANNEL GLASS IRON SPOT FACE BRICKCOMPOSITE STONE PANELSIRON SPOT FACE BRICKEXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE METAL PANEL EL. = 7884' - 7" EL. = 7902' - 0" EL. = 7887' - 0"37'-11"37'-6"14'-6"22'-6"EL. = 7883' - 9"41'-1"39'-10"(INTERPOLATED GRADE SURVEY) CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/15/2016 9:37:09 AMA3.2 1506 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 3/32" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION 3/32" = 1'-0"2 EAST ELEVATIONP150 VI.A. T.O. SLAB @ MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" T.O. SLAB @ MIDDLE LEVEL 112'-6" T.O. SLAB @ UPPER LEVEL 125'-0" T.O. PLATE 137'-8" T.O. SLAB @ BASEMENT 88'-11" 2 A4.1 2 A4.1 11'-1" 12'-6" 12'-6" 12'-8"42'-0"T.O. SLAB @ MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" T.O. SLAB @ MIDDLE LEVEL 112'-6" T.O. SLAB @ UPPER LEVEL 125'-0" T.O. PLATE 137'-8" T.O. SLAB @ BASEMENT 88'-11" 1 A4.1 1 A4.1 11'-1" 12'-6" 12'-6" 12'-8"42'-0"CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.11/29/2016 3:16:10 PMA4.1 1506 BUILDING SECTIONSASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: ISSUE XX/XX/X X ISSUE XX/XX/X X ISSUE XX/XX/X X 3/32" = 1'-0"1 NORTH/SOUTH SECTION 3/32" = 1'-0" 2 EAST/ WEST SECTION P151VI.A. UPUP UP PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY MILL STREET CONDOS OFFICE ELEVATOR OFFICE LOCKER/SHOWER LOCKER/SHOWER STORAGE STORAGE STORAGEPRINT/COPY/MAIL ELEVATOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT PITKIN COUNTY JAIL B B B B A A A A A A A A A A A PARKING GARAGE LIGHTING TO REMAIN AS EXISTING RIO GRANDE BUILDING LIGHTING TO REMAIN AS EXISTING SEE SHEET L0-01 FOR LANDSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGEND RECESSED CEILING DOWNLIGHT WALL MOUNTED DOWNLIGHT A B CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/15/2016 9:37:10 AMA7.4 1506 MAIN LEVEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 NORTH 0 10 20 40 3/32" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL EXT LIGHTING PLANP152 VI.A. UP UP DN PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY EXISTING COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT (BELOW) MILL STREET CONDOS OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE 20'-0"12'-5"TRASH/RECYCLE SHIP/RECEIVING ELEVATOR PITKIN COUNTY JAIL ELEVATOR PARKING GARAGE LIGHTING TO REMAIN AS EXISTING EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGEND RECESSED CEILING DOWNLIGHT WALL MOUNTED DOWNLIGHT A B CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/15/2016 9:37:17 AMA7.5 1506 MIDDLE LEVEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 NORTH 0 10 20 40 3/32" = 1'-0"1 MIDDLE LEVEL EXT LIGHTING PLANP153 VI.A. DN PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY ADDITION MILL STREET CONDOS PITKIN COUNTY JAIL OFFICE MEETING ROOM MEETING ROOM ELEVATOR ELEVATOR AA A A A AA A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A B SEE SHEET L0-01 FOR LANDSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN RIO GRANDE BUILDING LIGHTING TO REMAIN AS EXISTING EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGEND RECESSED CEILING DOWNLIGHT WALL MOUNTED DOWNLIGHT A B CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTSC 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.920.4557 cunniffe.com SHEET NO. JOB NO.12/15/2016 9:37:21 AMA7.6 1506 UPPER LEVEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLANASPEN CITY OFFICES425 RIO GRANDE PLACEASPEN, COISSUE: DATE: LAND USE APP 11/14/16 NORTH 0 10 20 40 3/32" = 1'-0"1 UPPER LEVEL EXT LIGHTING PLANP154 VI.A. VIEW FROM RIO GRANDE PL. VIEW FROM RIO GRANDE PARK ASPEN CITY OFFICES AT RIO GRANDE 13 December 2016P155VI.A. PROPOSED - VIEW FROM GALENA ST. EXISTING - VIEW FROM GALENA ST. ASPEN CITY OFFICES AT RIO GRANDE 13 December 2016P156VI.A. PROPOSED GALENA PLAZA ASPEN CITY OFFICES AT RIO GRANDE 13 December 2016P157VI.A. ASPEN CITY HALL CONCEPTUAL DESIGN NOVEMBER 2016 STORMWATER FILTRATION ZONE PROPOSED CITY HALL ON-STREET PARKING = PERMEABLE PAVERS RIO GRANDE PARK RIO GRANDE PL A C E ADA ACCESSIBLE RAMP BICYCLE PARKING CURB EXTENSION CITY OFFICES APPENDIX B P158VI.A. EXTERIOR MATERIALS MINOR DEVELOPMENT Aspen City Offices at 425 & 455 Rio Grande Place A Level One Transportation Impact Analysis with an application for a essential public facility building Date: Location: November 14, 2016 425 & 455 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 425-(PID# 2737-073-06-852) 455-(PID# 2737-073-06-854) 1. Exterior Modular Brick Veneer: the primary cladding. Use of stone sills and soldier course banding at top of wall and base. Exact color and manufactur- er TBD. 2. Stone Composite Panel: accent mate- rial, pattern as shown. 3. Pre-finished Metal Zinc Gray Panel :for parapet copings, accent areas and overhang cladding. This is a green product. 4. Pilkington Profilite Glazing System: only at 3rd floor main exterior stair to allow diffused daylighting into building core. 1. 1. 1. 2. 4. 3. 5. P159 VI.A. Type: BEGA Product: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: BEGA -US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805 ) 684-0533 FAX (805 ) 566 -9474 www .bega -us .com ©copyright BEGA-US 2016 Updated 06/16 Housing: Constructed of die-cast and extruded aluminum. Housing is provided with mounting clamps that provide a vibration proof installation. Rough-in housing constructed of glavanized steel with through wiring box. Rough-in housing included. Die castings are marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy. Enclosure: Tempered clear glass, retained by a one piece, die- cast aluminum frame threaded into luminaire housing. Internal reflector made from pure, anodized aluminum. Fully gasketed for weather tight operation using a molded silicone gasket. Electrical: 17.5W LED luminaire, 21 total system watts, -30°C start temperature. EldoLED 0-10V dimmable driver mounted to the junction box of the ceiling pan for easy maintenance. The LED driver provides smooth and flicker free dimming down to 0.1% and is compatible with both sink and current source controllers. Optional Dali dimmable driver available, consult factory for details. LED module(s) are available from factory for easy replacement. Standard LED color temperature is 3000K with an 85 CRI. Available in 4000K (85 CRI); add suffix K4 to order. Note: LEDs supplied with luminaire. Due to the dynamic nature of LED technology, LED luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA-US. For the most current technical data, please refer to www.bega-us.com. Finish: All BEGA standard finishes are polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness. Available in four standard BEGA colors: Black (BLK); White (WHT); Bronze (BRZ); Silver (SLV). To specify, add appropriate suffix to catalog number. Custom colors supplied on special order. CSA certified to U.S. and Canadian standards, suitable for wet locations. Protection class IP65 Weight: 1.4 lbs. Luminaire Lumens: 1162 Recessed ceiling downlights with symmetrical light distribution · narrow beam A C B b = Beam angle Recessed ceiling downlights · narrow beam Lamp b A B C 55 925 17.5 W LED 16˚5 5⁄8 3 1⁄4 18 RECESSED CEILING DOWNLIGHT P160 VI.A. Type: BEGA Product: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: BEGA -US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805 ) 684-0533 FAX (805 ) 566 -9474 www .bega -us .com ©copyright BEGA-US 2016 Updated 02/16 Housing: Die-cast aluminum with integral wiring compartment. Die castings are marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy. Enclosure: One piece die-cast aluminum faceplate. 1⁄8“ thick, tempered glass; clear with white translucent ceramic coating. Faceplate is secured by four (4) socket head, stainless steel, captive screws threaded into stainless steel inserts in the housing casting. Continuous high temperature O-ring gasket for weather tight operation. Electrical: 10.5W LED luminaire, 12.8 total system watts, -30°C start temperature. Integral 120V through 277V electronic LED driver, 0-10V dimming. LED module(s) are available from factory for easy replacement. Standard LED color temperature is 3000K with an 85 CRI. Available in 4000K (85 CRI); add suffix K4 to order. Note: LEDs supplied with luminaire. Due to the dynamic nature of LED technology, LED luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA-US. For the most current technical data, please refer to www.bega-us.com. Finish: All BEGA standard finishes are polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness. Available in four standard BEGA colors: Black (BLK); White (WHT); Bronze (BRZ); Silver (SLV). To specify, add appropriate suffix to catalog number. Custom colors supplied on special order. CSA certified to U.S. and Canadian standards, suitable for wet locations. Protection class IP65 Weight: 3.5 lbs. Luminaire Lumens: 160 Tested in accordance with LM-79-08 Recessed wall luminaires · shielded Recessed Luminaires · shielded light Lamp A B C CPC 22 372 10.5W LED 7 1⁄2 7 1⁄2 4 19 522 A C B A C B 3I SUBMISSION - JUNE 29, 2016 STEP AND RAMP LIGHT P161 VI.A. A B C BEGA -US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805 ) 684-0533 FAX (805 ) 566 -9474 www .bega -us .com ©copyright BEGA-US 2016 Updated 02/16 Wall luminaires with directed light in one direction Housing: One Piece, die cast aluminum housing with a one piece, die cast aluminum mounting plate. The mounting plate is supplied with a flat plate that mounts directly to a standard, recessed 4" octagonal wiring box. Die castings are marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy. Enclosure: Clear tempered glass diffuser. Provided reflector made of pure anodized aluminum. Housing is secured to the mounting plate with two (2) mechanically captive, stainless steel set screws. Electrical: 6.5W LED luminaire, 8.6 total system watts, -30°C start temperature. Integral 120V through 277V electronic LED driver, 0-10V dimming. LED module(s) are available from factory for easy replacement. Standard LED color temperature is 3000K with an 85 CRI. Available in 4000K (85 CRI); add suffix K4 to orde Note: Due to the dynamic nature of LED technology, LED luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA-US. For the most current technical data, please refer to www.bega-us.com. Finish: All BEGA standard finishes are polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness. Available in four standard BEGA colors: Black (BLK); White (WHT); Bronze (BRZ); Silver (SLV). To specify, add appropriate suffix to catalog number. Custom colors supplied on special order. CSA certified to U.S. and Canadian standards, suitable for wet locations. Protection class IP64 Weight: 3.5 lbs. Luminaire Lumens: 173 Tested in accordance with LM-79-08 Type: BEGA Product: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: One-sided light distribution Lamp A B C 33 580 6.5 W LED 4 3⁄8 7 1⁄2 5 WALL MOUNTED DOWNLIGHT P162 VI.A. Type: BEGA Product: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: BEGA -US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805 ) 684-0533 FAX (805 ) 566 -9474 www .bega -us .com ©copyright BEGA-US 2016 Updated 03/16 Post construction: One piece extruded aluminum. All aluminum in the construction is marine grade and copper free. Lamp Enclosure: One piece die cast aluminum housing attached to post using two (2) captive stainless steel screws threaded into stainless steel inserts. Matte safety glass lens. Fully gasketed using a one piece molded silicone gasket. Electrical: 3.4W LED luminaire, 5 total system watts, -30°C start temperature. Integral 12V AC driver provided must be operated using remote magnetic transformer. Standard LED color temperature is 3000K with a >80 CRI. Note: LEDs supplied with luminaire. Due to the dynamic nature of LED technology, LED luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA-US. For the most current technical data, please refer to www.bega-us.com. Anchor base: Anchor base made of galvanized steel, made for bolting into foundation or other paved surface. Bollards are secured to anchor base using two (2) stainless steel set screws. Finish: Available in four standard BEGA colors: Black (BLK); White (WHT); Bronze (BRZ); Silver (SLV). To specify, add appropriate suffix to catalog number. Custom colors supplied on special order. Please note: BEGA’s approach to product design is to innovate, not follow. With a steadfast commitment to quality, each product is conceived to satisfy a general or specific lighting task as defined by its architectural or exterior surroundings. The Home and Garden Collection is designed specifically for use in Residential and Light Commercial applications. Please reference our standard BEGA portfolio when mounting provisions for the rigorous demands of high-use commercial and/or vandal prone settings are required. CSA certified to U.S. and Canadian standards, suitable for wet locations. Protection class IP65 Weight: 6.3 lbs. LED garden and pathway bollard A A B A A B Lamp A B 77 263 with direct burial anchorage 3.4 W LED 4 3⁄8 27 1⁄2 PATH LIGHT P163 VI.A. Description: Soft Strip (SS1) provides accent light with warm white or very warm white LEDs. At less than a 3/8" wide, the flexible copper strip, with an optically clear protective coating, is sold in 1 foot increments up to 40 feet with cutting increments every 4 inches. Includes Snap & Light Connector SS- SLC-96IN. Additional Snap & Light Connectors (pages 4-5) are also available for making custom configurations. At only 1.4 system watts per foot, this economical system uses an electronic low-voltage or 0-10V power supply (sold separately). Self-adhering SS1 mounts to most smooth finished surfaces with industrial strength 3M tape (provided on back of strip); some unfinished surfaces may require screw-in mounting clips (sold separately). Designed for indoor/damp locations. Soft Strip is compatible with solderless Snap & Light Connectors. Fixtures include a 5 year warranty. Applications: Indoor/Damp Location - Inside cabinet, wine cellar, steps, behind mirrors, handrails, inside drawers, niches and toe kicks. ETL listed to conform to UL 2108 for closet and under-cabinet applications Lamp: 24VDC Power Supply (sold separately): PSB-96W-010-24VDC 120-277VAC input, 96 watt output PSB-2X96W-010-24VDC 120-277VAC input, 2x96 watt output PSB-3X96W-010-24VDC 120-277VAC input, 3x96 watt output PSB-4X96W-010-24VDC 120-277VAC input, 4x96 watt output PSB-60W-ELV-24VDC 120VAC input, 60 watt output PSB-100W-ELV-24VDC 120VAC input, 96 watt output PSB-2X100W-ELV-24VDC 120VAC input, 2x96 watt output PSB-3X100W-ELV-24VDC 120VAC input, 3x96 watt output PSB-4x100W-ELV-24VDC 120VAC input, 4x96 watt output Dimming: 0-10 power supplies use 0-10V dimmer: Philips Sunrise SR1200ZTUNV. ELV power supplies use ELV dimmer: Legrand, Adorne ADTP703TU; Lutron: Diva DVELV-300P, Skylark SELV-300P, Maestro MAELV-600 and Radio Ra 2 Mounting Straps & Clips: (See page 4) SS-SU Use U-Strap every 6 to 12 inches for extra support (30 per package). SS-ST Use Tie Strap every 6 to 12 inches for extra support (30 per package). SS1-MCL Mounts beneath strip, snapping strip in place for additional support (10 per package). SS1-24V-_-30K System Voltage Length in Feet Color Temperature SS1 –24V –40 –27K SS1 Soft Strip 1.4W per Ft 24V 24 Volt Sold in 1 ft increments up to 40ft (Example 40=40') 27K 30K 2700K Very Warm White 3000K Warm White SS1 SOFT STRIP 1.4W 24VDC LOW OUTPUT, ECONOMY GRADE (80+CRI) REV.11.15.16 LENGTH IN FEET TOTAL WATTAGE 1 2 2 3 3 5 4 6 5 7 6 9 7 10 8 12 9 13 10 14 11 16 12 17 13 19 14 20 15 21 16 23 17 24 18 26 19 27 20 28 21 30 LENGTH IN FEET TOTAL WATTAGE 22 31 23 33 24 34 25 35 26 37 27 38 28 40 29 41 30 42 31 44 32 45 33 47 34 48 35 49 36 51 37 52 38 54 39 55 40 56 Maximum Length Before Refeeding: 40 Ft .47" .67" 4" Watts Color Temp.CRI Lumens 50,000 Hour per Foot per Watt per Foot Lamp Life 1.4 2700K 80+73 102 • 1.4 3000K 80+88 123 • INTEGRATED BENCH LIGHT P164 VI.A. SS1 SOFT STRIP ELV DIMMING Application: Electronic low-voltage dimming for SS1 Soft Strip Power Supply: PSB-60W-ELV-24VDC: 120VAC input, 24VDC 60 watt output Dimming: Dimmable with low voltage electronic dimmer using power supply above. See power supply spec sheet for additional details. Lutron: Diva DVELV-300P; Skylark SELV-300P; Maestro MAELV-600 dimmers are recommended STRIP DOES NOT BEND 90° General 24VDC Soft Strip Wiring Diagram w/ Snapand Light ConnectorsCreated 10/26/15 120VAC (HOT) -24VDC +24VDC -24VDC+24VDC-24VDC+24VDC-24VDC +24VDC -24VDC +24VDC TRIM ONLY AT CUT LINES POWER SUPPLY ELV DIMMER INPUT 120VAC SS_-24V-_-_ SS_-24V-_-_SS_-24V-_-_SS-SLC-_SS-SLC-_ SS-SLC-_SS-SLLWHITE (NEUTRAL) BLACK (HOT) 120VAC (HOT)HOT NEU GND 24VDC + 24VDC - 24VDC - 24VDC + 24VDC - 24VDC + SS-SLC-_24VDC +24VDC -24VDC +24VDC -REV.11.15.16 P165 VI.A. Application: 0-10V dimming for SS1 Soft Strip Power Supply: Class 2, 24VDC output: 120-277VAC input, 96 watt output PSB-96W-010-24VDC; Dimming: Dimmable with 0-10V dimmer using power supply above. See power supply spec sheet for additional details. Philips Sunrise SR1200ZTUNV, 0-10V dimmer recommended. SS1 SOFT STRIP 0-10V DIMMING RED (24VDC+)BLUE (RETURN-)YELLOW (DIM RETURN-) +24VDC+24VDC RED 120VAC (HOT) PURPLE 0-10V GRAY 0-10V WHITE (NEUTRAL) BLACK (HOT) GND 0-10V DIMMING WIRING DIAGRAM WHITE (NEUTRAL) BLACK (HOT) PSB-96W-010-24VDC GRAY 0-10V PURPLE 0-10V RED 24VDC+RED (24VDC+) BLUE (RETURN-) YELLOW (DIM RETURN-)GND RED 120VAC (HOT) BLACK 24VDC- 4 Wires for 0-10V DimmingPHILIPS SR1200ZTUNV DIMMER SS_-24V-_-_SS-SLC-_ TRIM ONLY AT CUT LINES STRIP DOES NOT BEND 90° REV.11.15.16 P166 VI.A. Soft Strip U Strap Use U-Strap every 6 to 12 inches for extra support (30 per package). System Product SS –SU SS Soft Strip SU U-Strap 0.63" (1.6CM) 0.07" (0.2CM) 1.16" (2.9CM) 0.48" (1.2CM) 0.22" (0.6CM)1.16" (2.9CM) 0.63" (1.6CM) 0.23" (0.6CM) Top Profile 0.73" (1.9CM) 0.48" (1.2CM) 0.08" (0.2CM) 0.21" (0.5CM) 0.18" (0.5CM) 4.07" (10.3CM) Soft Strip Tie Strap Use Tie Strap every 6 to 12 inches for extra support (30 per package). System Product SS –ST SS Soft Strip ST Tie Strap Top Top Soft Strip Mounting Clip Screw In Mounting Clip mounts beneath strip, snapping the Strip into place for additional support (10 per package). Used with SS1 White Soft Strip. 0.46" (1.2CM) 0.39" (1CM) 0.11" (0.3CM) Top 0.39" (1CM) 0.46" (1.2CM) 0.18" (0.5CM) Profile 0.18" (0.5CM) 0.39" (1CM) Side REV.11.15.16 MOUNTING STRIPS System Product SS1 –MCL SS1 Soft Strip MCL Mounting Clip P167 VI.A. APPENDIX C P168 VI.A. P169 VI.A. P170 VI.A. P171 VI.A. P172 VI.A. P173 VI.A. P174 VI.A. P175 VI.A. P176 VI.A. P177 VI.A. P178 VI.A. P179 VI.A. P180 VI.A. P181 VI.A. P182 VI.A. APPENDIX D P183 VI.A. P184 VI.A. P185 VI.A. P186 VI.A. P187 VI.A. P188 VI.A. P189 VI.A. P190 VI.A. P191 VI.A. P192 VI.A. P193 VI.A. P194 VI.A. P195 VI.A. P196 VI.A. P197 VI.A. P198 VI.A. P199 VI.A. P200 VI.A. P201 VI.A. P202 VI.A. P203 VI.A. P204 VI.A. P205 VI.A. P206 VI.A. P207 VI.A. P208 VI.A. P209 VI.A. P210 VI.A. P211 VI.A. P212 VI.A. P213 VI.A. P214 VI.A. P215 VI.A. P216 VI.A. P217 VI.A. P218 VI.A. P219 VI.A. P220 VI.A. P221 VI.A. P222 VI.A. P223 VI.A. P224 VI.A. P225 VI.A. P226 VI.A. APPENDIX E P227 VI.A. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS MINOR DEVELOPMENT Aspen City Offices at 425 & 455 Rio Grande Place A Level One Transportation Impact Analysis with an application for a essential public facility building Represented By: Grant Bankston Charles Cunniffe Architects 610 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Date: Location: November 14, 2016 425 & 455 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 425-(PID# 2737-073-06-852) 455-(PID# 2737-073-06-854) APPENDIX E P228 VI.A. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERACTIVE TIA TOOL Trip Generation MMLOS Input Page TDM Input Page Summary and Narrative Exhibit A, Site Plans 3 3 4 6 7 11 P229 VI.A. 3 = input = calculation DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY, ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Minor Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total Commercial (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Free‐Market Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Affordable Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lodging (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Essential Public Facility (sf)32750.0 sf 17.46 10.70 28.17 21.75 32.62 54.37 17.46 10.70 28.17 21.75 32.62 54.37 Land Use Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Commercial 2.27 0.69 0.31 4.14 0.4 0.6 Free‐Market Housing 0.67 0.29 0.71 0.82 0.56 0.44 Affordable Housing 0.75 0.48 0.52 0.89 0.55 0.45 Lodging 0.25 0.57 0.43 0.31 0.52 0.48 Essential Public Facility 0.86 0.62 0.38 1.66 0.4 0.6 Net New Units/Square Feet of the Proposed ProjectProposed Land Use *For mixed‐use (at least two of the established land uses) sites, a 4% reduction for AM Peak‐Hour and a 14% reduction for PM Peak‐Hour is applied to the trip generation. Name: Grant Bankston Company: Charles Cunniffe Architects Address: 610 E Hyman Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: 907‐925‐5590 Email: grantb@cunniffe.com Trip Generation 11/14/2016 AM Peak Average PM Peak Average Trips Generated AM Peak‐Hour PM Peak‐Hour TOTAL NEW TRIPS ASSUMPTIONS ASPEN TRIP GENERATION Is this a major or minor project? 425 & 455 Rio Grande PL, Aspen. CO 81611 Aspen City Offices Instructions: IMPORTANT: Turn on Macros: In order for code to run correctly the security settings need to be altered. Click "File" and then click "Excel Options." In the "Trust Center" category, click "Trust Center Settings", and then click the "Macro Settings" category. Beneath "Macro Settings" select "Enable all Macros." Sheet 1. Trip Generation: Enter the project's square footage and/or unit counts under Proposed Land Use. The numbers should reflect the net change in land use between existing and proposed conditions. If a landuse is to be reduced put a negative number of units or square feet. Sheet 2. MMLOS: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable under each of the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Points are only awarded for proposed (not existing) and confirmed aspects of the project. Sheet 3. TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Sheet 4. Summary and Narrative: Review the summary of the project's mitigated trips and provide a narrative which explains the measures selected for the project. Click on "Generate Narrative" and individually explain each measure that was chosen and how it enhances the site or mitigates vehicle traffic. Ensure each selected measure make sense Minor Development - Inside the Roundabout Major Development - Outside the Roundabout Helpful Hints: 1. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for information on the use of this tool. 2. Refer to TIA Frequently Asked Questions for a quick overview. 2. Hover over red corner tags for additional information on individual measures. 3. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project location and future use. Transportation Impact Analysis TIA Frequently Asked Questions P230 VI.A. 4 = input = calculation 54 Category Sub. Measure Number Question Answer Points 1 Does the project propose a detached sidewalk where an attached sidewalk currently exists? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? No 0 2 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 3 Does the project propose a landscape buffer greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 0 4 Does the project propose a detached sidewalk on an adjacent block? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? No 0 5 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 6 Is the proposed landscape buffer on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 0 7 Are slopes between back of curb and sidewalk equal to or less than 5%?Yes 0 8 Are curbs equal to (or less than) 6 inches?Yes 0 9 Is new large-scale landscaping proposed that improves the pedestrian experience? Properties within the Core do not have ample area to provide the level of landscaping required to receive credit in this category. Yes 5 10 Does the project propose an improved crosswalk? This measure must get City approval before receiving credit. Yes 5 10 11 Are existing driveways removed from the street?Yes 5 12 Is pedestrian and/or vehicle visibility unchanged by new structure or column?Yes 0 13 Is the grade (where pedestrians cross) on cross-slope of driveway 2% or less?Yes 0 14 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian access points from the ROW? This includes improvements to ADA ramps or creating new access points which prevent pedestrians from crossing a street. No 0 15 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist interaction with vehicles at driveway areas?No 0 5 16 Is the project's pedestrian directness factor less than 1.5?No -5 17 Does the project propose new improvements which reduce the pedestrian directness factor to less than 1.2? A site which has an existing pedestrian directness factor less than 1.2 cannot receive credit in this category. 0 18 Is the project proposing an off site improvement that results in a pedestrian directness factor below 1.2?* 0 19 Are traffic calming features proposed that are part of an approved plan (speed humps, rapid flash)?*Yes 10 5 20 Are additional minor improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? No 0 21 Are additional major improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? Yes 5 5 25Pedestrian Total* MMLOS Input Page Subtotal SubtotalSidewalk Condition on Adjacent BlocksSidewalk Condition on Project FrontageSubtotal Instructions: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable to each measure under the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Subtotal Subtotal PedestriansSubtotalAdditional Proposed ImprovementsTOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS MITIGATED:Pedestrian RoutesTraffic Calming and Pedestrian NetworkDriveways, Parking, and Access ConsiderationsP231 VI.A. 5 Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points 22 Is a new bicycle path being implemented with City approved design?0 23 Do new bike paths allow access without crossing a street or driveway?0 24 Is there proposed landscaping, striping, or signage improvements to an existing bicycle path?Yes 5 25 Does the project propose additional minor bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?0 26 Does the project propose additional major bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?0 5 Bicycle Parking27 Is the project providing bicycle parking?Yes 5 5 10 Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points 28 Is seating/bench proposed?Yes 3 29 Is a trash receptacle proposed?Yes 3 30 Is transit system information (signage) proposed?Yes 3 31 Is shelter/shade proposed?0 32 Is enhanced pedestrian-scale lighting proposed?0 33 Is real-time transit information proposed?0 34 Is bicycle parking/storage proposed specifically for bus stop use?0 35 Are ADA improvements proposed?0 9 36 Is a bus pull-out proposed at an existing stop?0 37 Is relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway operations proposed?Yes 10 38 Is a new bus stop proposed (with minimum of two basic amenities)?0 10 19 Bicycles Total* Transit Total*BicyclesModifications to Existing Bicycle PathsTransitBasic AmenitiesSubtotal Subtotal Enhanced AmenitiesSubtotal Subtotal P232 VI.A. 6 Category Measure Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT Reductions Will an onsite ammenities strategy be implemented?No Which onsite ammenities will be implemented? Will a shared shuttle service strategy be implemented?No What is the degree of implementation? What is the company size? What percentage of customers are eligible? 3 Nonmotorized Zones Will a nonmotorized zones strategy be implemented?No 0.00% 0.00% Category Measure Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT Reductions Will a network expansion stragtegy be implemented?No What is the percentage increase of transit network coverage? What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? Will a service frequency/speed strategy be implemented?No What is the percentage reduction in headways (increase in frequency)? What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? What is the level of implementation? Will a transit access improvement strategy be implemented?Yes What is the extent of access improvements? Within Project and Connecting Off‐site 7 Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented?No 0.00% 2.00% Category Measure Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT Reductions Will there be participation in TOP?No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented?Yes What percentage of employees are eligible?100% What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)?100% Is an employee parking cash‐out strategy being implemented?No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a workplace parking pricing strategy implemented?Yes What is the daily parking charge?3 What percentage of employees are subject to priced parking?100% Is a compressed work weeks strategy implemented?Yes What percentage of employees are participating?25% What is the workweek schedule?4‐day/40‐hour Is an employer sponsered shuttle program implemented?No What is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool matching strategy implemented?No What percentage of employees are eligble? Is carshare participation being implemented?Yes How many employee memberships have been purchased?<100 What percentage of employees are eligble?100% Is participation in the bikeshare program WE‐cycle being implemented?Yes How many memberships have been purchased?<100 What percentage of employees/guests are eligble?100% Is an end of trip facilities strategy being implemented?Yes What is the degree of implementation? High What is the employer size? Large Is a self‐funded emergency ride home strategy being implemented?Yes What percentage of employees are eligible?100% Is a carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy being implemented?No What is the employer size? What number of parking spots are available for the program? Is a private employer shuttle strategy being implemented?No What is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a trip reduction marketing/incentive program implemented?Yes What percentage of employees/guests are eligible?100% 8.45% 2.00% 10.28% 1. 22% work trips represents a mixed-used site (SF Bay Area Travel Survey). See Assumptions Tab for more detail. Maximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryTransit System Improvements Strategies1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 4.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.00% 0.00% Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category 13.80% 0.00% 16.80% 3.75% 0.00% 0.00% 2.00% Bikeshare Program 0.00% TDM Input Page 1.50% 4.00% 0.25%Commute Trip Reduction Programs StrategiesOnsite Servicing Shared Shuttle Service Neighborhood/Site Enhancements Strategies0.00% 0.00% Network Expansion Service Frequency/Speed Transit Access Improvement Participation in TOP Transit Fare Subsidy Employee Parking Cash‐Out Workplace Parking Pricing Compressed Work Weeks Employer Sponsored Vanpool Carpool Matching Carshare Program Self‐funded Emergency Ride Home Carpool/Vanpool Priority Parking Private Employer Shuttle Trip Reduction Marketing/Incentive Program End of Trip Facilities Cross Category Maximum Reduction, Neighborhood and Transit Global Maximum VMT Reductions 11 12 13 14 15 21 16 17 18 19 20 Instructions TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project location and future use. P233 VI.A. 7 DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY, ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated PM 54.4 54 5.59 59.59 0.00 MMLOS In the space provided desicribe what new landscaping is proposed and how the proposed landscaping plan enhances the pedestrian experience. This measure is only applicable to large scale projects and requires more extensive landscaping then a few plantings or lawn area. The project shall establish extensive landscaping which significantly benefits the site and improves the pedestrian comfort and experience. The Project proposes a redesign of the existing lawn of the Galena Plaza as well as an extension of it north toward the Rio Grande Park. The majority of the extensive planting will be on the south side of the plaza near the Parking Garage Elevator. A group of smaller trees will be planted on the plaza between the Pitkin County library addition and the proposed City Offices. Smaller trees will also be planted along the renovated stair case between the park and plaza. Trees will also be replaced to buffer the building from Rio Grande Place and the park. Less intensive landscaping is also proposed at the edge of the second story roof. Explain the proposed improved crosswalk and how this improvement benefits the pedestian experience and the site as a whole. An improved crosswalk includes measures such as incorporating a corner bulb out or defining a crosswalk path with colored concrete. Simply re‐striping a crosswalk will not recieve credit. This measure must be pre‐approved by City staff. Corner extensions at the northwest and northeast corner of the city office building are proposed. Explain what driveways are removed and how this benefits the pedestrian experience. Name: Grant Bankston Company: Charles Cunniffe Architects Address: 610 E Hyman Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: 907‐925‐5590 Email: grantb@cunniffe.com Summary and Narrative: 11/14/2016 Aspen City Offices 425 & 455 Rio Grande PL, Aspen. CO 81611 Trip Generation SUMMARY Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE MITIGATED Click on the "Generate Narrative" Button to the right. Respond to each of the prompts in the space provided. Each response should cover the following: 1. Explain the selected measure. 2. Call out where the measure is located. 3. Demonstrate how the selected measure is appropriate to enhance the project site and reduce traffic impacts. 4. Explain the Enforcement and Financing Plan for the selected measure. 5. Explain the scheduling and implementation responsibility of the mitigation measure. 6. Attach any additional information and a site map to the narrative report. Project Description In the space below provide a description of the proposed project. The Aspen City Offices is an essential public facility at 425 Rio Grande Place in Aspen, Colorado. The building abuts the Rio Grande Parking Garage and will replace the existing ACRA building. The building includes 3 levels above grade with a connection to the existing Rio Grande building and a basement level totaling 37,400 sq. ft. The project proposes an expansion of the public amenity space of the Galena Plaza as well as a renovation and expansion of the Rio Grande Stairs to better connect Rio Grande Park with the Galena Plaza and the downtown core. Narrative: P234 VI.A. 8 TDM A transit access improvement strategy will be implemented. Provision of safe and comfortable access to transit service is important for generating and maintaining transit ridership, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will improve pedestrian access to a transit stop via formalization of trails, addition and/or improvement of sidewalk, installation of lighting and/or way finding or other measures.Explain the proposed transit access improvement strategy below. Improvements of the Rio Grande Staircase and site lighting will help safelty guide and improve access from the park to and from the proposed Galena shuttle stop at the plaza. Explain below the transit fare subsidy strategy. The successful project will provide subsidized/discounted daily or monthly public transit passes for the RFTA valley system. These passes can be partially or wholly subsidized by the project, with additional points being provided for larger subsidies. Many entities use revenue from parking to offset the cost of such a project. Desribe the proposed landscaping, striping, or signage which benefits an existing bicycle path. Striping for the Jail trail and wayfinding signage is proposed. A bicycle guide track is also proposed as part of the renovation of the Rio Grande stairs Describe the proposed seating/bench and the bench location for which existing bus stop. A bench shall be provided for the Galena shuttle at the plaza near the proposed bus stop location Explain the proposed transit system information (signage). A formal sign with the specific bus schedule and route is proposed for the Galena Street shuttle. Explain the relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway operations. An additional stop is proposed for the Galena Street shuttle at the south end of the Galena Plaza One driveway between the north entry/exit of the garage and north entry/exit of the mill street lot will be removed. This allows for an improved side walk and fewer points of interaction between pedestrians/ and vehicles. Explain any planned traffic calming features below. All traffic calming features must be pre‐approved by the City. Features include islands, medians, raised crosswalks, speed humps, and rapid flash. A rapid flash signal is proposed at the crosswalk nearest the Rio Grande Staircase. Explain any additional major improvements which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff. The Galena Staircase will be redesigned and with a wider run to create a better link from the downtown core to Rio Grande Park. P235 VI.A. 9 The City of Aspen has Flexible Work Options and compressed workweeks as part of the employee support structure. Provide details in the space provided for the proposed carshare participation. Carshare programs have been linked to increased use of alternative transportation modes and reduced SOV trips. The successful project will provide access to Aspen’s CAR TO GO carshare program. Trip reduction potential will depend on the level to which the development participates. Car share memberships can be provided to all employees or residents of new developments. The Cars to Go program is available for use to all city employees. Full details on options available to employees is included in the attached document “City of Aspen Employee Commute Benefits” WE‐cycle season passes are provided free of charge to all city employees for work related trips. Explain the proposed end of trip facilities strategy below. The provision of convenient facilities for pedestrians and cyclists encourages these types of alternative modes, thus reducing SOV trips. Non‐residential projects may provide facilities such as showers, secure bicycle lockers, personal lockers, changing spaces, etc. The plan proposes bicycle storage, lockers, changing rooms and bathrooms with showers for staff. Explain the proposed self‐funded emergency ride home strategy below. Emergency Ride Home programs reduce barriers associated with alternative commute modes, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will develop and fund a program to provide commuters who carpool, vanpool, bike, walk or take transit to work with a reliable and free ride home ‐ usually in a taxi or rental car when unexpected emergencies arise. The use of the TOP program's Emergency Ride Home service is not applicable for mitigation purposes. In the event of an emergency, free taxi rides home are available for commuters. Provide details for the proposed bike share program participation. Bike sharing provides access to a fleet of bicycles for short trips, thus reducing SOV travel. The successful project will provide memberships to the existing WE‐cycle program. Include details on how many WE‐ cycle memberships will be purchased and whether these will be made available to guests, employees, or both. The City of Aspen provides several options for subsidized transit to its employees. These are offered thru several options for employee bus passes. See attached document “City of Aspen Buss Pass Guidelines” for the full program description. Explain the proposed workplace parking pricing strategy below. The successful project will implement workplace parking pricing at its employment centers. This may include: explicitly charging for employee parking, or implementing above market‐rate pricing. Employees must pay the parking fee at the Rio Grande Parking Garage or on street. Provide details below for the proposed compressed work weeks strategy. Compressed work week schedules allow an employee to work the typical 40‐hour workweek in an alternative manner such as 4/10s or 9/80s. This eliminates the need for work‐related travel on the days not worked, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will demonstrate that it will offer compressed work week schedules to 25% of its employees. P236 VI.A. 10 MMLOS Site Plan Requirements Include the following on a site plan. Clearly call out and label each measure. Attach the site plan to the TIA submittal. Slopes Between Back of Curb and Sidewalk Landscape Plan Removed Driveway(s) Crosswalk Improvement(s) Bus Stop Seating/Bench Bus Stop Trash Recepticle 2% Slope at Pedestrian Driveway Crossings Traffic Calming Features Additional Major Pedestrian Improvement Bicycle Parking Proposed landscaping, striping, or signage which benefits an existing bicycle path Explain the proposed trip reduction marketing/incentive program in the space provided. A trip reduction marketing programs should include a number of the following strategies: orientation to trip reduction programs and benefits; orientation to specific alternative transportation modes such as bus service information, bike/walk route maps, etc.; publishing of web or traditional informational materials; events and contests such as commuter fairs, new employee orientations, bike to work days, etc.; educational opportunities such bicycle commute/repair classes; web or traditional materials aimed at guests/customers such as bike/walk maps, free transit day passes, etc.; incentive programs such as prizes, rewards or discounts for alternative commuting. Trip reduction is incentivized thru the several programs offered to the employees by the City of Aspen. This includes the Employee Commute Benefits, Bus Passes, and Commuter Incentive programs. Transit System Information Provide a monitoring and reporting plan. Refer to page 17 in the Transportation Analysis Guidelines for a list of monitoring plan requirements. Components of a Monitoring and Reporting Plan should include (1) Assessment of compliance with guidelines, (2) Results and effectiveness of implemented measures, (3) Identification of additional strategies, and (4) Surveys and other supporting data. A survey to the city staff will be issued on an annual basis. This simple survey will determine the level of use and effectiveness of the TDM measures on reducing SOV trips by employees. An annual report will be submitted to the Transportation Department after survey data is collected and analyzed. Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. All MMLOS items will be completed during the construction phase of the project. They will be part of the plan set submitted to the City of Aspen Building Department for Engineering review. The applicant understands that issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is contingent upon satisfactory installation of the MMLOS improvements, as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. TDM measures including the end of trip facilities will also be completed during the construction phase of the project. Monitoring and Reporting Relocated Bus Stop Enforcement and Financing Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. The MMLOS measures (sidewalk enhancements, landscaping, bike rack, etc.) will be paid for by the applicant. TDM measures including the end of trip facilities will also be paid for by the applicant. P237 VI.A. 11P238VI.A. CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEE BUS PASS GUIDELINES WHICH BUS PASS IS RIGHT FOR ME? Employees who use the bus to get to or from work or for work purposes (meetings, etc.) qualify for free Value Card passes. If an employee commutes to and from work via bus more than three times per week, they then qualify for a seasonal picture Zone pass. An employee may also qualify for a Value Card pass if they have missed Zone pass deadlines due to their hire date. HOW DO I GET A VALUE CARD OR ZONE PASS? Each department has a point person who requests, distributes and tracks value cards. You should request your value card directly from that person or through your super visor. Zone passes are available seasonally and may be requested directly from the Transportation Department. WHAT IF I LEAVE MY EMPLOYMENT WITH THE CITY? If you leave your City of Aspen position, you are required to turn your Value Card or Zone pass over to Human Resources. FOR MORE INFORMATION www.CommuterConnect.net P239 VI.A. CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEE COMMUTE BENEFITS RFTA VALUE CARDS and ZONE PASSES City employees are eligible for free RFTA value cards or zone passes for travel to and from work. Request from your supervisor or contact Transportation to discuss which pass is best for you. COMMUTER REWARDS Record your commutes in CommuterConnect.net and you’ll be entered to win monthly prizes! EMERGENCY RIDE HOME Alternative commuters are eligible for free taxi rides home in the event of an emergency. CAR TO GO The City’s carshare program allows members to use private vehicles for a low fee that includes gas and insurance. If you only need a car once in awhile, this program is perfect for you! Application fe es are waived for City employees and your department may offer a membership for work -related trips. FLEXIBLE WORK OPTIONS The City supports flexible work schedules when appropriate. Ask your supervisor about compressed workweeks, off-peak hours or telecommuting. FLEET VEHICLES & BIKES Check out CAR TO GO or departmental vehicles for errands or meetings. WE-cycle season passes are also available free of charge to City employees for work -related use. Call extension 2868 for more information on these programs. SHOWERS Combine your commute with a workout. Showers are available in City Hall and other facilities. CARPOOL PARKING Carpools of two or more adults may park for free in special spaces around town. Pick up a daily pass at the airport Parking Kiosk. For help finding a carpool, call extension 2868. A NOTE ON PARKING City employees are encouraged to use commute alternatives and are not provided with free parking. If you choose to drive to work alone, you must pay to park. FOR MORE COMMUTE INFORMATION Transit Routes & Schedules: 970.925.8484 • www.rfta.com Construction/Road Conditions: www.commuterconnect.net Commute Benefits Information: City Source or Extension 2868 Commuter Rewards: City Source or Extension 2868 Bicycle Program Information: City Source or Extension 2868 CAR TO GO Information: www.cartogo.com or extension 5066 P240 VI.A. COMMUTER REWARDS PROGRAM INFORMATION ELIGIBILITY: Employees who commute to work via bus, carpool, vanpool, bicycle or walking at least twice a week are eligible for a monthly drawing for one of two $25 City Market gift cards. ENTRY: To enter, employees must register on the City’s CommuterConnect website; list the City of Aspen as their employer and record commuting activity on the interactive calendar. Employees without computer access may call 429 -2868 for assistance. MONTHLY DRAWINGS: Prize winners will be selected randomly in a monthly prize drawing. Prize winners will be notified by the Transportation Department and may be featured in the City’s newsletter. ANNUAL DRAWING: An annual grand prize drawing for all who participated over the course of the year will be held in December. Grand prize to be determined at a later date. SIGNATURES: Supervisor signatures are not required to participate in this program. Your supervisor may be contacted to verify activity. TAXES: Prize winners will be responsible for all payroll taxes associated with winnings. Winner’s names will be submitted to the Finance Department. HOW TO REGISTER CREATING AN ACCOUNT IS SIMPLE: go to www.commuterconnect.net and provide your name, email address, physical address, employer (City of Aspen) and some basic profile information. Your physical address is important for the commute calendar to process your commuting distance. WHAT’S THE CITY OF ASPEN’S PIN CODE? When you request the City of Aspen as your employer, you’ll be prompt to enter a 6 digit pin code. Your pin code is 666666. WHY ISN'T MY COMMUTE CALENDAR WORKING? The commuter calendar will not work without the Silverlight program. The Commuter Connect website will prompt you to upload a free Silverlight program. Some of you don’t have the proper authorization to upload programs at work. If you’re unable to upload Silverlight, the Simple Calendar still works for logging your commutes, but won't track your CO2 emissions, calories burned or money saved. WHAT IF I DON’T HAVE COMPUTER/INTERNET ACCESS? Contact the Transportation Department at 429-2868 for assistance. FOR MORE INFORMATION www.CommuterConnect.net P241 VI.A. APPENDIX F P242 VI.A. APPENDIX F AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDITS GENERATED BY 505 FUND PRIOR PROJECT FTEs Constructed/Housed FTEs Used Alpine Grove; 420D AABC 2.25 Anderson 1.75 Aspen Recreation Center 2.25 19.3 Burlingame Ranch Phase II 8.25 Cemetery Lane 10.25 Marolt 3 Mtn. River Manor; 900 E Hopkins #4 1.25 Park Maintenance Facility 1.25 1.85 Truscott Place 24.5 Water Place 56.25 Police Station (540 E Main) 16.523.4New housing, and new APD space TOTAL 127.5 44.55 BALANCE AVAILABLE (after construction of APD and the housing at 540 E Main) = 82.95 P243 VI.A. APPENDIX F ACRP - The Numbers Staff/Seat Count Seats 2030 CITY CLERK/MUNICIPAL COURTS 6 CITY MANAGER 13 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 29 ENGINEERING 23 FINANCE 17 HUMAN RESOURCES 8 LEGAL 4 TOTAL SEAT COUNT 100 P244 VI.A. Page 1 of 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director Phillip Supino, Principal Long-Range Planner MEETING DATE: January 3, 2017 RE: Land Use Code Revisions Update REQUEST OF P&Z: The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the ordinances proposed under the AACP-LUC coordination process, specifically Use Mix, Growth Management, Miscellaneous Regulations, Definitions, Off-Street Parking and Mobility, and View Planes. The Commercial Design ordinance and the Commercial Design Guidelines will be discussed at the January 17, 2017 P&Z lunch meeting. This meeting is a follow-up to the November 15, 2016 meeting, where the draft ordinances were first presented to P&Z. The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to provide feedback on the proposed ordinances, which will inform Council consideration of the legislation at meetings on January 9, 10, 23 and 24, 2017. BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY: In August 2015, City Council adopted a set of “Top Ten Goals” to work on for the next two years. One of the goals is to “reconcile the land use code to the Aspen Area Community Plan so the Land Use Code delivers what the AACP promises.” The process for coordinating those two documents has been ongoing under the commercial development moratorium since March of 2016. The moratorium is set to expire at the end of February, 2017, and it is Council’s goal to have completed the coordination process in anticipation of that expiration date. City Council reviewed draft ordinances addressing each of the above topic areas at meetings on November 28, December 5, 6 and 12, 2016. At each hearing, Council provided staff with feedback and additional direction on the proposed ordinances. Subsequently, staff has revised those ordinances and is preparing to return to Council in January for final review and adoption of the ordinances. This meeting and the January 17th lunch meeting will be P&Z’s final opportunities to provide feedback to staff and Council regarding those ordinances. The focus of this meeting will be on specific elements of the ordinances: • affordable housing mitigation rate, • affordable housing mitigation for existing commercial spaces, • second-tier commercial space requirements, • second-tier commercial space replacement, • elimination of the ability to maintain an existing parking deficit when a building is redeveloped. Staff seeks specific feedback from P&Z on these elements of the proposed ordinances. If time allows, P&Z may discuss additional elements of the ordinances included in the packet. P245 VII.A. Page 2 of 6 Attached to this cover memo are the individual second reading ordinances (excluding Commercial Design and view planes), and the Council packet cover memos from the second reading hearings in late November and early December. These are broken down as follows: • Ordinance 29, Series 2016: 26.700 Use Mix & Dimensional Standards • Ordinance 30, Series 2016: 26.575 Miscellaneous Regulations & 26.104 Definitions • Ordinance 31, Series 2016: 26.470 Growth Management • Ordinance 32, Series 2016: 26.515 Parking & Mobility • November 28, 2016 Council Memo • December 5, 2016 Council Memo • December 12, 2016 Council Memo Also attached to this cover memo are pdf versions of the slideshow presentations given to Council at the November 28, December 5 and December 12 public hearings for the draft ordinances. These are included to provide P&Z with additional background on each of the ordinances and the specific elements of those ordinances discussed by Council. Staff and the consultant team have been working on development scenarios to help visualize the impacts of the proposed amendments on development. The results of this analysis will be presented at the January 3 P&Z meeting. Staff will propose some changes to the code amendment language based on these initial findings, which is referenced in the discussion below. AFFORDABLE HOUSING MITIGATION RATE: In order to achieve its use mix and affordable housing policies, Council has directed staff to explore an increase the affordable housing mitigation rate for commercial development from 60% to 80%. At the same time, Council has favored policies eliminating the ability for new development in commercial zones (except MU) to develop voluntary affordable housing for credits, which could be sold to others needed to satisfy their affordable housing requirements. This is designed to ensure that new commercial development mitigates its housing impacts and provides the affordable housing it is required to, while not providing any incentive to create additional affordable housing in commercial zone districts where commercial uses are preferred. Council has also identified the relationship between second-tier (affordable) commercial space and the need for a reduced mitigation rate in order to provide an incentive for those spaces to be developed and to create successful spaces. To that end, Council has explored the option of offering reduced mitigation rates for that portion of a development’s net leasable area classified as second-tier. (Second-tier spaces are defined as being commercial space located off of the primary street frontage, in a basement, off an alley, mid-block walkway, or on an upper floor.) The proposed mitigation rates for new commercial are presently 80% for prime commercial spaces (ground-level, street facing) and 60% for second-tier space. Based on the initial scenarios work, staff recommends maintaining the existing 60% rate for all commercial spaces. The change, as proposed, would result in some additional affordable housing, but would not actually incentivize the creation of second tier spaces, which is the goal of the change. It also adds an additional layer of complexity to the code. Questions: P246 VII.A. Page 3 of 6 1. Does the Commission support the increase of the mitigation rate to 80% with a reduction for second-tier space? 2. Does the 20% reduction provide a sufficient incentive to create successful second-tier spaces? 3. Does the commission support the removal of the ability to establish housing credits in the CC, C1, NC and SCI zones? MITIGATION FOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL SPACE: Along with an increase in the mitigation rate, Council has supported exploration of a policy whereby existing commercial spaces that were developed before affordable housing mitigation requirements (and have therefore not provided affordable housing for that space) would be required to mitigate for that space upon redevelopment. For example, a 6,000 square foot historic building with plans to add 500 square feet would be required to mitigate for 6,500 square feet, as opposed to 500 square feet, as is required under the current code. This regulatory change is intended to capture mitigation from properties that have not previously mitigated, because the existing square footage of those properties is, in effect, a credit which is not necessarily provided to other properties. The impact of this change on redevelopment scenarios is potentially significant, which could place additional burdens on those seeking to renovate and restore historic properties. However, it would have the benefit of increasing the availability of affordable housing program funds and the creation of new affordable housing units. Based on the results of the scenarios analysis, staff and the consultants do not recommend moving forward with the policy change. The impact to historic properties would be significant and the impact on some non- historic buildings could be to discourage maintenance, upkeep and remodeling. Questions: 4. Does the Commission support the mitigation of previously unmitigated commercial space? 5. Are there any possible changes to the details of the draft regulations which may improve their effect or avoid unintended consequences? SECOND TIER COMMERCIAL SPACE REQUIREMENTS: Throughout staff discussion with Council about their policy priorities for commercial and residential use mix, Council has favored design-based approaches over prescriptive regulations. In order to provide opportunities for locally owned and essential businesses, Council directed staff to develop the idea of second-tier commercial space requirements. While the concept of creating second-tier spaces for businesses is a design-based approach, the requirement that development provide specific portions of their net leasable area is prescriptive. The proposed requirements are: P247 VII.A. Page 4 of 6 Zoning District Second tier commercial space provided1 Minimum Maximum2 Commercial Core (CC) 20% 75% Commercial (C) 25% 75% Service Commercial Industrial (S/C/I) 35% -- Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 35% -- Mixed Use (MU) 25% 50% For remodels and renovations of existing buildings where second-tier space was present on the site, Council has supported requirements that the existing second-tier square footage be replaced as second-tier spaces somewhere on the property. For example, a building with a 2,000 square foot subgrade commercial space and 1,000 square foot upper floor commercial space would be required to include 3,000 total square feet of second-tier space in some format in the redeveloped building. This requirement is similar to the multi- family replacement program insofar as it is designed to ensure no-net-loss of existing second tier spaces, many of which have existing locally-serving and essential businesses. The replaced second-tier spaces could be provided in any location that meets the definition of second-tier, and the same relationship between pedestrian amenity, commercial design and second-tier location and uses applies to replaced space as it does to new space. The impact on many buildings would be that it may be more likely that remodels, as opposed to full redevelopment, would be pursued. The intent of these requirements is to ensure that new commercial and mixed-use buildings support Council’s use mix policy goals by providing second-tier spaces where lower-yield businesses may more affordably locate. Staff has created strong relationships between pedestrian amenity requirements, commercial design guidelines and second-tier space requirements within the proposed code changes to facilitate their development. However, considered with other development requirements (such as reduced floor areas and the elimination of the ability to generate affordable housing credits in commercial zones), the second-tier requirements may have a negative impact on the feasibility of commercial development. Based on the scenarios analysis, staff suggests that rather than requiring strict replacement of all existing second tier spaces, a hard minimum be established similar to the existing public amenity requirements. Questions: 6. Does the Commission support the concept of second-tier spaces as a means to support the creation and success of small and local-serving businesses? 7. Does the Commission support the requirement of second-tier space in all new and redeveloped buildings? 8. Do the minimum and maximum amounts of net leasable reflect reasonable proportions of commercial net leasable in a building? 9. What unintended consequences, if any, may impede the success of these spaces? 10. Does the Commission support the second-tier replacement requirements? 11. Is there anything different about the replacement requirement from the previously discussed second-tier space requirement that creates a disproportionate burden or barrier to projects? 1 Numbers are for discussion only. 2 For discussion. The first floor provides a natural upper limit to the percent of second-tier commercial space. P248 VII.A. Page 5 of 6 CARRIED PARKING DEFICIT: There are two essential elements to Council’s approach to the revised off- street parking regulations, now referred to as Parking and Mobility. First, the parking chapter has been combined with the City’s multi-modal and transit policies and regulations to create an integrated parking and mobility scheme. The second major change is that the presence of an existing parking deficit, which allowed redevelopment projects to carry forward parking deficits from one iteration of a site to the next, has been eliminated. While the thinking for allowing the carried parking deficit in the past may have been to remove a requirement that may result in downtown properties over-parking their developments, it is perceived by some now to be providing a development credit, lowering the bar for redevelopment of commercial properties. In effect, this change means that a site in the commercial core with no on-site parking and no history of cash-in-lieu of parking would be required to meet its parking requirement under to new code. (That requirement can be satisfied by parking spaces, cash-in-lieu, mobility improvements, etc.) Under some circumstances, this new policy would create a significant new project cost in order to comply with the regulations by providing physical parking spaces, cash-in-lieu, mobility improvements or a combination of those. While the draft ordinance goes a long way to eliminate the inefficient use of land for private surface parking in downtown, the removal of the carried parking deficit introduces a new cost to some properties that is not present under the current code. When combined with other changes to the land use code, this regulatory change may significantly alter the financials for commercial redevelopment projects, while generating new revenue, mobility improvements and parking spaces for the community. Based on the scenarios analysis, staff recommends tis policy proposal move forward, perhaps as a tier system. Additionally, staff and consultants recommend increasing the cash-in-lieu amount to $38,000. Questions: 12. Does the commission support the elimination of the carried parking deficit? 13. What unintended consequences, if any, may impede the success of the new approach to parking and mobility? NEXT STEPS: The AACP-LUC coordination process is in its third phase, the legislative process, which includes policy resolution and the development of code amendments for all of the topic areas included in the moratorium. The remaining proposed Council Public Hearings and discussion topics through the end of the moratorium: • January 9, 2017: all topics • January 10, 2017: all topics • January 23, 2017: all topics • January 24, 2017: all topics Aside from Commercial Design, any items requiring additional feedback following Council discussion on the 9th and 10th will be presented to P&Z at the January 17th lunch meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Ordinance 29, Series 2016: 26.700 Use Mix & Dimensional Standards Exhibit B: Ordinance 30, Series 2016: 26.575 Miscellaneous Regulations & 26.104 Definitions P249 VII.A. Page 6 of 6 Exhibit C: Ordinance 31, Series 2016: 26.470 Growth Management Exhibit D: Ordinance 32, Series 2016: 26.515 Parking & Mobility Exhibit E: November 28, 2016 Council Memo Exhibit F: December 5, 2016 Council Memo Exhibit G: November 28, 2016 Council Presentation Exhibit H: December 5, 2016 Council Presentation Exhibit I: December 12, 2016 Council Presentation Exhibit J: Second Tier Space Commercial Design Ordinance Code Language P250 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 1 of 27 ORDINANCE No. 29 Series of 2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS CHAPTER 26.710 – ZONE DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to craft code amendments to coordinate the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) and the Land Use Code related to parking and mobility, the mix of commercial uses, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department and a Consultant Team consisting of White & Smith, LLC; Alan Richman Planning Services; Nelson Nygaard; Rowland + Broughton; BendonAdams; and Karen Setterfield conducted existing conditions research and outreach with respect to commercial use mix, parking, mobility, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted extensive Public Outreach with community members, the Planning & Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and City Council regarding the commercial district, commercial design, parking and view plane regulations; and, WHEREAS, from May through November, 2016, the City and the Consultant team conducted 20 public outreach events, an online public outreach and survey page with over 1,230 visits, eleven (11) focus group meetings with stakeholders and City officials, five (5) meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, four (4) meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission, and fourteen (14) public meetings with the City Council; WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council met in work sessions on February 29, 2016, April 12, 2016, April 18, 2016, April 26, 2016, May 10, 2016, June 21, 2016, July 18, 2016, August 9, 2016, August 28, 2016, September 13, 2016, September 19, 2016, September 27, 2016, October 10, 2016, and November 2, 2016 and provided general direction on code amendments; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on October 24, 2016, the City Council approved Resolution No. 147, Series of 2016, by a four to zero (4 – 0) vote, requesting code amendments to the Land Use Code to implement the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, amending the Land Use Code so it better reflects the goals of the AACP is a City Council Top Ten Goal; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (“Growth Management, The Commercial Sector,” page 20) documents that businesses providing basic necessities are at risk of being displaced by restaurants, retail spaces, and offices in high-profile locations with high rents, resulting in a continuing shift towards exclusivity; and P251 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 2 of 27 WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (“Growth Management, The Commercial Sector,” page 20) calls for a diverse commercial mix to strength the City’s character, with more aggressive measures to ensure the needs of the community are met; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for regulatory tools, such as Growth Management, for the use of non-prime commercial space including basements, second floors and alleys (Growth Management Policy V.1.b); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for the City to explore creating a program to encourage limited-use commercial spaces, which would be charged lower rents or rents based on a percentage of sales (Growth Management Policy V.1.d); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for the City to explore adopting an Existing Use Zone District in specific areas in order to prohibit new uses from displacing existing ones, such as providing a limited list of commercial uses subject to a conditional use process (Growth Management Policy V.1.e); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to identify products and services that are considered basic community needs (Growth Management Policy V.2.a); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to incentivize the provision of on-site affordable housing. This could include prioritization in receiving a building permit, points in growth management, etc. (Growth Management Policy VII.2.d); and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team conducted a study to identify the aggregate retail demand of local residents and determine whether there are adequate local-serving businesses to meet that demand, and if there are types of business that are over-represented in the downtown, along with zoning tools to manage those imbalances (see Aspen Area Community Plan, Growth Management Policies V.1.a, V.1.c); and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team conducted a study that considered creating regulatory tools such as quotas, limited prohibitions, and zoning regulations to manage imbalances in the City’s commercial uses (see Aspen Area Community Plan, Growth Management Policy V.1.a); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to establish lower maximum building heights to maintain Aspen’s small town character (Growth Management Policy I.6.a); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to amend zoning, the Commercial Design Guidelines, Residential Design Guidelines and Historic Design Guidelines as needed to implement the policy to maintain Aspen’s small town character (Growth Management Policy I.6.a); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to amend the Commercial Design Guidelines, Historic Design Guidelines and zoning as needed to ensure that the P252 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 3 of 27 Code supports innovative development that respects our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, form and a diversity of heights (Growth Management Policy V.3.b); and WHEREAS, the Vision (Residential Sector) provisions of the Aspen Area Community Plan provide for the City to limit mass and scale, and to preserve scenic mountain views; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health safety and welfare; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO THAT: Section 1. Chapter 26.710 of Part 700 of Title 26 shall be amended by adding the following new Section 26.710.035, Table of Permitted Uses (CC, C-1, S/C/I, MU, and EBO), to read as follows: 26.710.035 Table of Permitted Uses (CC, C-1, S/C/I, NC, MU, and EBO). The following table outlines the permitted and conditional uses for the City of Aspen’s commercial zone districts. Definitions for specific uses are detailed in Section 26.104.110, Use Categories. Areas of the table that are blank indicate the use is not allowed in the zone district. P253 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 4 of 27 Table 26.710-1 Use Matrix P = Permitted by right | C = Conditional Use (26.425) | A = Accessory to a permitted or conditional non-residential use Use Commercial Core Commercial Service/ Commercial/ Industrial Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use Essential Business Overlay CC C-1 SCI NC MU EBO Residential Duplex P Multi-family housing (affordable), accessory to commercial use, upper floors only P P P P P Multi-family housing (free market, as a single use of the property) P Single-family residence / Detached residential dwelling P Two (2) detached residential dwellings P Lodging/Short-Term Rental Bed and breakfast P Bed and breakfast (historic landmark properties only) P Lodge (basement) (when the entire building is dedicated to Lodge and associated commercial use) P P P Lodge (ground floor) P C Lodge (ground floor, when the entire building is dedicated to lodge and associated commercial use) P P P Lodge (upper floors) P P P P Vacation rentals (26.575.220) (in legally established residential units) P P P P P Commercial Farmers' market (vending agreement required per 15.04.350(B)) P P P P P254 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 5 of 27 Table 26.710-1 Use Matrix P = Permitted by right | C = Conditional Use (26.425) | A = Accessory to a permitted or conditional non-residential use Use Commercial Core Commercial Service/ Commercial/ Industrial Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use Essential Business Overlay Home occupation (in legally established residential units) P P P P P Financial Institutions (including banks) P P C P C Office P P P P P Retail, Small Format P P P P P P Retail, General P P A P P Retail, Specialty P C Retail, Large Format C C C C C P Service, General P P A P P P Service, Large Format A C Service, Neighborhood P P A P P P Restaurant and Bar, Entertainment P P P P Civic Academic P P P P Arts and cultural P P P P Assembly and Community A P P P Commercial parking facility (26.515) C C C C C C Public uses P P A P P Recreation P P P P Industrial Service, Commercial, Industrial P P C Miscellaneous Accessory buildings and uses (generally) P P P P P P255 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 6 of 27 Table 26.710-1 Use Matrix P = Permitted by right | C = Conditional Use (26.425) | A = Accessory to a permitted or conditional non-residential use Use Commercial Core Commercial Service/ Commercial/ Industrial Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use Essential Business Overlay Building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors (basement or ground floor only) P Service yard A Storage accessory to a permitted use P P P P P P Section 2. Section 26.710.140, Commercial Core (CC), shall be amended to read as follows: 26.710.140 Commercial Core (CC). A. Purpose. The Commercial Core (CC) serves as the highest intensity commercial area, fulfilling the policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan geared towards a strong and sustainable local and visitor economy, a diversity of commercial opportunities and the maintenance of Aspen’s historic character. The CC provides for the use of land for retail, service, commercial, and institutional purposes within mixed-use buildings. The balance of uses is designed to enhance the business and commercial character in the historic core of the City and provide commercial opportunities proximal to multi-modal transit infrastructure higher density residential uses. The CC zone permits a mix of retail, office, lodging, affordable housing, free-market housing established prior to the adoption of Ordinance 25, Series 2012, short-term vacation rentals, and other uses, oriented to local and tourist populations. This mix of uses creates economic, cultural and social vitality, and uses which enhance that vitality are encouraged. Outdoor and street-level pedestrian amenity spaces add vitality and enhance commercial opportunities in the CC zone. Retail and restaurant uses are appropriate on all building levels, while office and residential uses are permitted on upper floors, in basements and outside of primary commercial locations. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted by right in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District: P256 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 7 of 27 1. Uses allowed on basement floors: Retail and restaurant uses, office uses, uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors. Lodging uses, only when the entire building is dedicated to lodging and associated commercial use. 2. Uses allowed on the ground floor: Retail and restaurant uses and uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors. Lodging uses, only when the entire building is dedicated to lodging and associated commercial use. Office uses are prohibited on the ground floor except within spaces set back a minimum of forty (40) feet from a street and recessed behind the front-most street-facing façade. This prohibition shall not apply to split-level buildings (see definition) or properties north of Main Street. Parking shall not be allowed as the sole use of the ground floor. Automobile drive- through service is prohibited. 3. Uses allowed on upper floors: Retail, small format and general, restaurant and bar uses, office uses, lodging, affordable multi-family housing. 4. Uses allowed on all floors: Retail, small format and general,restaurant and bar uses, , service uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, academic uses, child care center, accessory uses and structures, storage accessory to a permitted use, and uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors, including parking accessory to a permitted use. 5. Free-Market Residential Units: No new Free-Market Residential Units may be established. Free-Market Residential units are permitted on any level if they were legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 25 (Series of 2012). 6. Affordable Housing Units: Affordable housing is permitted by right where accessory to a commercial use on the property or required for on-site affordable housing mitigation requirements. See 26.710.140.D.12 for affordable housing Floor Area Ratio requirements. Affordable housing created pursuant to this subsection is not eligible to be used for the creation of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540. 7. Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals: Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals are permitted only in legally established residential units. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Gasoline service station. 2. Retail, large format. 3. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515. P257 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 8 of 27 D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District. The dimensional standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed-use developments are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximum allowable dimensional standards. 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): No requirement. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement 7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06. 8. Maximum height (feet): Twenty-eight (28) feet. 9. Minimum floor to floor heights: a) Minimum First Floor to Second Floor floor-to-floor: Thirteen (13) feet. b) Minimum Upper Floor-to-ceiling height: Nine (9) feet. c) Floor-to-Ceiling heights in upper floors shall be less than the floor-to-ceiling height of the first floor. 10. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No requirement. 11. Public amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.412. 12. Floor area ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 2:1. a. Commercial uses: 2:1. b. Arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center and similar uses: 2:1. c. Affordable multi-family housing: Greater of existing FAR or 0.75:1. d. Lodging: 0.5:1, which may be increased to 1.5:1 if the individual lodge units on the parcel average five hundred (500) net livable square feet or less, which may be comprised of lock-off units. P258 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 9 of 27 e. Free-Market multi-family housing: Limited to the existing FAR. No expansion to FAR shall be permitted, except at-grade patios, and decks (other than roof-top decks), balconies, exterior stairways, trellis, and other similar features up to 15% of the total free-market residential floor area. Any subsequent reduction in floor area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed a new limitation and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater floor area. Free-market residential units shall not be able to utilize any exemptions to floor area outlined in Section 26.575.020(D), Measuring Floor Area, except as noted above. 13. Maximum lodge unit size (square feet): 1,500. When units are comprised of lock-off units, this maximum shall apply to the largest possible combination of units. 14. Net Livable Area (square feet): a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation. b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. c) Free-Market Residential: Overall net livable area for a building or project is limited to the existing net livable square footage. No expansion to overall net livable area shall be permitted. Any subsequent reduction in net livable area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed a new limitation and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater net livable area. Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. Combination of Free-Market residential units is permitted, but subject to the net livable size limitations herein. d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit sizes may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the use. 15. Commercial/residential ratio: When development includes mixed-uses, the total residential net livable area shall be no greater than 65% of the total above-grade commercial net leasable and lodge net livable area on the same parcel. E. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that was in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the P259 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 10 of 27 provisions of Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of Aspen Charter. Section 3. Section 26.710.150, Commercial (C-1), shall be amended to read as follows: 26.710.150. Commercial (C-1). A. Purpose. The Commercial (C-1) zone district provides for a diversity of commercial uses in mixed-use buildings outside of the historic context of the Commercial Core (CC) zone district. The C-1 advances Aspen Area Community Plan policies geared toward a strong and sustainable local and visitor economy, a diversity of commercial opportunities and the maintenance of Aspen as a recreation and cultural destination. The C-1 creates economic vitality by providing a mix of commercial uses with greater flexibility in architecture and design, enhancing Aspen’s community character. The C-1 creates a transition from the more intense activity of the CC zone district to the surrounding mixed-use, residential and lodge related uses. Businesses including restaurants, retail and service uses are encouraged on all building levels. Office, lodging and affordable residential uses are encouraged on upper floors, in basements and in spaces off of the street frontage to ensure active street presence and vital use mixes in mixed-use buildings. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted by right in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District: 1. Uses allowed on all floors: Retail, small format and general, restaurant and bar uses, service uses, lodging uses, office uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center, bed and breakfast, accessory uses and structures, and uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors, including parking accessory to a permitted use, storage accessory to a permitted use. Parking shall not be allowed as the sole use of the ground floor. Automobile drive- through service is prohibited. 2. Uses allowed on upper floors: Lodging, affordable multi-family housing. 3. Free-Market Residential Units: No new Free-Market Residential Units may be established. Free-Market Residential units are permitted on any level if they were legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 25 (Series of 2012). 4. Affordable Housing Units: Affordable housing is permitted by right where accessory to a commercial use on the property or required for on-site affordable housing mitigation requirements. See 26.710.150.D.12 for affordable housing Floor Area Ratio requirements. Affordable housing created pursuant to this subsection is not eligible to be used for the creation of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540. P260 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 11 of 27 5. Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals: Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals are permitted on any building level only in legally established residential units. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Affordable multi-family housing or home occupations on the ground floor. 2. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Section 26.515. 3. Retail, large format. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District. The dimensional standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed-use developments are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximum allowable dimensional standards. 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): a. Bed and breakfast: 3,000. b. All other uses: No requirement. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to chapter 12.06 P261 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 12 of 27 8. Maximum height: a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: Twenty-Eight (28) feet 9. Minimum floor heights: a. Minimum First Floor to Second Floor floor-to-floor height: Eleven (11) feet. b. Minimum Upper Floor-to-ceiling height: Nine (9) feet. c. Floor-to-Ceiling heights in upper floors shall be less than the floor-to-ceiling height of the first floor. 10. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): a. Bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 11. Public amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.412. 12. Floor area ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 1.75:1. a. Commercial uses: 1.75:1. b. Arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center and similar uses: 1.75:1. c. Affordable multi-family housing: Greater of existing FAR or 0.75:1 d. Lodging: .5:1, which may be increased to 1.5:1 if the individual lodge units on the parcel average five hundred (500) net livable square feet or less, which may be comprised of lock-off units. e. Bed and breakfast (as the sole use of parcel and not cumulative with other uses): Eighty percent (80%) of allowable floor area of a same-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.) Extinguishment of historic TDRs shall not permit additional FAR for single-family or duplex development. f. Free-Market multi-family housing: Limited to the existing FAR. No expansion to FAR shall be permitted except at-grade patios, and decks (other than roof-top decks), balconies, exterior stairways, trellis, and other similar features up to 15% of the total free-market residential floor area. Any subsequent reduction in floor area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed a new limitation and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater floor area. Free-market residential units shall not be able to utilize any exemptions to floor area outlined in Section 26.575.020(D), Measuring Floor Area, except as noted above. 13. Maximum lodge unit size (square feet): 1,500. When units are comprised of lock-off units, this maximum shall apply to the largest possible combination of units. P262 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 13 of 27 14. Net Livable Area (square feet): a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation. b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. c) Free-Market Residential: Overall net livable area for a building or project is limited to the existing net livable square footage. No expansion to overall net livable area shall be permitted. Any subsequent reduction in net livable area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed a new limitation and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater net livable area. Individual units shall be limited to 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area. Combination of Free-Market residential units is permitted, but subject to the net livable size limitations herein. d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit sizes may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the use. 15. Commercial/residential ratio: When development includes mixed-uses, the total residential net livable area shall be no greater than 65% of the total commercial net leasable and lodge net livable area on the same parcel. E. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that was in the Commercial (C-1) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the provisions of Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of Aspen Charter. Section 4. Section 26.710.160, Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI), shall be amended to read as follows: 26.710.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I). A. Purpose. The S/C/I zone supports Aspen Area Community Plan policies related to a sustainable, local serving economy and the preservation of a diversity of commercial opportunities for locals and visitors. In response to the decreased intensity of commercial uses in the zone and relative distance from the CC and C1 zones, both multi-modal and automobile parking improvements are appropriate on site in the S/C/I. In order to enhance the City’s P263 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 14 of 27 commercial diversity, the zone allows for uses not found in other zones including light industrial, manufacturing, production, repair and similar service-related uses. The S/C/I zone is designed to provide commercial space to those uses not appropriate in other commercial zones, but which provide an essential or unique service to support the local economy Flexibility and adaptability are important features of the zone to respond to changing commercial sector dynamics and meet the space needs of the City’s service, creative and production economies. As such, it is important for less-desirable uses or those permitted in other zone districts to not erode the character of the zone. In specific cases, affordable residential uses directly related to commercial uses in the same buildings may be permitted to achieve the commercial, residential and employment policies of the City. B. Permitted Uses. 1. Refer to Table 26.710-1 for uses permitted as of right or as conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district. The following uses may have, in combination, a limited percent of the floor area, devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception, and such uses shall be ancillary to the primary commercial use. This floor area percentage may be increased through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and according to the standards of Section 26.710.160(E)1. % retail sales, showroom, or customer reception (maximum – net leasable area) Uses manufactured, repaired, customized, serviced or detailed 100% • Vehicle sales. • Building materials, components, hardware, fixtures, interior finishes and equipment. • Fabric and sewing supply. • Household appliances such as ranges, refrigerators, dishwashers, etc. • Non-motorized vehicles such as bicycles and river-related recreational items, for rental or in combination with a service use related to guiding or touring. 25% • Animal boarding facility. • Animal grooming establishment. • Artist studio. • Brewery and brewing supply. • Coffee roasting and supply • Commercial dry cleaning. • Commercial Kitchen or Bakery. • Design Studio (limited to the Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision). • Internet auction consignment outlet • Laundromat. P264 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 15 of 27 % retail sales, showroom, or customer reception (maximum – net leasable area) Uses manufactured, repaired, customized, serviced or detailed • Locksmith. • Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Marijuana Product Manufacturing Facility, or Marijuana Testing Facility • Photo processing laboratory. • Post Office branch. • Printing /copy center. • Recycling center. • Shipping and receiving services. • Veterinary clinic. 10% • Automobile washing facility. • Building/landscape maintenance facility. • Warehousing and storageI am really not sure what to do with this table… . 2. Primary Care Physician’s Office Uses permitted: a. On Upper Floors, pursuant to Section 26.710.160 (D)11(b). b. Limited to a cap of 3,500 square feet at the Obermeyer Place PD, upon execution of an Insubstantial PD Amendment. 3. Permitted Accessory Uses: a) Service yard accessory to a permitted use. b) Sales and rental accessory and incidental to a permitted use. c) Accessory buildings and uses. d) Home occupations and Vacation Rentals: Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals are permitted only in legally established residential units. e) Offices, accessory to a permitted or conditional use, not to exceed 10% of a commercial unit. 4. Affordable Housing Units: Affordable housing is permitted by right where accessory to a commercial use on the property or required for on-site affordable housing mitigation requirements. See 26.710.160.D.11 for affordable housing Floor Area Ratio requirements. Affordable housing created pursuant to this subsection is not eligible to be used for the creation of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540. 5. Free-Market Residential Units: No new Free-Market Residential Units may be established. Free-Market Residential units are permitted on any level if they were legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance **, Series ****. P265 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 16 of 27 C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district, subject to the procedures established in Chapter 26.425.050 Procedures for Review, and the standards established in Section 26.710.160(F). Under Section 26.710.160(C)1-3, the Commission shall establish the appropriate amount of floor area to be devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception for each conditional use during the review, pursuant to the review standards of Section 26.710.160 (F)1. Under Section 26.710.160(C)4-5, the Commission shall review the site plan to determine compliance pursuant to the review standards of Section 26.710.160(F)2-3, and establish conditions of approval as needed. 1. Consignment retail establishment. 2. Commercial Parking Facility, pursuant to Section 26.515. 3. Gasoline service station. 4. Retail, large format. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district. The dimensional standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed-use developments are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximum allowable dimensional standards. 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): 3,000 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement. 7. Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06. 8. Maximum height: Thirty-five (35) feet. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No Requirement. 10. Pedestrian Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.412. P266 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 17 of 27 11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 2.25:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. a. Commercial Uses: 1.5:1. b. Primary Care Physician’s Office uses: .25:1 FAR, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial uses, listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3, exist on the same parcel. c. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: Greater of existing FAR or .5:1. d. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: Limited to the existing FAR. No expansion to FAR shall be permitted except at-grade patios, and decks (other than roof-top decks), balconies, exterior stairways, trellis, and other similar features up to 15% of the total free-market residential floor area. Any subsequent reduction in floor area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed a new limitation and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater floor area. Free-market residential units shall not be able to utilize any exemptions to floor area outlined in Section 26.575.020(D), Measuring Floor Area, except as noted above. 12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling unit size (square feet): a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation. b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. c) Free-Market multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit sizes may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the use. E. Special Review Standards. Whenever the dimensional standards of a proposed P267 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 18 of 27 development within the SCI Zone District are subject to Special Review, the development application shall be processed as a Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: 1. To increase the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness for such additional space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI Zone District. The additional approved percentage for a specific use shall be limited to that use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space. F. Conditional Use Review Standards. 1. Retail, Showroom or Customer Reception Area. In addition to meeting the standards in Chapter 26.425, Conditional Use, the following Standards shall be met: a. For consignment retail establishment, commercial parking facility (pursuant to Chapter 26.575), and gasoline service station, the Commission shall establish the appropriate amount of floor area to be devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception as a condition of conditional use review. b. To establish the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness for the space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI Zone District. The approved percentage for a specific use is limited to that use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space. 2. Affordable Multi-Family Housing. In addition to meeting the standards in Chapter 26.425, Conditional Use, the following Standards shall be met. a. The Commission shall review the site plan to determine compliance pursuant to the following review standard, and establish conditions of approval as needed. The applicant must demonstrate that the affordable housing is substantially removed and physically separated from Commercial Uses on the same parcel, to the extent practicable, so as to isolate residential uses from commercial impacts and to adequately provide for on-loading, off-loading, circulation and parking for commercial uses. G. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that was in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the provisions of Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of Aspen Charter. Section 5. Section 26.710.170, Neighborhood Commercial (NC), shall be amended to read as follows: 26.710.170 Neighborhood Commercial (NC). A. Purpose. The Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone supports Aspen Area Community Plan policies related to a sustainable, local serving economy and the preservation of a diversity P268 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 19 of 27 of commercial opportunities for locals and visitors. The zone district provides opportunities for mixed-use development in close proximity to downtown at higher intensity than the Mixed Use or surrounding residential neighborhood zone districts. The NC allows for a mix of essential goods and services oriented businesses in close proximity to multi-modal transit infrastructure. The mix of uses in the NC is designed to provide for the daily needs of residents and visitors in a built environment that enhances the community character of Aspen. Greater design flexibility and increased setbacks from the CC zone allows for mixed-use development which creates a transition from the downtown commercial areas and can accommodate retail, service commercial, food service and related uses in conjunction with affordable housing on upper floors as an ancillary use to the primarily commercial purpose of the zone. Limited on-site parking is appropriate in conjunction with high traffic volume or residential uses and in addition to multi- modal improvements. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District: 1. Uses allowed on all building levels: retail, small format and general, restaurant and bar uses, service uses, office uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center, accessory uses and structures, uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors, including parking accessory to a permitted use, storage accessory to a permitted use. 2. Uses allowed on upper floors: affordable multi-family housing. 3. Free-Market Residential Units: No new Free-Market Residential Units may be established. Free-Market Residential units are permitted on any level if they were legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 25 (Series of 2012). 4. Affordable Housing Units: Affordable housing is permitted by right where accessory to a commercial use on the property or required for on-site affordable housing mitigation requirements. See 26.710.170.D.11 for affordable housing Floor Area Ratio requirements. Affordable housing created pursuant to this subsection is not eligible to be used for the creation of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540. 5. Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals: Home Occupations and Vacation Rentals are permitted only in legally established residential units. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515. 2. Retail, large format P269 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 20 of 27 D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District. The dimensional standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed-use developments are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximum allowable dimensional standards. 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): No requirement. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): five (5). 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): five (5). 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): five (5). 7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06. 8. Maximum height: twenty-eight (28) feet. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No requirement. 10. Public amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.412. 11. Floor area ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 1.5:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. a. Commercial uses: 1.5:1. b. Arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center and similar uses: 1:1. c. Affordable multi-family housing: Greater of existing FAR and .5:1. d. Free-market multi-family housing: Limited to the existing FAR. No expansion to FAR shall be permitted except at-grade patios, and decks (other than roof-top decks), balconies, exterior stairways, trellis, and other similar features up to 15% of the total free-market residential floor area. Any subsequent reduction in floor area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed a new limitation and the use shall not P270 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 21 of 27 thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater floor area. Free-market residential units shall not be able to utilize any exemptions to floor area outlined in Section 26.575.020(D), Measuring Floor Area, except as noted above. 12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling size (square feet): a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation. b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. c) Free-Market multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of net livable area. d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit sizes may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the use. 13. Commercial/residential ratio: When development includes mixed-uses the total residential net livable area shall be no greater than 65% of the total commercial net leasable and lodging net livable on the same parcel. E. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that was in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the provisions of Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of Aspen Charter. Section 6. Section 26.710.180, Mixed-Use (MU), shall be amended to read as follows: 26.710.180 Mixed-Use (MU). A. Purpose. The Mixed Use (MU) zone serves as a transition from the more intense commercial areas of the CC and C-1, and the residential and lodging zones surrounding Main Street. By allowing for a mix of commercial and residential uses and smaller-scale development, the Mixed Use zone reflects Aspen’s historic character and provides different economic and residential opportunities from more traditional commercial zones. Particularly along Main Street, the Mixed Use zone serves as a buffer from the traffic of Highway 82 while allowing for smaller scale commercial and residential opportunities. P271 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 22 of 27 Buildings in the Mixed Use zone consist primarily of commercial, service and office uses on the ground floor and in second tier spaces, and residential and office uses on upper floors, in second tier spaces and off of the primary street frontage. Uses in the MU zone should not erode the character of the neighborhood or create excessive impacts to the surrounding residential and lodging zone. Standalone residential uses are permitted on properties as a reflection of the historic residential nature of the zone district, while multi-family housing is limited to an ancillary use within mixed-use developments to ensure limited use conflicts. Standalone, affordable multi-family development is allowed. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District: 1. On historic landmark properties: Bed and breakfast. 2. Retail, small format and general, 3. Restaurant and bar uses. 4. Service uses. 5. Office uses. 6. Neighborhood commercial uses. 7. Lodging. 8. Arts, cultural and civic uses. 9. Public uses. 10. Recreational uses. 11. Academic uses. 12. Child care center. 13. Stand-alone affordable multi-family housing. 14. Free-market multi-family housing is permitted if: a. The housing was legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 32 (Series of 2016). No new Free-Market Residential Units may be established except as provided in subsection b, below; or b. The parcel is only used for residential use. 15. Single-family residence. 16. Duplex residence. 17. Two (2) detached single-family residences. 18. Single-family residence or accessory dwelling unit in a separate building accessed off the rear of a lot as an accessory use. 19. Affordable multi-family residential. 20. Home occupations. 21. Accessory uses and structures. 22. Storage accessory to a permitted use. 23. Vacation rentals. Pursuant to Section 26.575.220 C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: P272 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 23 of 27 1. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District. The dimensional standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed-use developments are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximum allowable dimensional standards. 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): 3,000. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. Detached residential dwellings: 4,500. 3,000 for historic landmark properties. b. Duplex dwellings (square feet): 4,500. 3,000 for historic landmark properties. c. All other uses: Not applicable. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): 30. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 10, which may be reduced to 5, pursuant to Special Review, Chapter 26.430. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 5. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 5. 7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06. 8. Maximum height: a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: 25 feet. b. All other uses: 28 feet. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): 10. 10. Public amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.412. 11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): a. The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively and individually when part of a commercial, lodging, or mixed-use development, as follows: Use Maximum Maximum by special review (see Subsection 26.430.040.A) Main Street Historic District All Other Locations Cumulative total of all uses 1:1 1.25:1 1.5:1 Commercial 1:1 1.25:1 1.5:1 P273 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 24 of 27 Civic 1:1 1.25:1 1.5:1 Lodging 0.75:1 1:1 1:1 Affordable Housing No limitation other than cumulative total of all uses b. The following FAR schedule applies to affordable housing and free-market residential uses when developed as the only use of the parcel: i. Affordable Housing, multi-family housing: Limited to cumulative total outlined in Section 26.710.180.11.a, above. ii. Free-market, affordable housing: 0.5:1, which may be increased to 0.75:1 if affordable housing floor area equal to 100% of the free-market residential floor area is developed on the same parcel. c. The following FAR schedule applies to single-family and duplex uses when developed as the only use of the parcel: i. Detached residential and duplex dwellings established prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005: 100% of the allowable floor area of an equivalent-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.) Receipt of a development order shall constitute the date the use was established. Replacement after demolition shall not effect a new establishment date for the purposes of this Section. City historic transferable development rights shall not permit additional floor area for detached residential and duplex dwellings. ii. Detached residential and duplex dwellings established after the adoption of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005: 80% of the allowable floor area of an equivalent-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.) City historic transferable development rights shall not permit additional floor area for detached residential and duplex dwellings. 12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling unit size (square feet): a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation. b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. c) Free-Market multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 1,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit sizes may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is P274 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 25 of 27 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the use. 13. Commercial/residential ratio: When development includes mixed-uses, the total residential net livable area shall be no greater than 150% the total commercial net leasable and lodging net livable area located on the same parcel. E. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that was in the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the provisions of Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of Aspen Charter. Section 7. Chapter 26.710 of Part 700 of Title 26 shall be amended by adding the following new Section 26.710.340, Small Business Overlay (SBO) Zone District, to read as follows: 26.710.340 Essential Business Overlay (EBO) Zone District. A. Purpose. The purpose of the Essential Business Overlay (EBO) Zone District is to encourage businesses that accommodate the basic consumer needs of Aspen residents and visitors in the Aspen infill area. The EBO provides alternative dimensional and use standards from the underlying zoning to allow redevelopment to create spaces useful to locally serving, non-traditional or other businesses not anticipated in the zoning code. The EBO also provides opportunities for public-private partnerships, where agencies and developers partner to create useful, non-traditional spaces, including live-work, business incubators and other mixed-use development models. This zone is a voluntary overlay that may be applied to properties zoned S/C/I and NC zones to enable quality redevelopment and achieve desired use and design outcomes. The EBO is applied through the rezoning process and approval is contingent upon meeting specific use and design criteria (Chapter 26.310). B. Permitted and conditional uses. 1. Refer to Table 26.710-1 for uses permitted as of right or as a conditional use in the Essential Business Overlay (EBO) Zone. 2. Residential uses are not permitted in the EBO Zone, unless the uses are accessory to a commercial use on the property or part of a live-work arrangement where the predominant uses on the site are commercial, and the uses are approved as a condition of rezoning (see subsection C.2 below). The EBO zone may not be applied to an existing residential use, unless the applicant for rezoning enters into a binding commitment to demolish or redevelop the residential uses for a use permitted in the EBO Zone, or the residential use is approved as part of the rezoning. P275 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 26 of 27 C. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements for all uses in the Essential Business Overlay (EBO) Zone District shall be the dimensional requirements established for those uses in the underlying zone district, except as provided below. 1. The following dimensional standards apply: Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): No requirement. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. Minimum front yard setback (feet): No requirement. Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement. Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06. Maximum height: 35 feet. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No requirement. Pedestrian Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.412. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.5:1 Neighborhood Commercial FAR (minimum) 1.5:1 2. The applicant may apply for alternative dimensional requirements as a condition of rezoning, taking into consideration neighborhood compatibility and the dimensional requirements of surrounding zone districts. D. Transportation and Parking Management. See Chapter 26.515, except that the maximum spaces allowed (Section 26.515.040.E, Table 26.515-1) do not apply to the SBO district. Section 8: Any scrivener’s errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 9: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 10: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 11: Effective Date. P276 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix Page 27 of 27 In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 12: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the ____ day of _____, 2016, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _____ day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _____th day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor Approved as to form: _____________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P277 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 1 of 16 ORDINANCE No. 30 Series of 2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMNETS RELATED TO SECTION 26.100, 104, DEFINITIONS, AND CHAPTER 26.575, MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to craft code amendments to coordinate the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) and the Land Use Code related to parking and mobility, the mix of commercial uses, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department and a Consultant Team consisting of White & Smith, LLC; Alan Richman Planning Services; Nelson Nygaard; Rowland + Broughton; BendonAdams; and Karen Setterfield conducted existing conditions research and outreach with respect to commercial use mix, parking, mobility, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted extensive Public Outreach with community members, the Planning & Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and City Council regarding the commercial district, commercial design, parking and view plane regulations; and, WHEREAS, from May through November, 2016, the City and the Consultant team conducted 20 public outreach events, an online public outreach and survey page with over 1,230 visits, eleven (11) focus group meetings with stakeholders and City officials, five (5) meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, four (4) meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission, and fourteen (14) public meetings with the City Council; WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council met in work sessions on February 29, 2016, April 12, 2016, April 18, 2016, April 26, 2016, May 10, 2016, June 21, 2016, July 18, 2016, August 9, 2016, August 28, 2016, September 13, 2016, September 19, 2016, September 27, 2016, October 10, 2016, and November 2, 2016 and provided general direction on code amendments; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on October 24, 2016, the City Council approved Resolution No. 147, Series of 2016, by a four to zero (4 – 0) vote, requesting code amendments to the Land Use Code to implement the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, amending the Land Use Code so it better reflects the goals of the AACP is a City Council Top Ten Goal; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (“Growth Management, The Commercial Sector,” page 20) documents that businesses providing basic necessities are at risk of being P278 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 2 of 16 displaced by restaurants, retail spaces, and offices in high-profile locations with high rents, resulting in a continuing shift towards exclusivity; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (“Growth Management, The Commercial Sector,” page 20) calls for a diverse commercial mix to strength the City’s character, with more aggressive measures to ensure the needs of the community are met; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for regulatory tools, such as Growth Management, for the use of non-prime commercial space including basements, second floors and alleys (Growth Management Policy V.1.b); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for the City to explore creating a program to encourage limited-use commercial spaces, which would be charged lower rents or rents based on a percentage of sales (Growth Management Policy V.1.d); and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team conducted a study to identify the aggregate retail demand of local residents and determine whether there are adequate local-serving businesses to meet that demand, and if there are types of business that are over-represented in the downtown, along with zoning tools to manage those imbalances (see Aspen Area Community Plan, Growth Management Policies V.1.a, V.1.c); and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team conducted a study that considered creating regulatory tools such as quotas, limited prohibitions, and zoning regulations to manage imbalances in the City’s commercial uses (see Aspen Area Community Plan, Growth Management Policy V.1.a); and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health safety and welfare; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO THAT: Section 1: The following definitions shall be added to Section 26.140.100, Definitions: Church. See “Religious Land Use.” Multi-family housing. See “residential multi-family housing.” P279 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 3 of 16 Religious Land Use. A place of religious worship and instruction. Accessory uses requiring independent approval include (1) an associated private school, and (2) child care in the main building or the same lot as the church or worship center that accepts customers not attending the church, recreational facilities, dormitories or other facilities for temporary or permanent residences. Child care facilities located in the main building that are used only during worship services, for persons attending the service, are considered accessory to the church and do not require independent approval. For purposes of this section, "religious worship" includes any "religious exercise" as defined by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-5. Second Tier Commercial Space. See Section 26.412.060. Vehicle Sales. The sale or rental of motorcycles, motor-driven cycles and motorized bicycles as defined by Section 42-1-102, C.R.S. Section 2. The following definitions in Section 26.140.100, Definitions, shall be amended to: Net leasable area. Areas within a commercial or mixed use building which are permitted to be leased to a tenant and occupied for commercial or office purposes. This also includes commercial areas within a lodge that are open to the general public. This also includes second- tier commercial spaces. (Also see Section 26.410.080 – Second-Tier Commercial Space and Section 26.575.020 – Calculations and Measurements.) Planned Development (PD). A zoning designation used prior to the adoption of Ordinance 36, Series 2013, replaced by the provisions of Chapter 26.445 – Planned Development. Formerly known as Planned Unit Development (PUD). Section 3. The following Definitions shall be deleted from Section 26.104.100, Definitions, and shall be readopted in new Section 26.104.110, Use Categories, which shall read as follows: 26.104.110. Use Categories. A. Generally. This section defines the terms and use categories that apply to this Code. B. Use Categories. 1. Purpose. This Chapter classifies land uses and activities into use categories on the basis of common functional, product, or physical characteristics. This section includes definitions that describe categories of uses. Characteristics include the type and amount of activity, the type of customers or residents, how goods or services are sold or delivered, and certain site factors. The use categories provide a systematic basis to assign present and future uses to zone districts (see the zone district regulations in Part 700). The decision to allow or prohibit the use categories in the various zones is based on the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan. P280 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 4 of 16 2. Use Categories. The affected definitions (see subsection C, below) include the following: academic uses; agricultural uses; arts, cultural and civic uses; assembly and community uses; commercial uses; essential services; hotels; offices; public uses; recreation; residential; retail; and service commercial. 3. Classification of Uses a. Considerations. (1) Uses are assigned to the category whose description most closely describes the nature of the primary use. The "Characteristics" subsection of each use category describes the characteristics of each use category. Developments may have more than one primary use. Developments may also have one or more accessory uses. Developments with more than one primary use are addressed in Subsection c. below. Accessory uses are addressed in Subsection c. below. (2) Uses are given the meaning assigned in subsection C or in the North American Industry Classification Manual (Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, 2012) (“NAICS”) or, if not defined in the NAICS, the American Planning Association, Land-Based Classification Standards LBCS Tables (April 1, 2001)(“LBCS”), or their ordinary and customary meaning. The NAICS and LBCS are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Section. (3) The following items are considered to determine what use category the use is in, and whether the activities constitute primary uses or accessory uses: • The description of the activity(ies) in relationship to the characteristics of each use category; • The relative amount of site or floor space and equipment devoted to the activity; • Relative amounts of sales from each activity; • The customer type for each activity; • The relative number of employees in each activity; • Hours of operation; • Building and site arrangement; • Vehicles used with the activity; • The relative number of vehicle trips generated by the activity; • Signs; P281 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 5 of 16 • How the use advertises itself; • Whether use is within the same industry classification is a functionally similar structural type as another permitted use, taking into consideration the NAICS and LBCS; • Whether the activity would be likely to be found independent of the other activities on the site; and • Other characteristics and factors as determined by the Community Development Director. b. Developments with multiple primary uses. When all the primary uses of a development fall within one use category, then the development is assigned to that use category. For example, a development that contains a commercial kitchen/bakery and a neighborhood cafe would be classified in the Retail category because all the primary uses are in that category. When the primary uses of a development fall within different use categories, each primary use is classified in the applicable category and is subject to the regulations for that category. c. Accessory uses. Accessory uses are allowed by right in conjunction with the use unless stated otherwise in the regulations. Also, unless otherwise stated, they are subject to the same regulations as the primary use. Common accessory uses are listed as examples with the categories. d. Use of examples. The "Examples" subsection of each use category provides a list of examples of uses that are included in the use category. The names of uses on the lists are generic. They are based on the common meaning of the terms and not on what a specific use may call itself. For example, a use whose business name is "Wholesale Bakery" but that sells mostly to consumers, would be included in the Retail category rather than the Service Commercial Industrial uses category. This is because the actual activity on the site matches the description of the Retail category. C. Definitions. As used in this Code, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall be defined as follows: Academic uses. Characteristics The use of land or buildings for public or private educational activities with related accessory uses. Examples Public or private schools, colleges or universities, technical schools, personal instructional services (such as musical instruction), specialized schools (such as beauty schools), tutoring services, or similar uses. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include office, maintenance facility, retail, housing or P282 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 6 of 16 food service. Exceptions Religious land uses are classified as Assembly and Community uses. Child day care, preschools, and trade schools are classified as Retail, under the Services subcategory. Agricultural uses. Characteristics The use of land and buildings for the production of crops, agricultural products, animals, and animal products. Examples Agricultural uses include nurseries, commercial greenhouses, bee keeping, community garden, or similar uses. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Exceptions Uses incidental to a residence (such as a backyard garden) do not constitute Agricultural uses unless the produce or livestock is intended for wholesale or retail businesses. Cultivation, Manufacturing, and Testing of Medical or Retail Marijuana are not considered Agricultural uses. Arts, Cultural and Civic uses. Characteristics The use of land or buildings by arts or cultural, institutions or establishments that are community-based or non-profit in nature. Examples Examples include performing arts centers, museums, and civic clubs or membership organizations. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include offices related to the operation of the primary use, maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Exceptions For profit bars, night clubs or similar performance spaces, galleries, commercial museums, and membership-based organizations. Assembly and Community uses. Characteristics The use of land or buildings for meeting places or by nonprofit or public organizations. P283 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 7 of 16 Examples Examples include community centers, fraternal clubs, libraries, religious land uses, or similar uses. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include offices related to the operation of the primary use, maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Exceptions Private lodges, clubs, and private or commercial athletic or health clubs are classified as Recreation, under the Indoor Recreation subcategory. Church. See “Religious Land Use.” Essential Services. Characteristics The development or maintenance of infrastructure by public utilities, state agencies, special districts, or the city. Examples Examples include fuel (such as gas, electrical, and steam), or water, wastewater and storm water transmission or distribution systems (underground, surface or overhead). The development or maintenance of wireless telecommunication services facilities and/or equipment used exclusively for police, fire and/or other emergency response communication systems is considered essential services. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include control, monitoring, data or transmission equipment, maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Exceptions The development or maintenance of commercial wireless telecommunication services facilities and/or equipment is not an essential service. Wireless telecommunications uses are subject to the provisions of Section 26.575.130. Hotel (Lodge) uses. Characteristics A building or parcel containing individual units used for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-term basis for a fee, with or without kitchens within individual units, with or without meals provided and which has common reservation and cleaning services, combined utilities and on-site management and reception services. For hotels with flexible unit configurations, also known as “lock-off units,” each rentable division or “key” shall constitute a lodge unit for the purposes of this Title. Unless P284 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 8 of 16 otherwise approved pursuant to Chapter 26.590 – Timeshare Development, occupancy periods of a hotel or unit thereof, by any one (1) person or entity with an ownership interest in the hotel or units thereof, shall not exceed thirty (30) consecutive days or exceed ninety (90) days within any calendar year, regardless of the form of ownership. Occupancy periods for person or entities with no ownership interested (e.g. vacationers) shall be limited only by the ninety-days per calendar year requirement. Examples Motels, hotels, timeshare (a.k.a. fractional) units and timeshare developments, and hostels. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include offices related to the operation of the primary use, maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Restaurants and retail uses are allowed up to the FAR limits and in the locations prescribed by the applicable zone. Exceptions Bed and breakfasts rooming houses / boardinghouses are classified separately. Offices uses. Characteristics A type of land use, or any building or portion thereof, involving the establishment, transaction and delivery of business, medical, professional or governmental activities or services. Examples Examples include advertising or insurance or travel agencies, , nonprofit organizations, medical and dental offices, clinics, and laboratories; professional offices publishing, and real property sales or management companies . Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include cafeterias, health facilities, parking, or other amenities primarily for the use of employees in the firm or building, maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Exceptions Offices that are part of and are located with a firm in another category are considered accessory to the firm's primary activity. Contractors and others who perform services off-site are included in the Office category if equipment and materials are not stored on the site and fabrication, services, or similar work is not carried on at the site. P285 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 9 of 16 Public uses. Characteristics The use of land or buildings by public or quasi-public organizations for public use and not otherwise defined in this section. Examples Examples include uses such as government administration and service, transportation buildings and facilities, public parking, post office, public safety facilities, hospital, and similar uses. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Police stations may include holding cells. Exceptions Parking facilities that are accessory to a primary use are not considered Public Uses, even if the operator leases the facility to the primary use or charges a fee to the individuals who park in the facility. Recreational uses. Characteristics The use of land or buildings for recreational activities. Examples Uses are divided into the following categories: 1. Indoor Recreation activities that occur in fully or partially enclosed buildings, such as skiing facilities, recreation and fitness centers (such as ice rinks, tennis clubs, indoor play courts), bowling centers, pool rooms, and amusement arcades. 2. Outdoor Recreation activities that occur in outdoor settings, such as parks, playgrounds, play fields, golf courses, skateboard parks, horseback riding facilities, or similar uses. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include concessions, parking, caretaker's quarters, and maintenance facilities. Accessory uses may include maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Exceptions Uses which draw large numbers of people to periodic events, rather than on a continuous basis, are classified as seasonal uses and are subject to Chapter 26.450. P286 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 10 of 16 Residential multi-family housing. See “Residential or Residential Use.” Religious Land Use. A place of religious worship and instruction. Accessory uses requiring independent approval include (1) an associated private school, and (2) child care in the main building or the same lot as the church or worship center that accepts customers not attending the church, recreational facilities, dormitories or other facilities for temporary or permanent residences. Child care facilities located in the main building that are used only during worship services, for persons attending the service, are considered accessory to the church and do not require independent approval. For purposes of this section, "religious worship" includes any "religious exercise" as defined by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-5. Residential use. Characteristics A dwelling unit which has in its history ever housed a resident, and which are occupied by a single resident or a household. Examples Residential uses and configurations include the following categories: 1. detached residential dwellings, 2. attached residential dwellings, duplex dwellings, 3. residential multi-family housing, which refers to any of the following configurations: multi-family dwellings located in an exclusively residential building, multi-family dwellings located in a mixed-use building, or detached buildings on a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures containing three (3) or more detached residential dwellings where permitted by the zone district, and 4. live-work dwellings (principally residential buildings that include an office, studio, or other commercial use and a dwelling unit occupied on a full time basis by a person who is employed by the commercial use), In addition, residential uses are further divided into affordable housing and free market units for purposes of the Growth Management Quota System (Chapter 26.470) and the disposition of units by location or floor area in the applicable zone district. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Accessory uses commonly found are recreational activities, raising of pets, hobbies, and parking of the occupants' vehicles. Home occupations, accessory dwelling units, accessory short-term rentals, and food membership P287 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 11 of 16 distribution are accessory uses that are permitted only where allowed by the applicable zone district, and may be subject to additional regulations. Exceptions Guest houses that contain kitchen facilities are prohibited as accessory uses except where allowed by the applicable zone district. Residential units used exclusively as tourist accommodations, except where permitted by the applicable zone district. Restaurant and Bar 6. Entertainment and Dining: establishments where food is served or entertainment is provided, or that have a dance floor or facilities for the display of movies, theatrical productions, or similar activities. Examples include restaurants, nightclubs and bars, neighborhood cafés, or movie theaters. Characteristics The use of buildings or land for establishments where food or alcoholic beverages are served or entertainment is provided Examples Examples include restaurants, bars, and delicatessens. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Accessory uses may include offices and small format retail uses ancillary to the primary use of the property. Exceptions Commercial kitchens and bakeries. Retail Uses Characteristics Commercial establishments engaged in the selling or renting of consumer goods and merchandise. Examples Examples include uses from the four subgroups listed below: 1. Consumer Sales, Small Format: the sale of goods that provide day to day consumer needs, and that typically occur in a storefront building or second tier space. This includes books, clothing, convenience stores, consumer electronics (such as cellular telephones), food and beverage stores (including food markets and liquor stores pharmacies, pet stores, sporting goods,and similar retail uses and activities. P288 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 12 of 16 2. Consumer Sales, Generally: the sale of goods on a non-recurring basis, or not otherwise classified, such as auto parts and hardware, commercial kitchen or bakery, consumer goods rental, clothing, banks, florists, retail marijuana establishments, office supplies, and similar retail establishments not otherwise listed. 3. Consumer Sales, Specialty: the sale of goods that are non-recurring and that tend to occupy spaces in more expensive locations, such as jewelry, art dealers, luggage, fur and leather goods. 4. Consumer Sales, Large Format: uses that tend to occupy or require stand- alone or large format buildings, display lots, or outdoor area, such as building material dealers, gas stations, electric charging stations, repair and maintenance shops, vehicle sales and furniture stores. 5. Services: Commercial establishments engaged in providing personal or financial services to the general public, including accessory retail sales of products associated with the primary service use. This includes, but is not limited to, beauty shops, child day care, laundry and dry cleaners, tailors and cobblers. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Offices, storage of goods, parking, and the production or repackaging of products sold on-premises and the rendering of services incidental to the sale or rental of those products. Services such as bicycle and ski repair, which are incidental to the primary use as retail. Exceptions Offices are not considered retail uses. Uses which may be classified as Service Commercial Industrial uses due to their scale or impacts. Service, Commercial, Industrial uses. Characteristics The use of buildings or land for the manufacture, repair and servicing of consumer goods, the provision of common domestic services and with limited retail, showroom or customer reception areas. (See P289 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 13 of 16 Service/Commercial/Industrial Zone District, Section 26.710.160.) Examples Examples include uses involved in production of goods, or services, such as bike and ski shops (including items for rent or sale in combination with a guiding service), brewery and brewing supply, hardware, locksmiths, copy and packing and shipping centers, marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing and testing facilities. This may also include uses in the Office or the Retail category/ Consumer Sales, Large Format or Services subcategories, with showroom space, where designated in the SCI zone district. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include maintenance facilities for the uses on the site, parking, and garbage or trash disposal consistent with City Code Chapter 12.04. Accessory uses may include offices, parking, storage, employee recreational facilities, warehouses, storage yards, docks, repair facilities. Retail sales, such a recreational parts and equipment, which may be incidental to the primary use as a service. Exceptions Contractors and others who perform services off-site are included in the Office category, if equipment and materials are not stored at the site, and fabrication or similar work is not carried on at the site. Manufacturing of goods where the primary use is the retail sale of those products to the general public. Section 3. Section 26.575.030, Public Amenity, is hereby rescinded and replaced with Section 26.575.030, Outdoor Merchandising, as follows: 26.575.030 Outdoor Merchandising A. Outdoor Merchandising on Private Property. Private property may be utilized for merchandising purposes by those businesses located adjacent to and on the same parcel as the outdoor space. This shall not grant transient sales from peddlers who are not associated with an adjacent commercial operation; this includes service uses such as massage, tarot card reading, aura analysis, etc. Outdoor merchandising shall be directly associated with the adjacent business and shall not permit stand-alone operations, including, but not limited to, automated bike rental racks, movie rental kiosks, automated dog washes, or automated massage furniture. In addition, outdoor merchandising must meet the following requirements: P290 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 14 of 16 1. Merchandise must be maintained, orderly and located in front of or proximate to the storefront related to the sales. 2. The display of merchandise shall in no way inhibit the movement of pedestrian traffic along the public right-of-way. All merchandising shall be located on private property. A minimum of six (6) foot ingress/egress shall be maintained for building entrances and exits. 3. Outdoor clothing displays including, but not limited to, coats, jeans, shirts, athletic apparel, and footwear shall be allowed. Outside clothing displays of two (2) mannequins or one (1) clothing rack of up to six (6) feet in length, but not both, are allowed. Bins, boxes, and containers that sit directly on the ground are allowed for outdoor clothing sales, but cardboard boxes are prohibited. All outdoor merchandise displays must have a minimum height of not less than 27 inches from grade to prevent tripping hazards. For all other types of merchandise, the size and amount allowed shall be under the discretion of the property owner. 4. Umbrellas, retractable canopies, and similar devices are not permitted for outdoor merchandising. See Section 26.304.070.F.2. 5. Merchandise shall be displayed for sale with the ability for pedestrians to view the item(s). Outdoor areas shall not be used solely for storage. The prohibition of storage shall be limited to merchandising on private property and shall not apply to permitted commercial activity on an abutting right-of-way or otherwise permitted by the City. B. Outdoor Restaurant Seating on Private Property. Private Property may be used for commercial restaurant outdoor dining if adequate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is maintained. Umbrellas, retractable canopies, and similar temporary, removable devices are permitted for commercial restaurant uses. For outdoor food vending in the Commercial Core District, also see Paragraph 26.470.040.B.3, Administrative growth management review. Section 4. Section 26.575.020(F)(4)(m) shall be added as follows: For commercial, lodge, or mixed-use buildings located in the Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (C-1), or Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone districts, decorative architectural elements such as a parapet, cornice, spire, pediment, are exempted from height measurement up to eighteen (24) inches only if approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission as part of a Commercial Design Review. Section 5. Chapter 26.575.040 is amended as follows: 26.575.040 Commercial Parking Facilities P291 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 15 of 16 When a parking facility is proposed to function as a commercial parking facility, as such terms are used herein, review and approval shall be according to Chapter 26.430, Special Review and the review standards of Section 26.515.040, Special Review Standards. Development of such a facility may also require conditional use review in some Zone Districts. Also see definition of "Commercial parking facility," Section 26.104.100. Section 6: Any scrivener’s errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 7: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 8: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 9: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 10: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the ____ day of _____, 2016, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _____ day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _____th day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor P292 VII.A. 1.9.2017 Second Reading, Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations Page 16 of 16 Approved as to form: _____________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P293 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 1 of 42 ORDINANCE No. 31 Series of 2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS TO LAND USE CODE CHAPTER 26.470 – GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTE SYSTEM. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to craft code amendments to coordinate the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) and the Land Use Code related to parking and mobility, the mix of commercial uses, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department and a Consultant Team consisting of White & Smith, LLC; Alan Richman Planning Services; Nelson Nygaard; Rowland + Broughton; BendonAdams; and Karen Setterfield conducted existing conditions research and outreach with respect to commercial use mix, parking, mobility, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted extensive Public Outreach with community members, the Planning & Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and City Council regarding the commercial district, commercial design, parking and view plane regulations; and, WHEREAS, from May through November, 2016, the City and the Consultant team conducted 20 public outreach events, an online public outreach and survey page with over 1,230 visits, eleven (11) focus group meetings with stakeholders and City officials, five (5) meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, four (4) meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission, and fourteen (14) public meetings with the City Council; WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council met in work sessions on February 29, 2016, April 12, 2016, April 18, 2016, April 26, 2016, May 10, 2016, June 21, 2016, July 18, 2016, August 9, 2016, August 28, 2016, September 13, 2016, September 19, 2016, September 27, 2016, October 10, 2016, and November 2, 2016 and provided general direction on code amendments; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on October 24, 2016, the City Council approved Resolution No. 147, Series of 2016, by a four to zero (4 – 0) vote, requesting code amendments to the Land Use Code to implement the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, amending the Land Use Code so it better reflects the goals of the AACP is a City Council Top Ten Goal; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to ensure development mitigates its reasonably related impacts while allowing some abatements when community benefits are received (Growth Management Policies VII.2 and VII.3); and P294 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 2 of 42 WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (“Growth Management, The Commercial Sector,” page 20) documents that businesses providing basic necessities are at risk of being displaced by restaurants, retail spaces, and offices in high-profile locations with high rents, resulting in a continuing shift towards exclusivity; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (“Growth Management, The Commercial Sector,” page 20) calls for a diverse commercial mix to strength the City’s character, with more aggressive measures to ensure the needs of the community are met; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for regulatory tools, such as Growth Management, for the use of non-prime commercial space including basements, second floors and alleys (Growth Management Policy V.1.b); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for the City to explore creating a program to encourage limited-use commercial spaces, which would be charged lower rents or rents based on a percentage of sales (Growth Management Policy V.1.d); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to incentivize the provision of on-site affordable housing. This could include prioritization in receiving a building permit, points in growth management, etc. (Growth Management Policy VII.2.d); and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team conducted a study to identify the aggregate retail demand of local residents and determine whether there are adequate local-serving businesses to meet that demand, and if there are types of business that are over-represented in the downtown, along with zoning tools to manage those imbalances (see Aspen Area Community Plan, Growth Management Policies V.1.a, V.1.c); and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team conducted a study that considered creating regulatory tools such as quotas, limited prohibitions, and zoning regulations to manage imbalances in the City’s commercial uses (see Aspen Area Community Plan, Growth Management Policy V.1.a); and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health safety and welfare; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO THAT: P295 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 3 of 42 Section 1. Chapter 26.470shall be rescinded and readopted as follows: Chapter 26.470 GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS) Sections: Sec. 26.470.010 Purpose. Sec. 26.470.020 Terminology. Sec. 26.470.030 Applicability and Prohibitions. Sec. 26.470.040 Allotment Procedures. Sec. 26.470.050 Calculations. Sec. 26.470.060 Procedures for Review. Sec. 26.470.070 Exempt Development. Sec. 26.470.080 General Review Standards. Sec. 26.470.090 Administrative applications. Sec. 26.470.100 Planning and Zoning Commission applications. Sec. 26.470.110 City Council applications. Sec. 26.470.120 Yearly Growth Management accounting procedures. Sec. 26.470.130 Application contents. Sec. 26.470.140 Reconstruction limitations. Sec. 26.470.150 Amendment of a growth management development order. Sec. 26.470.160 Appeals. 26.470.010 Purpose The purposes of this Chapter are to: (a) implement the goals and policies for the City and the Aspen Area Community Plan; (b) ensure that new growth occurs in an orderly and efficient manner in the City; (c) ensure sufficient public facilities are present to accommodate new growth and development; (d) ensure that new growth and development is designed and constructed to maintain the character and ambiance of the City; (e) ensure the presence of an adequate supply of affordable housing, businesses and events that serve the local, permanent community and the area's tourist base; (f) ensure that growth does not overextend the community's ability to provide support services, including employee housing, traffic control and parking; and (g) ensure that the resulting employees generated and impacts created by development and redevelopment are mitigated by said development and redevelopment. 26.470.020 Terminology. Growth Management Year. A year period, lasting from January 1 through December 31, which constitutes the time period that each year’s development allotments are available. Development categories. All development falls into one of four land use categories, which are outlined in Table 1. Table 1 establishes the development categories and units of allocation for each category for purposes of administering this Chapter. Sub-Categories 1.A – 1.B are all considered part of the Residential Uses category, and therefore conversion between these two sub-categories does not require change in use review. TABLE 1, Development Categories P296 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 4 of 42 Category Description Allocation units 1. Residential Uses A. Residential – Free-Market Dwelling units intended exclusively for residential purposes, not subject to any residency requirements and not including hotels, or lodging. Units may be in the form of single-family, duplex, multi-family or part of a mixed-use structure. (See definitions of Residential use and Dwelling.) Dwelling units B. Residential – Affordable Housing Dwelling units intended to house only local working residents that are deed restricted according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Units may be in the form of single-family, duplex, multi-family, dormitory or part of a mixed-use structure. (See definition of Affordable housing.) Dwelling units 2. Commercial Buildings, or portions thereof, supporting office, retail, warehousing, manufacturing, commercial recreation, restaurant/bar or service oriented businesses, including retail and office uses but not including hotel or lodging uses. (See definition of Commercial use.) Net leasable square feet 3. Lodging Buildings, or portions thereof, used to house a transient tourist population on a short-term basis, including lodges, hotels, motels, bed and breakfasts, and timeshare development. (See definition of Hotel.) Lodging pillows. (Each lodging bedroom shall be considered to be two pillows.) 4. Essential Public Facilities Facilities serving essential public purposes used by or for the benefit of the general public and serving the needs of the community. (See definition of Essential public facility.) Square feet Annual development allotment. Each growth management year's potential growth within the City, applied to each type of land use. This is a unit of measurement applied to each type of land use, that, if granted, allows the specific development proposal to move forward in the review process. The number of development allotments for each land use is established in Table 2 below. See also Section 26.470.040, Allotment Procedure. Carry-forward allotment. The number of unused and unclaimed growth management allotments for each type of development that the City Council determines should be brought forward, or rolled-over, into the next growth management year. Procedures for carry-forward are established in Section 26.470.120, Yearly Growth Management accounting procedures. Full Time Equivalent (FTE). A unit of measurement standardizing the workloads of employees. In this Chapter, FTEs refer to the number of employees generated or housed by development. P297 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 5 of 42 26.470.030 Applicability and Prohibitions. This Chapter shall apply to all development in the City unless exempted in section 26.470.070, Exempt Development. A. Number of development applications. No more than one (1) application for growth management allotments on any one (1) parcel shall be considered concurrently. To submit a new application, any active growth management application for the same property must be vacated. B. Number of growth management allocations. No more than one (1) project shall be entitled to growth management allotments on any one (1) parcel concurrently. In order to entitle a different project on the same parcel, existing growth allotments must be vacated. (Also see Section 26.470.140, Amendment of a growth management development order.) C. No automatic "resubmission" of growth management applications. Applications shall only be eligible for growth allotments within the growth management session in which they are submitted and shall not automatically become eligible for allotments in future sessions or future years. Applications must be resubmitted in order to be eligible for allotments in the next session or next year, as applicable. Resubmission shall effect a new submission date. D. Subdivision and other required land use reviews. Projects requiring additional land use reviews, including Conceptual Commercial Design Review, pursuant to Section 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, Conceptual Review by the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Section 26.415, Historic Preservation, Project Review or Detailed Review, pursuant to Section 26.445, Planned Development, and Subdivision, pursuant to Section 26.480, Subdivision, may be reviewed concurrently with review for growth management, pursuant to Paragraph 26.304.060.B.1. E. No partial approvals. In order for a project to gain approval, sufficient allotments for every element of the project must be obtained. No partial approvals shall be granted. In circumstances where a proposal requires allotments be granted for various types of uses within the project, the reviewing body shall not grant approval unless allotments for every type of use are available. For example: If a proposal requires that allotments be granted for free-market residential units, affordable housing units and commercial space, and there are no remaining allotments for free-market residential for the year, the project shall be tabled until such time as allotments are available. In the above example, the project shall be tabled in total and not granted allotments for the affordable housing units or the commercial space. Similarly, a project requiring 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial allotments when only 5,000 sq. ft. of commercial allotments remain shall be tabled until such time as allotments are available. Also see multi-year allotments below. F. Multi-year growth allotments. Projects requiring development allotments in excess of the annual allotment may be granted a multi-year allotment, pursuant to Subsection P298 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 6 of 42 26.470.090.A, or may gain allotments over a multi-year period, provided that the allotment gained in any one (1) year shall not exceed the annual allotment. For example, a project requesting fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of commercial space may request either a one-time, multi-year allotment of fifty thousand (50,000) square feet or may request approval in the first year for twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet and request approval for the remaining twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet in a subsequent year. Gaining allotments in any year shall not guarantee that allotments will be granted in later years for the same project. Projects requiring a multi-year allotment shall not be granted a development order until all elements of the project have been granted allotments. If the design of a project changes prior to receiving the full allotment needed for a development order, the reviewing body shall determine if the changes are acceptable or if the change invalidates the previously granted allotment and requires a resubmission for allotments. Applications for each year's allotment need to be submitted, and there shall be no preferential status given to a project granted partial allotment. Projects that do not require allotments in excess of the annual allotment shall not be eligible to gain partial allotments. See No partial approvals above. G. Non-assignability of growth allotments. Development allotments obtained pursuant to this Chapter shall not be assignable or transferable independent of the conveyance of the real property on which the development allotment has been approved. H. No reduction in mitigation requirements. Notwithstanding Section 26.470.090(4), Essential Public Facilities, an applicant may not request a reduction in the mitigation requirements of this Chapter. Properties requesting historic designation pursuant to Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation, shall be exempt from this provision, provided, however, that any reduction is reviewed and approved by City Council. I. No combination of multiple affordable housing requirements allowed. Whenever multiple affordable housing mitigation requirements are required, each housing requirement shall be met. For example: A mixed-use project may require two (2) affordable housing units to mitigate an increase in commercial employee generation and two (2) affordable housing units to mitigate free-market residential development. In this case, four (4) affordable housing units are required. 26.470.040 Allotment Procedures. A. General. Aspen area residents have determined that growth must be managed to ensure long-term negative consequences associated with development and its impacts are minimized. One of the broad themes of the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) is to “manage future development so that it contributes to the long-term viability of a sustainable, demographically diverse visitor-based economy and a vital year-round community.” To implement these goals, the community has established a two percent (2%) growth rate that can be accommodated without compromising community character. The AACP supports a "critical mass of year-round P299 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 7 of 42 residents” to be housed while maintaining our community character and way of life. Therefore, the Growth Management Quota System does not limit the annual growth rate of affordable housing, while all other types of development shall be limited to not exceed a two-percent annual growth rate. In order to address continued community growth concerns, a growth limit of one- half percent (0.5%) has been implemented for new free-market residential development. B. Existing development. The following tables describe the existing (as of March 2007) amount of development in each sector used as a "baseline" in establishing annual allotments and development ceilings.1 Commercial Development Within the City (square feet)1 Commercial use "class" Leasable square feet for class Merchandising 365,486 Lodging2 19,950 Offices 113,207 Recreation 179,824 Special purpose 144,777 Warehouse/storage 149,814 Multi-use 208,331 Commercial Condos 483,549 Total commercial: 1,664,938 2% Annual growth rate for commercial development 33,300 Residential Development Within the City (units) Property type Residences in class Single-family 1,268 Duplex or triplex3 79 Multi-units 4-8 4 45 Multi-units 9+ 142 Condominiums 2,978 Duplex condos 366 1 Source: Pitkin County Assessor, March 7, 2005 2 Lodge unit square footage removed from total. Commercial space within lodge developments estimated through City records. 3 Single ownership duplex and triplex units. 2 units per property ownership estimated. 4 Single ownership apartment buildings. Residence count reflects actual number of units recorded with Assessor. P300 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 8 of 42 Manufactured 29 Partial exempt 1 Total residences: 4,909 Nonexempt affordable housing units 5 1,132 Total free-market residences 3,777 0.5% Annual growth rate for free-market residential development: 18.9 units Lodging Development Within the City (Pillows) Total lodging pillows: 7,500 1.5% Annual growth rate 112.5 pillows Annual development allotments. The Growth Management Quota System establishes annual development allotments available for use by projects during each growth management year. The Community Development Director shall calculate the development allotments available for each type of land use as follows: Available development allotments = annual allotment + Carry-forward allotment from prior year The following annual allotments are hereby established: Table 2, Development Allotments Development Type Annual Allotment Residential — Free-Market 19 units Residential — Affordable Housing No annual limit Commercial 33,000 net leasable square feet Lodging 112 pillows Essential public facility No annual limit 5 A total of 1,815 residences within the City are deed-restricted affordable housing. Of these units, several are considered tax-exempt and are not included in the Assessor's counts. These units are rental affordable housing owned by the City, APCHA or tax-exempt nonprofit organizations. Therefore, only the nonexempt units have been subtracted from the Assessor's total residences to determine the number of free-market residences. P301 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 9 of 42 Note, the annual allotment may be reduced if multi-year allotments are granted by the City Council. Upon a denial of the project and the completion of any appeals, where it’s found the denial was appropriate, the project’s allotments shall not be considered granted and shall be returned to the available allotment pool for the remainder of the year. Allotments shall be considered vacated by a property owner upon written notification from the property owner. C. Allocation procedure. Following approval or approval with conditions, pursuant to the above procedures for review, the Community Development Director shall issue a development order pursuant to Section 26.304.070, Development orders. Those applicants having received allotments may proceed to apply for any further development approvals required by this Title or any other regulations of the City. D. Expiration of growth management allotments. Growth management allotments granted pursuant to this Chapter shall expire with the expiration of the development order, pursuant to the terms and limitations of Section 26.304.080, Development Orders. Expired allotments shall not be considered valid, and the applicant shall be required to re-apply for growth management approval. Expired allotments may be added to the next year's available allotments at the discretion of the City Council, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.E. 26.470.050. Calculations. A. General. Whenever employee housing or fee-in-lieu is required to mitigate for employees generated by a development, there shall be an analysis and credit for employee generation of the existing project, prior to redevelopment, and an employee generation analysis of the proposed development. The employee mitigation requirement shall be based upon the incremental employee generation difference between the existing development and the proposed development. Unless otherwise exempted by this Chapter, the employee mitigation requirement shall be based upon the total employee generation of the proposed development. Except for the conversion between residential and lodge uses outlined in Section 26.470.140, Reconstruction limitations, credits are not given for changes between the land use categories outlined in Table 1. For instance, a change in use from commercial net leasable area to free-market residential units does not generate a credit. B. Employee generation rates. Table 3 establishes the employee generation rates are the result of the Employee Generation Study, an analysis sponsored by the City during the fall and winter of 2012 considering the actual employment requirements of over one hundred (100) Aspen businesses. This study is available at the Community Development Department. Employee generation is quantified as full-time equivalents (FTEs) per one thousand (1,000) square feet of net leasable space or per lodge bedroom. Table 3, Employee Generation Rates Zone District Employees Generated per 1,000 Square Feet of Net Leasable Space Commercial Core (CC) Commercial (C-1) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Commercial Lodge (CL) commercial space 4.7 P302 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 10 of 42 Zone District Employees Generated per 1,000 Square Feet of Net Leasable Space Lodge (L) commercial space Lodge Preservation (LP) commercial space Lodge Overlay (LO) commercial space Ski Base (SKI) commercial space Mixed-Use (MU) 3.6 Service Commercial Industrial (S/C/I) 3.9 Public1 5.1 Lodge Preservation (LP) lodge units .3 per lodging bedroom Lodge (L), Commercial Lodge (CL), Ski Base (SKI) and other zone district lodge units .6 per lodging bedroom 1 For the Public Zone, the study evaluated only office-type public uses, and this number should not be considered typical for other non-office public facilities. Hence, each Essential Public Facility proposal shall be evaluated for actual employee generation. Each use within a mixed-use building shall require a separate calculation to be added to the total for the project. For commercial net leasable space within basement or upper floors, the rates quoted above shall be reduced by twenty-five percent (25%) for the purpose of calculating total employee generation. This reduction shall not apply to lodge units. For lodging projects with flexible unit configurations, also known as "lock-off units," each separate "key" or rentable division shall constitute a unit for the purposes of this Section. Timeshare units and exempt timeshare units are considered lodging projects for the purposes of determining employee generation. C. Employee generation review. All essential public facilities shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine employee generation, pursuant to Section 26.470.110D. In addition, any applicant who believes the employee generation rate is different than that outlined herein may request an employee generation review with the Planning and Zoning Commission during a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E. In establishing employee generation, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following: 1. The expected employee generation of the use considering the employment generation pattern of the use or of a similar use within the City or a similar resort. 2. Any unique employment characteristics of the operation. 3. The extent to which employees of various uses within a mixed-use building or of a related off-site operation will overlap or serve multiple functions. 4. A proposed restriction requiring full employee generation mitigation upon vacation of the type of business acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. P303 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 11 of 42 5. Any proposed follow-up analyses of the project (e.g., an audit) to confirm actual employee generation. The requirements of any proposed follow-up analysis shall be outlined in a Development Agreement, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 6. For lodge projects only: An efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for the lodging component of the project may, at the discretion of the Commission as a means of incentivizing a lodge project, be applied as a credit towards the mitigation requirement of the free-market residential component of the project. Any approved reduction shall require an audit to determine actual employee generation after two (2) complete years of operation of the lodge. D. Employees housed. Whenever a project provides residential units on or off site the schedule in Table 4 shall be used to determine the number of employees housed by such units: Table 4, FTEs Housed Unit Type Employees Housed Studio 1.25 One-bedroom 1.75 Two-bedroom 2.25 Three-bedroom or larger 3.00, plus .5 per each additional bedroom Dormitory 1.00 employee per 150 square feet of net livable space E. Employee housing fee-in-lieu payment. Whenever a project provides employee housing via a fee-in-lieu payment, in part or in total, the amount of the payment shall be based upon the following (fee-in-lieu is only allowed for Categories 1-4, Categories 5-7 is calculated only for use in the Housing Certificates Program): Fee-In-Lieu (per FTE): Category 1: $ 356,433 Category 2: $ 320,186 Category 3: $ 286,495 Category 4: $ 223,072 Category 5: $ 157,280 Category 6: $ 132,817 Category 7: $ 104,148 Payment shall be calculated on a full-time-equivalent employee (FTE) basis according to the Affordable Housing Category designation required by this Title. Unless otherwise stated in this Title or in a Development Order, Fee-in-Lieu payments shall be collected by the City of Aspen Building Department upon and as a condition of Building Permit issuance. The Fee-In-Lieu rates shall be updated every five years and adopted by city council ordinance. During intermediate years, The City may choose to update the fee-in-lieu schedule, by ordinance, based on the change in the engineering news record inflation index. P304 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 12 of 42 The following methodology was used to determine the above fee-in-lieu schedule: The subsidy per FTE was calculated by subtracting unit sales revenue per FTE from the total development costs per FTE. Total development cost per FTE was determined by using an average of recent City of Aspen projects and foreseeable future City of Aspen projects for which land has already been acquired and program/density has been deliberated, where in each case actual land costs were used in the calculation. The Program/Density projections for future projects were based upon assumptions suitable for the respective neighborhood, public outreach, and program/density review by City Council. Development cost calculations included all “hard” and “soft” costs associated with development. F. Employee/square footage conversion. Whenever an affordable housing mitigation requirement is required to be converted between a number-of-employees requirement and a square-footage requirement, regardless of direction, the following conversion factor shall be used: 1 employee = 400 square feet of net livable area. G. Accessory dwelling units as mitigation units. Accessory dwelling units, approved pursuant to Chapter 26.520 and which are deed-restricted as "for sale" category housing and transferred to a qualified purchaser according to the provisions of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, shall be considered mitigation units and attributed to a project's affordable housing provision. ADUs which are not deed-restricted as category units and are not transferred to qualified purchasers shall not be considered mitigation units and shall not be attributed to a project's affordable housing provision. 26.470.060. Procedures for Review. A development application for growth management shall be reviewed pursuant to the following procedures and standards and the Common Development Review Procedures set forth at Chapter 26.304. According to the type of allotments requested, the following steps are necessary. A development proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. An application for growth management may be submitted to the Community Development Director on any date of the year. A. Administrative Applications. The Community Development Director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the application, based on the applicable standards of review in Section 26.470.090, Administrative applications. B. Planning and Zoning Commission Applications. The Planning and Zoning Commission, during a duly noticed public hearing, shall review a recommendation from the Community Development Director and shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application, based on the standards of review in Section 26.470.100, Planning and Zoning Commission Applications, and Section 26.470.080, General Review Standards. This requires a one-step process as follows: Step One – Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission. 1. Purpose: To determine if the application meets the standards for approval. P305 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 13 of 42 2. Process: The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application after considering the recommendation of the Community Development Director and comments and testimony from the public at a duly noticed public hearing. The Historic Preservation Commission shall be the recommending body for historic landmarks, properties requesting landmark designation, and all properties located within a Historic District. 3. Standards of review: The proposed development shall comply with the applicable review standards of Section 26.470.100, Planning and Zoning Commission applications and Section 26.470.080, General Review Standards. 4. Form of decision: The Commission’s decision shall be by resolution. 5. Notice requirements: Posting, Mailing and Publication pursuant to Subparagraph 26.304.060.E.3 and the provisions of Section 26.304.035 – Neighborhood Outreach as applicable. C. City Council Applications. City Council, during a duly noticed public hearing, shall review a recommendation from the Community Development Director, a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application, based on the standards of review in Section 26.470.110, City Council Applications, and Section 26.470.080, General Review Standards. This requires a two-step process as follows: Step One – Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission. 1. Purpose: To determine if the application meets the standards for approval. 2. Process: The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission shall forward a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to City Council after considering the recommendation of the Community Development Director and comments and testimony from the public at a duly noticed public hearing. The Historic Preservation Commission shall be the recommending body for historic landmarks, properties requesting landmark designation, and all properties located within a Historic District. 3. Standards of review: The proposed development shall comply with the applicable review standards of Section 26.470.110, City Council applications and Section 26.470.080, General Review Standards. 4. Form of decision: The Commission’s recommendation shall be by resolution. 5. Notice requirements: Posting, Mailing and Publication pursuant to Subparagraph 26.304.060.E.3 and the provisions of Section 26.304.035 – Neighborhood Outreach as applicable. Step Two – Public Hearing before City Council. 1. Purpose: To determine if the application meets the standards for approval P306 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 14 of 42 2. Process: The Community Development Director shall provide City Council with a recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application, based on the standards of review. City Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application after considering the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, and comments and testimony from the public at a duly noticed public hearing. 3. Standards of review: The proposed development shall comply with the applicable review standards of Section 26.470.110, City Council applications and Section 26.470.080, General Review Standards. 4. Form of decision: City Council decision shall be by ordinance. 5. Notice requirements: Posting, Mailing and Publication pursuant to Subparagraph 26.304.060.E.3, the requirements of Section 26.304.035 – Neighborhood Outreach as applicable, and the requisite notice requirements for adoption of an ordinance by City Council. D. Combined Reviews. An application for growth management review may be combined with development applications for other associated land use reviews, pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B.1, Combined Reviews. Sec. 26.470.070 Exempt development. The following types of development shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. Development exempt from growth management shall not be considered exempt from other chapters of the Land Use Code. Where applicable, exemptions are cumulative. A. Remodeling or redevelopment of existing single-family and duplex residential development. The remodeling or redevelopment of existing single-family and duplex residential properties shall be exempt from growth management provided that no additional Floor Area is added to the property. When an expansion of Floor Area occurs, see Section 26.470.060, subsections 1 and 2. Existing, prior to demolition, Floor Area shall be documented by the City Zoning Officer prior to demolition. B. Conversion of an existing single-family residence to a duplex residence or two (2) detached residences or vise-versa. The conversion of an existing single-family residence to a duplex residence or two (2) detached single-family residences, or vise-versa, which may include demolition shall be exempt from growth management provided that no additional Floor Area is added to the property. When an expansion of Floor Area occurs, see Section 26.470.060, subsections 1 and 2. Existing, prior to demolition, Floor Area shall be documented by the City Zoning Officer prior to demolition. C. Remodeling or expansion of existing multi-family residential development. The remodeling of existing multi-family residential dwellings shall be exempt from growth management provided that no additional Floor Area is added to the property and provided demolition of a unit or structure does not occur. When an expansion of Floor Area occurs, see Section 26.470.060, subsection 2. When demolition occurs, see Paragraph 26.470.070.6, P307 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 15 of 42 Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing. (Also see definition of demolition, Section 26.104.100.) D. Relocation of historic structures. The permanent or temporary relocation of a structure listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, shall be exempt from growth management, provided that all necessary approvals are obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. E. Transferable development rights. The establishment and extinguishment of transferable development right certificates shall be exempt from growth management, provided that such certificates comply with Chapter 26.535, Transferable Development Rights. F. Remodeling or replacement of existing commercial or lodge development. Remodeling or replacement of existing commercial or hotel/lodge buildings and portions thereof shall be exempt from the provisions of growth management, provided that demolition is not triggered, no additional net leasable square footage or lodge units are created, and there is no change in use. If redevelopment involves an expansion of net leasable square footage or lodge units, only the replacement of existing development when no demolition has occurred shall be exempt. Existing, prior to demolition, net leasable square footage and lodge units shall be documented by the City Zoning Officer prior to demolition. Also see definition of net leasable commercial and office space, Section 26.104.100. G. Special events. Special events permitted by the City shall be exempt from this Chapter. H. Accessory dwelling units and carriage houses. The development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and carriage houses shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter but subject to the provisions of Chapter 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. I. Retractable canopies and trellis structures. Trellis structures and retractable canopies appended to a commercial or lodging structure shall be exempt from growth management provided that: a) there is no expansion of floor area; and b) the canopy or trellis structure is not enclosed by walls, screens, windows or other enclosures. Awnings shall be exempt from this Chapter. J. Public infrastructure. The development of public infrastructure such as roads, bridges, waterways, utilities and associated poles, wires, conduits, drains, hydrants and similar items considered essential services shall be exempt from growth management. Essential public facilities shall not be exempt and shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.110.D, Essential public facilities. (Also see definition of essential services, Section 26.104.100) 26.470.080. General Review Standards. All Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. A. Sufficient Allotments: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.040.B. P308 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 16 of 42 Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110.A shall be required to meet this standard for the growth management years from which the allotments are requested. B. Development Conformance: The proposed development conforms to the requirements and limitations of this Title, of the zone district or a site specific development plan, any adopted regulatory master plan, as well as any previous approvals, including the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable. C. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. D. Affordable Housing Mitigation. 1. For commercial development, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial net leasable space, according to Section 26.470.050.B, Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. 2. For lodge development, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional lodge pillows, according to Section 26.470.050.B, Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. 3. For free-market residential development, affordable housing net livable area shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area. 4. For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on Section 26.470.110.D. 5. For all affordable housing provided as mitigation pursuant to this chapter or for the creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. b. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of methods outlined in this chapter, including newly built units, buy down units, certificates of affordable housing credit, or cash-in-lieu. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this P309 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 17 of 42 standard, and the approved forms of mitigation methods shall be based on this recommendation. c. Affordable housing that is in the form of newly built units or buy-down units shall be located on the same parcel as the proposed development or located off-site within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.B. When off-site units within City limits are proposed, all requisite approvals shall be obtained prior to approval of the growth management application. d. Affordable housing mitigation in the form of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, shall be extinguished pursuant to Section 26.540.120, Extinguishment and Re-Issuance of a Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.050.F, Employee/Square Footage Conversion. e. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is less than .25 FTEs, a cash- in-lieu payment may be made by right. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is .25 or more FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.C. f. Affordable housing units shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.D, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. g. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430 6. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied (RO). E. Second Tier Commercial Replacement. When demolition is triggered, or a change in use between use categories on a non-historic property is requested, the redevelopment shall be required to replace a minimum percentage of the existing second tier commercial space, pursuant to Section 26.412.080, Second Tier Commercial Space. (See Section 20.104.100, Definitions) Sec. 26.470.090 Administrative applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.470.060, Procedures for Review, and the criteria described below. Except as noted, all administrative growth management P310 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 18 of 42 approvals shall not be deducted from the annual development allotments. All approvals apply cumulatively. A. Single-family and duplex development on historic landmark properties. The development of one or multiple single-family residences or a duplex on a parcel of land designated as an historic landmark and which contains an historic resource shall be approved by the Community Development Director. This review applies to the rehabilitation of existing structures, reconstruction after demolition of existing structures, an expansion of Floor Area, and to the development of new structures on historic landmark properties. No affordable housing mitigation shall be required, provided that all necessary approvals are obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation, and provided that the parcel contains an historic resource. Development of single-family or duplex structures on an historic landmark property that does not contain an historic resource (for example, a house on a lot which was subdivided from an historic landmark property) shall be subject to the provisions of Section 26.470.090.B, Single-Family and Duplex Residential Development or Expansion. B. Single-Family and Duplex Residential Development or Expansion. The following types of free-market residential development shall require the provision of affordable housing in one of the methods described below: 1. The development of a single-family, two detached residential units, or a duplex dwelling on a lot in one of the following conditions: a. A lot created by a lot split, pursuant to Subsection 26.480.060.A. b. A lot created by a historic lot split, pursuant to Subsection 26.480.060.B, when the subject lot does not itself contain a historic resource. c. A lot that was subdivided or was a legally described parcel prior to November 14, 1977, that complies with the provisions of Subsection 26.480.020, Subdivision: applicability, prohibitions, and lot merger. 2. The net increase of Floor Area of an existing single-family, two detached residential units on a single lot, or a duplex dwelling, regardless of when the lot was subdivided or legally described and regardless of whether demolition occurs. This type of development shall not require a growth management allocation and shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. 3. Affordable housing mitigation requirements for the types of free-market residential development described above shall be as follows. The applicant shall have four options: a. Recording a resident-occupancy (RO), or lower, deed restriction on the single-family dwelling unit or one of the residences if a duplex or two detached residences are developed on the property. An existing deed restricted unit does not need to re-record a deed restriction. b. Providing a deed restricted one-bedroom or larger affordable housing unit within the Aspen Infill Area acceptable to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (which may require certain improvements) in a size equal to or larger than 30% of the Floor P311 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 19 of 42 Area increase to the Free-Market unit. The mitigation unit must be deed-restricted as a "for sale" Category 2 (or lower) housing unit and transferred to a qualified purchaser according to the provisions of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. c. Providing a fee-in-lieu payment or extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit in a full-time-equivalent (FTE) amount based on the following schedule: Floor Area per dwelling unit Employment Generation Rate First 4,500 square feet (Floor Area) .16 employees per 1,000 square feet of Floor Area. Above 4,500 square feet (Floor Area) .36 employees per 1,000 square feet of Floor Area. Notes: - The calculation of the Employment Generation shall be assessed per dwelling unit. Duplex dwelling units do not combine their floor area for one calculation. - An Accessory Dwelling Unit or Carriage House, as defined by and meeting the requirements of this Title, shall be calculated as floor area of the primary dwelling. - When redevelopment of a property adds floor area, the difference between the generation rates of the existing floor area and the proposed floor area shall be the basis for determining the number of employees generated. No refunds shall be provided if Floor Area is reduced. - When demolition is proposed, the redevelopment shall be credited the floor area from the demolished residential dwelling unit. Credit from a demolished dwelling unit cannot be allocated to development on a different lot. - The above generation rates are based on a study of employment generation of Aspen residences, from both initial construction and ongoing operation, performed by RRC Associates of Boulder, Colorado, dated March 4, 2015. Affordable housing mitigation must be provided at a Category 2 (or lower) rate. Certificates must be extinguished pursuant to the procedures of Chapter 26.540, Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. Fee-in-lieu rates shall be those stated in Section 26.470.100 – Calculations; Employee Generation and Mitigation, in effect on the date of application acceptance. Providing a fee-in-lieu payment in excess of .10 FTE shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.C. Example 1: A new home of 3,400 square feet of Floor Area on a vacant lot created by a historic lot split. The applicant must provide affordable housing mitigation for .54 FTEs. 3,400 / 1,000 x .16 = .54 In this example the applicant may provide a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit or request City Council accept a fee-in-lieu payment. P312 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 20 of 42 Example 2: An existing home of 4,400 square feet of Floor Area is expanded by 250 square feet of Floor Area. The applicant must provide affordable housing mitigation for .07 FTEs, the difference in employee generation of the two house sizes. (4,500 / 1,000 x .16) + (150 / 1,000 x .36) – (4,400 / 1,000 x .16) = .07 In this example the applicant may provide a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit or a fee-in-lieu payment. d. For property owners qualified as a full-time local working resident, an affordable housing mitigation deferral agreement may be accepted by the City of Aspen and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. This allows deferral of the mitigation requirement until such time as the property is no longer owned by a full-time local working resident. Staff of the City of Aspen Community Development Department and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority can assist with the procedures and limitations of this option. C. Multi-Family Residential Expansion. The following types of free-market residential development shall require the provision of affordable housing in one of the methods described below: 1. The net increase of Floor Area of an existing free-market multi-family unit or structure, regardless of when the lot was subdivided or legally described and provided demolition does not occur. (When demolition occurs, see Section 26.470.100.E, Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing.) This type of development shall not require a growth management allocation and shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments established pursuant to Section 26.470.040. 2. Affordable housing mitigation requirements for the type of free-market residential development described above shall be as follows. The applicant shall have four options: a. Recording a resident-occupancy (RO), or lower, deed restriction on the dwelling unit(s) being expanded. An existing deed restricted unit does not need to re-record a deed restriction. b. Providing a deed restricted one-bedroom or larger affordable housing unit within the Aspen Infill Area acceptable to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (which may require certain improvements) in a size equal to or larger than 30% of the Floor Area increase to the Free-Market unit(s). The mitigation unit(s) must be deed- restricted as a "for sale" Category 2 (or lower) housing unit and transferred to a qualified purchaser according to the provisions of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. c. Providing a fee-in-lieu payment or extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit in a full-time-equivalent (FTE) amount based on the following schedule: Floor Area per dwelling unit Employment Generation Rate square feet of expansion (Floor Area) .18 employees per 1,000 square feet of Floor Area Notes: - The calculation of the Employment Generation shall be assessed per dwelling unit. P313 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 21 of 42 Multiple dwelling units do not combine their floor area for one calculation. - When a unit adds floor area, the difference between the generation rates of the existing floor area and the proposed floor area shall be the basis for determining the number of employees generated. No refunds shall be provided if Floor Area is reduced. - When demolition is proposed, please see Section 26.470.100.E – Demolition or Redevelopment of Multi-Family Housing. Projects - The above generation rates are based on a study of employment generation of Aspen residences, from both initial construction and ongoing operation, performed by RRC Associates of Boulder, Colorado, dated March 4, 2015. Affordable housing mitigation must be provided at a Category 2 (or lower) rate. Certificates must be extinguished pursuant to the procedures of Chapter 26.540, Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. Fee-in-lieu rates shall be those stated in Section 26.470.050 – Calculations; Employee Generation and Mitigation, in effect on the date of application acceptance. Providing a fee-in-lieu payment in excess of .10 FTE shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.C. Example 1: A multi-family unit of 1,400 square feet of Floor Area is expanded by 400 square feet of Floor Area. The applicant must provide affordable housing mitigation for .09 FTEs. 500 / 1,000 x .18 = .09 In this example the applicant may provide a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit or a fee-in-lieu payment. Example 2: A multi-family unit of 1,400 square feet of Floor Area is expanded by 2,600 square feet of Floor Area. The applicant must provide affordable housing mitigation for .47 FTEs, the difference in employee generation of the two unit sizes. 2,600 / 1,000 x .18 = .47 In this example the applicant may provide a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit or request City Council accept a fee-in-lieu payment. d. For property owners qualified as a full-time local working resident, an affordable housing mitigation deferral agreement may be accepted by the City of Aspen and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. This allows deferral of the mitigation requirement until such time as the property is no longer owned by a full-time local working resident. Staff of the City of Aspen Community Development Department and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority can assist with the procedures and limitations of this option. D. Change in use of historic landmark sites and structures. The change of use between the development categories identified in Section 26.470.020, of a property, structure or portion of a structure designated as an historic landmark shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director if no more than one (1) free-market residence is created. No employee mitigation shall be required. If more than one (1) free-market residence is created, the additional units shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.7. The change in amount of development and number P314 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 22 of 42 of units shall not be added or deducted from the respective annual development allotments. E. Minor enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development. The enlargement of a property, structure or portion of a structure designated as an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria. The additional development of uses identified in Section 26.470.020 shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. 1. If the development increases either floor area or net leasable space/lodge units, but not both, then no employee mitigation shall be required. 2. If the development increases both floor area and net leasable space/lodge units, up to four (4) employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge shall not require the provision of affordable housing mitigation. This shall be cumulative. An expansion generating more than four (4) employees shall not qualify for this administrative approval and shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.A. 3. No more than one (1) free-market residence is created. This shall be cumulative and shall include administrative GMQS approvals granted prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2016. F. Minor expansion of a commercial, lodge or mixed-use development. The minor enlargement of a property, structure or portion of a structure for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development when demolition is not triggered shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria. The additional development of uses identified in Section 26.470.020 shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. 1. The expansion involves no more than five-hundred (500) square feet of net leasable space, no more than two-hundred-fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area, and no more than three (3) additional hotel/lodge units. No employee mitigation shall be required. 2. The expansion involves no residential units. 3. This shall be cumulative and shall include administrative GMQS approvals granted prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2013. 4. When demolition is triggered, the application shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 25.470.100(G), Replacement of commercial space following demolition. G. Second Tier Commercial Space. The expansion or conversion of an existing commercial or mixed-use building, or portion thereof, or the development of a new commercial or mixed-use building to accommodate a second-tier storefront shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria: 1. The commercial space shall not reduce the property's utility/trash/recycle service area requirement unless such reduction is approved pursuant to Chapter 12.10. P315 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 23 of 42 2. Affordable housing mitigation shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.470.050, General Review Standards, at a rate of 60% of the net leasable space. H. Sale of locally-made products in common areas of commercial buildings. Commercial use of common areas within commercial and mixed-use buildings which contain commercial use (a.k.a. “non-unit spaces,” “arcades,” “hallways,” “lobbies,” or “malls”) shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria. 1. Products shall be limited to arts, crafts, or produce designed, manufactured, created, grown, or assembled in the Roaring Fork Valley, defined as the watershed of the Roaring Fork River plus the municipal limits of the City of Glenwood Springs. Exempt from these product and geographic limitations are items sold by a hardware store adjacent to the common area and items incidental to arts, crafts, and produce such as frames and pedestals. 2. The area can be used by an existing business within the building or by “stand-alone” businesses. Multiple spaces may be created. 3. These areas shall not be considered net leasable space for the purposes of calculating impact fees or redevelopment credits. No employee mitigation shall be required. Compliance with all zoning, building, and fire codes is mandatory. I. Outdoor food/beverage vending license. Outdoor food/beverage vending shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria: 1. Location. All outdoor food/beverage vending must be on private property and may be located in the Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (C1), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), or Commercial Lodge (CL) zone districts. Outdoor Food Vending may occur on public property that is subject to an approved mall lease. Additional location criteria: a. The operation shall be in a consistent location as is practically reasonable and not intended to move on a daily basis throughout the duration of the permit. b. Normal operation, including line queues, shall not inhibit the movement of pedestrian or vehicular traffic along the public right-of-way. c. The operation shall not interfere with required emergency egress or pose a threat to public health, safety and welfare. A minimum of six (6) foot ingress/egress shall be maintained for building entrances and exits. 2. Size. The area of outdoor food/beverage vending activities shall not exceed fifty (50) square feet per operation. The area of activity shall be defined as a counter area, equipment needed for the food vending activities (e.g. cooler with drinks, snow cone machine, popcorn machine, etc.), and the space needed by employees to work the food vending activity. 3. Signage. Signage for outdoor food/beverage vending carts shall be exempt from those requirements found within Land Use Code Section 26.510, Signs, but not P316 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 24 of 42 excluding Prohibited Signs. The total amount of signage shall be the lesser of fifty percent (50%) of the surface area of the front of the cart, or six (6) square feet. Sign(s) shall be painted on or affixed to the cart. Any logos, lettering, or signage on umbrellas or canopies counts towards this calculation. Food carts may have a sandwich board sign in accordance with the regulations found within Chapter 26.510. 4. Environmental Health Approval. Approval of a food service plan from the Environmental Health Department is required. The area of outdoor food vending activities shall include recycling bins and a waste disposal container that shall be emptied daily and stored inside at night and when the outdoor food vending activities are not in operation. Additionally, no outdoor, open-flame char-broiling shall be permitted pursuant to Municipal Code Section 13.08.100, Restaurant Grills. 5. Building and Fire Code Compliance. All outdoor food/beverage vending operations must comply with adopted building and fire codes. Applicants are encouraged to meet with the City’s Building Department to discuss the vending cart/stand. 6. Application Contents. An application for a food/beverage vending license shall include the standard information required in 26.304.030.B, plus the following: a. Copy of a lease or approval letter from the property owner. b. A description of the operation including days/hours of operation, types of food and beverage to be offered, a picture or drawing of the vending cart/stand, and proposed signage. c. The property survey requirement shall be waived if the applicant can demonstrate how the operation will be contained on private property. 7. License Duration. Outdoor food/beverage vending licenses shall be valid for a one (1) year period beginning on the same the date that the Notice of Approval is signed by the Community Development Director. This one (1) year period may not be separated into non-consecutive periods. 8. License Renewal. Outdoor food/beverage vending licenses may be renewed. Upon renewal the Community Development Director shall consider the returning vendor’s past performance. This shall include, but shall not be limited to, input from the Environmental Health Department, Chief of Police, special event staff, and feedback from adjacent businesses. Unresolved complaints may result in denial of a renewal request. 9. Business License. The vending operator must obtain a business license. 10. Affordable Housing and Impact Fees Waived. The Community Development Director shall waive affordable housing mitigation fees and impact fees associated with outdoor food/beverage vending activities. 11. Maintenance and public safety. Outdoor food/beverage vending activities shall not diminish the general public health, safety or welfare and shall abide by applicable P317 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 25 of 42 City regulations, including but not limited to building codes, health safety codes, fire codes, liquor laws, sign and lighting codes, and sales tax license regulations. 12. Abandonment. The City of Aspen may remove an abandoned food/beverage vending operation, or components thereof, in order protect public health, safety, and welfare. Costs of such remediation shall be the sole burden of the property owner. 13. Temporary Cessation. The Community Development Director may require a temporary cancelation of operations to accommodate special events, holidays, or similar large public gatherings. Such action will be taken if it is determined that the food/beverage cart will create a public safety issue or create an excessive burden on the event activities. 14. License Revocation. The Community Development Director may deny renewal or revoke the license and cause removal of the food/beverage vending operation if the vendor fails to operate consistent with these criteria. An outdoor food/beverage vending license shall not constitute nor be interpreted by any property owner, developer, vendor, or court as a site specific development plan entitled to vesting under Article 68 of Title 24 of the Colorado Revised Statutes or Chapter 26.308 of this Title. Licenses granted in this subsection are subject to revocation by the City Manager or Community Development Director without requiring prior notice. J. Temporary uses and structures. The development of a temporary use or structure shall be exempt from growth management, subject to the provisions of Chapter 26.450, Temporary and Seasonal Uses. Temporary external airlocks shall only be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter if compliant with applicable sections of Commercial Design Review – Chapter 26.412, and approved pursuant to Chapter 26.450 Temporary and Seasonal Uses. Tents, external airlocks, and similar temporary or seasonal enclosures located on commercial properties and supporting commercial use shall only be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter, including affordable housing mitigation requirements, if compliant with applicable sections of Commercial Design Review – Chapter 26.412, if erected for 14 days or less in a 12-month period, and approved pursuant to Chapter 26.450 – Temporary and Seasonal Uses. Erection of these enclosures for longer than 14 days in a 12-month period shall require compliance with Commercial Design Review – Chapter 26.412, and compliance with the provisions of this Chapter including affordable housing mitigation. Affordable housing mitigation shall be required only for the days in excess of 14 in a 12-month period. Cash-in-lieu may be paid by- right. The mitigation calculation shall include the expected lifespan of a building, which is currently 30 years. For instance, a 500 sq. ft. tent proposed to be up for 21 days shall only require mitigation for seven (7) days. The calculation would be as follows: Methodology: • 500 sq. ft. / 1000 sq. ft. = .5 sq. ft. • .5 sq. ft. x 4.7 FTEs = 2.35 FTEs generated P318 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 26 of 42 • 2.35 FTEs x 60% mitigation rate = 1.41 FTEs to be mitigated if structures are in use 100% of year • 1.41 FTEs / 365 days per year = .003863 daily rate • .003863 x 7 days = .027041 FTEs • .027041 x $223,072 cash-in-lieu rate = $6,032.09 • $6,032.09/ 30 years = $201.07 due for mitigation of the structure for a period of 7 days 26.470.100 Planning and Zoning Commission applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.060, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.080. Except as noted, the following types of growth management approvals shall be deducted from the annual development allotments. Approvals apply cumulatively. A. Enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development. The enlargement of an historic landmark building for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: 1. Up to four (4) employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge development shall not require the provision of affordable housing. Thirty percent (30%) of the employee generation above four (4) and up to eight (8) employees shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing, affordable housing credits, or cash in lieu thereof. Sixty percent (60%) of the employee generation above eight (8) employees shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing, affordable housing credits, or cash in lieu thereof. For example: A project generating 15 employees shall require employee mitigation for a total of 5.4 employees, as follows: First 4 employees = 0 employee mitigation Second 4 employees mitigated at 30% = 1.2 employees Remaining 7 employees mitigated at 60% = 4.2 employees Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.080.D, Affordable Housing Mitigation. 2. Up to one (1) free-market residence may be created pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.E, Minor enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development. This shall be cumulative and shall include administrative GMQS approvals P319 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 27 of 42 granted prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2015. Additional free- market units (beyond one [1]) shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.C, New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. B. Change in use. A change in use of an existing property, structure or portions of an existing structure between the development categories identified in Section 26.470.020 (irrespective of direction), for which a certificate of occupancy has been issued and which is intended to be reused, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. No more than one (1) free-market residential unit may be created through the change-in-use. C. Expansion of free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The net livable area expansion of existing free-market residential units within a mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. The remodeling or expansion of existing multi-family residential dwellings shall be exempt from growth management as long as no demolition occurs, pursuant to Section 26.470.070.C. Expansion of existing free-market residential units shall not require a development allotment D. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. a. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. E. Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing. The City's neighborhoods have traditionally been comprised of a mix of housing types, including those affordable by its working residents. However, because of Aspen's attractiveness as a resort environment and because of the physical constraints of the upper Roaring Fork Valley, there is constant pressure for the redevelopment of dwellings currently providing resident housing for tourist and second-home P320 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 28 of 42 use. Such redevelopment results in the displacement of individuals and families who are an integral part of the Aspen work force. Given the extremely high cost of and demand for market- rate housing, resident housing opportunities for displaced working residents, which are now minimal, will continue to decrease. Preservation of the housing inventory and provision of dispersed housing opportunities in Aspen have been long-standing planning goals of the community. Achievement of these goals will serve to promote a socially and economically balanced community, limit the number of individuals who face a long and sometimes dangerous commute on State Highway 82, reduce the air pollution effects of commuting and prevent exclusion of working residents from the City's neighborhoods. The Aspen Area Community Plan established a goal that affordable housing for working residents be provided by both the public and private sectors. The City and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority have provided affordable housing both within and adjacent to the City limits. The private sector has also provided affordable housing. Nevertheless, as a result of the replacement of resident housing with second homes and tourist accommodations and the steady increase in the size of the workforce required to assure the continued viability of Aspen area businesses and the City's tourist-based economy, the City has found it necessary, in concert with other regulations, to adopt limitations on the combining, demolition or conversion of existing multi-family housing in order to minimize the displacement of working residents, to ensure that the private sector maintains its role in the provision of resident housing and to prevent a housing shortfall from occurring. The combining, demolition, conversion or redevelopment of multi-family housing shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on compliance with the following requirements (see definition of demolition.): 1. Requirements for combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping free-market multi- family housing units: Only one (1) of the following two (2) options is required to be met when combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping a free-market multi-family residential property. To ensure the continued vitality of the community and a critical mass of local working residents, no net loss of density (total number of units) between the existing development and proposed development shall be allowed. a. One-hundred-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing, the applicant shall have the option to construct replacement housing consisting of no less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of units, bedrooms and net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as resident occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Subsection D, Affordable housing, of this Section. When this one-hundred-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-market residential development with no additional affordable P321 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 29 of 42 housing mitigation required as long as there is no increase in the number of free- market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.110, subsection J or K, Residential Development – sixty or seventy percent affordable. b. Fifty-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing and replacement of less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of previous units, bedrooms or net livable area as described above, the applicant shall be required to construct affordable housing consisting of no less than fifty percent (50%) of the number of units, bedrooms and the net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as Category 4 housing, pursuant to the guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.D, Affordable housing. When this fifty-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-market residential development as long as additional affordable housing mitigation is provided pursuant to Section 26.470.080 – General Requirements, and there is no increase in the number of free-market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.100, subsection J or K, Residential Development – sixty or seventy percent affordable. c. One-hundred percent affordable housing replacement. When one-hundred-percent of the free-market multi-family housing units are demolished and are solely replaced with deed-restricted affordable housing units on a site that are not required for mitigation purposes, including any net additional dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.D, Affordable Housing; all of the units in the redevelopment are eligible for a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Section 26.540 Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit. Any remaining unused free market residential development rights shall be vacated. 2. Requirements for demolishing affordable multi-family housing units: In the event a project proposes to demolish or replace existing deed-restricted affordable housing units, the redevelopment may increase or decrease the number of units, bedrooms or net livable area such that there is no decrease in the total number of employees housed by the existing units. The overall number of replacement units, unit sizes, bedrooms and category of the units shall be reviewed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and a recommendation forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. Fractional unit requirement. When the affordable housing replacement requirement of this Section involves a fraction of a unit, fee-in-lieu may be provided only upon the review and approval of the City Council, to meet the fractional requirement only, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110.C, Provision of required affordable housing via a fee- in-lieu payment. P322 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 30 of 42 4. Location requirement. Multi-family replacement units, both free-market and affordable, shall be developed on the same site on which demolition has occurred, unless the owner shall demonstrate and the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that replacement of the units on site would be in conflict with the parcel's zoning or would be an inappropriate solution due to the site's physical constraints. When either of the above circumstances result, the owner shall replace the maximum number of units on site which the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the site can accommodate and may replace the remaining units off site, at a location determined acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission, or may replace the units by extinguishing the requisite number of affordable housing credits, pursuant to Sec. 26.540, Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. When calculating the number of credits that must be extinguished, the most restrictive replacement measure shall apply. So, for example, for an applicant proposing to replace one 1,000 square foot three-bedroom unit at the 50% rate using credits, the following calculations shall be used: • 50% of 1,000 square feet = 500 square feet to be replaced. At the Code mandated rate of 1 FTE per 400 square feet of net livable area, this requires 1.25 credits to be extinguished; or • A three-bedroom unit = 3.0 FTE’s. 50% of 3.0 FTE’s = 1.50 credits to be extinguished. Therefore, the applicant must extinguish 1.50 credits to replace a three-bedroom unit at the 50% rate. The credits to be extinguished would be Category 4 credits. 5. Timing requirement. Any replacement units required to be deed-restricted as affordable housing shall be issued a certificate of occupancy, according to the Building Department, and be available for occupancy at the same time as, or prior to, any redeveloped free- market units, regardless of whether the replacement units are built on site or off site. 6. Redevelopment agreement. The applicant and the City shall enter into a redevelopment agreement that specifies the manner in which the applicant shall adhere to the approvals granted pursuant to this Section and penalties for noncompliance. The agreement shall be recorded before an application for a demolition permit may be accepted by the City. 7. Growth management allotments. The existing number of free-market residential units, prior to demolition, may be replaced exempt from growth management, provided that the units conform to the provisions of this Section. The redevelopment credits shall not be transferable separate from the property unless permitted as described above in Subparagraph 4, Location requirement. P323 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 31 of 42 8. Exemptions. The Community Development Director shall exempt from the procedures and requirements of this Section the following types of development involving Multi- Family Housing Units. An exemption from these replacement requirements shall not exempt a development from compliance with any other provisions of this Title: a. The replacement of Multi-Family Housing Units after non-willful demolition such as a flood, fire, or other natural catastrophe, civil commotion, or similar event not purposefully caused by the land owner. The Community Development Director may require documentation be provided by the landowner to confirm the damage to the building was in-fact non-willful. To be exempted, the replacement development shall be an exact replacement of the previous number of units, bedrooms, and square footage and in the same configuration. The Community Development Director may approve exceptions to this exact replacement requirement to accommodate changes necessary to meet current building codes; improve accessibility; to conform to zoning, design standards, or other regulatory requirements of the City; or, to provide other architectural or site planning improvements that have no substantial effect on the use or program of the development. (Also see Chapter 26.312 – Nonconformities.) Substantive changes to the development shall not be exempted from this Section and shall be reviewed as a willful change pursuant to the procedures and requirements of this Section. b. The demolition of Multi-Family Housing Units by order of a public agency including, but not limited to, the City of Aspen for reasons of preserving the life, health, safety, or general welfare of the public. c. The demolition, combining, conversion, replacement, or redevelopment of Multi- Family Housing Units which have been used exclusively as tourist accommodations or by non-working residents. The Community Development Director may require occupancy records, leases, affidavits, or other documentation to the satisfaction of the Director to demonstrate that the unit(s) has never housed a working resident. All other requirements of this Title shall still apply including zoning, growth management, and building codes.) d. The demolition, combining, conversion, replacement, or redevelopment of Multi- Family Housing Units which were illegally created (also known as “Bandit Units”). Any improvements associated with Bandit Units shall be required to conform to current requirements of this Title including zoning, growth management, and building codes. Replaced or redeveloped Bandit Units shall be deed restricted as Resident Occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority e. Any development action involving demising walls or floors/ceilings necessary for the normal upkeep, maintenance, or remodeling of adjacent Multi-Family Housing Units. P324 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 32 of 42 f. A change order to an issued and active building permit that proposes to exceed the limitations of remodeling/demolition to rebuild portions of a structure which, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, should be rebuilt for structural, safety, accessibility, or significant energy efficiency reasons first realized during construction, which were not known and could not have been reasonably predicted prior to construction, and which cause no or minimal changes to the exterior dimensions and character of the building. F. Expansion or new commercial development. The expansion of an existing commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building or the development of a new commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. G. New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The development of new free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080 above. H. Expansion or new lodge development. The expansion of an existing lodge or the development of a new lodge shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: 1. If the project contains a minimum of one (1) lodge unit per five hundred (500) square feet of lot area, the following affordable housing mitigation standards shall apply: a. Affordable housing net livable area equaling a percentage, as defined in the unit size table below, of the additional free-market residential net livable area shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. b. A percentage, as defined in the table below, of the employees generated by the additional lodge, timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units and associated commercial development, according to Paragraph 26.470.100.A.1, Employee generation, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. Average Net Livable Area of Lodge Units Being Added to the Parcel Affordable Housing Net Livable Area Required (Percentage of Free- Market Net Livable Area) Percentage of Employee Generation Requiring the Provision of Mitigation 600 square feet or greater 30% 80% 500 square feet 30% 60% 400 square feet 20% 40% 300 square feet or smaller 10% 30% P325 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 33 of 42 When the average unit size falls between the square-footage categories, the required affordable housing shall be determined by interpolating the above schedule. For example, a lodge project with an average unit size of four hundred fifty (450) square feet shall be required to provide mitigation for thirty percent (50%) of the employees generated. c. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.D, Affordable housing. 2. If the project contains less than one (1) lodge unit per five hundred (500) square feet of lot area, the following affordable housing mitigation standards shall apply: a. Affordable housing net livable area equaling thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. b. Eighty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional lodge, timeshare lodge, exempt timeshare units and associated commercial development, according to Paragraph 26.470.050.B, Employee generation, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. I. Residential development – sixty percent (60%) affordable. The development of a residential project or an addition of units to an existing residential project, in which a minimum of sixty percent (60%) of the additional units and thirty percent (30%) of the additional floor area is affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: 1. A minimum of sixty percent (60%) of the total additional units and thirty percent (30%) of the project's additional floor area shall be affordable housing. Multi-site projects are permitted. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.D, Affordable housing, and shall average Category 4 rates as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. 2. If the project consists of only one (1) free-market residence, then a minimum of one (1) affordable residence representing a minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the project's total floor area and deed-restricted as a Category 4 "for sale" unit, according to the provisions of the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines, shall qualify. J. Residential development – seventy percent (70%) affordable. The development of a residential project or an addition to an existing residential project, in which seventy percent (70%) of the project's additional units and seventy percent (70%) of the project's P326 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 34 of 42 additional bedrooms are affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: 1. Seventy percent (70%) of the total additional units and total additional bedrooms shall be affordable housing. At least forty percent (40%) of the units shall average Category 4 rates as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The remaining thirty-percent affordable housing unit requirement may be provided as Resident Occupied (RO) units as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Multi-site projects are permitted. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. 2. If the project consists of one (1) free-market residence, then the provision of one (1) RO residence and one (1) category residence shall be considered meeting the seventy- percent unit standard. If the project consists of two (2) free-market residences, then the provision of two (2) RO residences and two (2) category residences shall qualify. Sec. 26.470.110. City Council applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.060, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.080. Except as noted, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. A. Multi-year development allotment. The City Council, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall approve, approve with conditions or deny a multi- year development allotment request based on the following criteria: 1. A project is required to meet at least five (5) of the following criteria. a. The proposal exceeds the minimum affordable housing required for a standard project. b. The proposed project represents an excellent historic preservation accomplishment. A recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission shall be considered for this standard. c. The proposal furthers affordable housing goals by providing units established as priority through the current Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and provides a desirable mix of affordable unit types, economic levels and lifestyles (e.g., singles, seniors, families, etc.). A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. P327 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 35 of 42 d. The proposal minimizes impacts on public infrastructure by incorporating innovative, energy-saving techniques. Recommendations from relevant departments shall be considered for this standard. For example, if an applicant proposed an innovative design related to the stormsewer system, a recommendation from the Engineering Department shall be considered. e. The proposal minimizes construction impacts beyond minimum requirements both during and after construction. A recommendation from the Engineering and Building Departments shall be considered for this standard. f. The proposal maximizes potential public transit usage and minimizes reliance on the automobile by exceeding the requirements in Section 26.515, Off-Street Parking and Mobility. A recommendation from the Transportation and Engineering Departments shall be considered for this standard. g. The proposal exceeds minimum requirements of the Efficient Building Code or for LEED certification, as applicable. A recommendation from the Building Department shall be considered for this standard. h. The proposal represents a desirable site plan and an architectural design solution. i. The proposal promotes opportunities for local businesses through the provision of Alley stores or second-tier commercial space. 2. The project complies with all other provisions of the Land Use Code and has obtained all necessary approvals from the Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, as applicable. 3. The Community Development Director shall be directed to reduce the applicable annual development allotments, as provided in Section 26.470.120, in subsequent years as determined appropriate by the City Council. B. Provision of required affordable housing units outside City limits. The provision of affordable housing, as required by this chapter, with units to be located outside the City boundary, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: 1. The off-site housing is within the Aspen Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The proposal furthers affordable housing goals by providing units established as priority through the current Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and provides a desirable mix of affordable unit types, economic levels and lifestyles (e.g., singles, seniors and families). A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. 3. The applicant has received all necessary approvals from the governing body with jurisdiction of the off-site parcel. P328 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 36 of 42 City Council may accept any percentage of a project's total affordable housing mitigation to be provided through units outside the City's jurisdictional limits, including all or none. C. Provision of required affordable housing via a fee-in-lieu payment. The provision of affordable housing in excess of 0.10 Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) via a fee-in-lieu payment, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: 1. The provision of affordable housing on site (on the same site as the project requiring such affordable housing) is impractical given the physical or legal parameters of the development or site or would be inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood in which the project is being developed. 2. The applicant has made a reasonable good-faith effort in pursuit of providing the required affordable housing off site through construction of new dwelling units, the deed restriction of existing dwelling units to affordable housing status, or through the purchase of affordable housing certificates. 3. The applicant has made a reasonable good-faith effort in pursuit of providing the required affordable housing through the purchase and extinguishment of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. 4. The proposal furthers affordable housing goals, and the fee-in-lieu payment will result in the near-term production of affordable housing units. The City Council may accept any percentage of a project's total affordable housing mitigation to be provided through a fee-in-lieu payment, including all or none. D. Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: 1. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. 2. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall determine the number of employees generated by the essential public facility pursuant to Section 26.470.050.C, Employee generation review. 3. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. P329 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 37 of 42 E. Preservation of significant open space parcels. On a project-specific basis and upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council shall approve, approve with conditions or deny development of one (1) or more residences in exchange for the permanent preservation of one (1) or more parcels considered significant for the preservation of open space. The preservation parcel may lie outside the City jurisdiction. The exempted residential units shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotment established pursuant to Section 26.470.040.B. The exempted residential units shall provide affordable housing mitigation, pursuant to the requirements of Section 26.470.100.E. This exemption shall only apply to the specific residences approved through this provision. Other residences within a project not specifically exempted through this provision shall require growth management approvals pursuant to this Chapter. The criteria for determining the significance of a preservation parcel and the associated development rights to be granted may include: 1. The strategic nature of the preservation parcel to facilitate park, trails or open space objectives of the City. This shall include a recommendation from the City of Aspen Open Space Acquisition Board. 2. Identification of the preservation parcel as desirable for preservation in any adopted master plans of the City or following a recommendation from the Parks and Open Space Department. 3. Proximity and/or visibility of the preservation parcel to the City. 4. The development rights of the preservation parcel, including the allowed uses and intensities and impacts associated with those uses if developed to the maximum. 5. The proposed location of the parcel being granted growth management approvals and the compatibility of the resulting uses and intensities of development with the surrounding neighborhood, including the impacts from the specified method of providing affordable housing mitigation. The new residences shall be restricted to the underlying zoning restrictions of the property on which they lie unless additional restrictions are necessary in order to meet this criterion. 6. The preservation parcel shall be encumbered with a legal instrument, acceptable to the City Attorney, which sterilizes the parcel from further development in perpetuity. 26.470.120. Yearly Growth management accounting procedures. A. General. The Community Development Director shall maintain an ongoing account of available, requested and approved growth management allocations for all land uses identified in Table 1 of Section 26.470.020. Allotments shall be considered allocated upon issuance of a development order for the project. Unless specifically not deducted from the annual development allotment, all units of growth shall be included in the accounting. Approved affordable housing units shall be counted regardless of the unit being provided as mitigation or otherwise. P330 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 38 of 42 B. Yearly Allotment Carry-Forward Procedures. At the conclusion of each growth management session and year, the Community Development Director shall prepare a summary of growth allocations. The City Council, at its first regular meeting of the growth management year, shall review the prior year's growth summary, consider a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and shall, via adoption of a resolution, establish the number of unused and unclaimed allotments to be carried forward and added to the annual allotment. A public hearing is not required and this action may be completed as part of City Council’s consent calendar. The City Council may carry forward any portion of the previous year's unused allotment, including all or none. The City Council shall consider the following criteria in determining the allotments to be carried forward: 1. The community's growth rate over the preceding five-year period. 2. The ability of the community to absorb the growth that could result from a proposed development utilizing accumulated allotments, including issues of scale, infrastructure capacity, construction impacts and community character. 3. The expected impact from approved developments that have obtained allotments, but that have not yet been built. There is no limit, other than that implemented by the City Council, on the amount of potential growth that may be carried forward to the next year. Any allotments awarded to a project which does not proceed and which are considered void shall constitute unused allotments and may be considered for allotment roll-over by the City Council for the year from which they were assigned. If a project decides not to proceed with the development after Council’s decision on roll-over allotments for that year, then those allotments shall be considered expired and no longer available. Allotments shall be considered vacated by a property owner upon written notification from the property owner or upon expiration of the development right pursuant to Section 26.470.040.D, Expiration of growth management allotments. 26.470.130. Application contents. Applications for growth management shall include the following: A. The general application information required in Common development review procedures, Chapter 26.304. B. A site-improvement survey meeting the requirements of Title 29, Engineering Design Standards. C. A description of the project and the number and type of the requested growth management allotments. D. A detailed description and site plan of the proposed development, including proposed land uses, densities, natural features, traffic and pedestrian circulation, off-street parking, P331 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 39 of 42 open space areas, infrastructure improvements, site drainage and any associated off-site improvements. E. A description of the proposed affordable housing and how it provides adequate mitigation for the project and conforms to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. F. A statement specifying the public facilities that will be needed to accommodate the proposed development, proposed infrastructure improvements and the specific assurances that will be made to ensure that the public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development. G. A written response to each of the review criteria for the particular review requested. H. Copies of required approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council, as necessary. 26.470.140. Reconstruction limitations. A. An applicant may propose to demolish and then delay the reconstruction of existing development for a period not to exceed one (1) year. To comply with this limitation and maintain the reconstruction credit, an applicant must submit a complete building permit application for reconstruction on or before the one-year anniversary of the issuance date of the demolition permit. The City Council may extend this deadline upon demonstration of good cause. This time limitation shall not apply to the reconstruction of single-family and duplex development. B. Applicants shall verify existing conditions prior to demolition with the City Zoning Officer in order to document reconstruction rights. An applicant's failure to accurately document existing conditions prior to demolition and verify reconstruction rights with the City Zoning Officer may result in a loss of some or all of the reconstruction rights. C. Reconstructed buildings shall comply with applicable requirements of the Land Use Code, including but not limited to Chapter 26.312, Nonconformities, and Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. D. Reconstruction rights shall be limited to reconstruction on the same parcel or on an adjacent parcel under the same ownership. E. Residential redevelopment credits may be converted to lodge redevelopment credits by right. The conversion rate shall be three (3) lodge units per each one (1) residential unit. This is a one- way conversion, and lodge credits may not be converted to residential credits. 26.470.150. Amendment of a growth management development order. A. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an approved growth management development order may be authorized by the Community Development Director if: P332 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 40 of 42 1. The change conforms to all other provisions of the Land Use Code and does not exceed approved variations to the residential design standards, require an amendment to the commercial design review approval or such variations or amendments have been approved. 2. The change does not alter the number, size, type or deed restriction of the proposed affordable housing units, or those changes have been accepted by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. 3. The change is limited to technical or engineering considerations discovered prior to or during actual development that could not reasonably be anticipated during the review process or any other minor change that the Community Development Director finds has no substantial effect on the conditions and representations made during the original project review. B. Substantial amendment. All other amendments to an approved growth management development order shall be reviewed pursuant to the terms and procedures of this Chapter. Allotments granted shall remain valid and applied to the amended application, provided that the amendment application is submitted prior to the expiration of vested rights. Amendment applications requiring additional allotments or allotments for different uses shall obtain those allotments pursuant to the procedures of this Chapter. Any new allotments shall be deducted from the growth management year in which the amendment is submitted. 26.470.160. Appeals. A. Appeal of adverse determination by Community Development Director. An appeal made by an applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Community Development Director on an application for administrative review shall be to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The appeal procedures set forth at Chapter 26.316 shall apply. The Planning and Zoning Commission may reverse, affirm or modify the decision or determination of the Community Development Director based upon the application submitted to the Community Development Director and the record established by the Director's review. The decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission shall constitute the final administrative action on the matter. B. Appeal of adverse determination by Planning and Zoning Commission. An appeal made by an applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Planning and Zoning Commission on an application for Planning and Zoning Commission review shall be to the City Council. The appeal procedures set forth at Chapter 26.316 shall apply. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify the decision or determination of the Planning and Zoning Commission based upon the application submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the record established by the Commission's review. The decision of the City Council shall constitute the final administrative action on the matter. C. Insufficient development allotments. Any property owner within the City who is prevented from developing a property because that year's development allotments have been entirely allocated may appeal to the City Council for development approval. An application requesting allotments must first be denied due to lack of necessary allotments. The appeal procedures set forth at Chapter 26.316 shall apply. The City Council may take any such action determined P333 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 41 of 42 necessary, including but not limited to making a one-time increase of the annual development allotment sufficient to accommodate the application. Section 2: Any scrivener’s errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 3: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 6: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the ____ day of _____, 2016, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _____ day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _____th day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor Approved as to form: _____________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P334 VII.A. 12.5.16 Second Reading, Ordinance 31, Series 2016 Growth Management Page 42 of 42 P335 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 1 of 19 ORDINANCE No. 32 Series of 2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE REVIEW CRITERIA MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT: 26.515 OFF-STREET PARKING. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to craft code amendments to coordinate the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) and the Land Use Code related to parking and mobility, the mix of commercial uses, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department and a Consultant Team consisting of White & Smith, LLC; Alan Richman Planning Services; Nelson Nygaard; Rowland + Broughton; BendonAdams; and Karen Setterfield conducted existing conditions research and outreach with respect to commercial use mix, parking, mobility, commercial design, and mountain view planes; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted extensive Public Outreach with community members, the Planning & Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and City Council regarding the commercial district, commercial design, parking and view plane regulations; and, WHEREAS, from May through November, 2016, the City and the Consultant team conducted 20 public outreach events, an online public outreach and survey page with over 1,230 visits, eleven (11) focus group meetings with technical and community stakeholders and City officials, five (5) meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, four (4) meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission, and fourteen (14) public meetings with the City Council; WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council met in work sessions on February 29, 2016, April 12, 2016, April 18, 2016, April 26, 2016, May 10, 2016, June 21, 2016, July 18, 2016, August 9, 2016, August 28, 2016, September 13, 2016, September 19, 2016, September 27, 2016, October 10, 2016, and November 2, 2016 and provided general direction on code amendments; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on October 24, 2016, the City Council approved Resolution No. 147, Series of 2016, by a four to zero (4 – 0) vote, requesting code amendments to the Land Use Code to implement the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, amending the Land Use Code so it better reflects the goals of the AACP is a City Council Top Ten Goal; and, P336 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 2 of 19 WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for utilizing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tools to accommodate additional trips as well as continuing to limit daily vehicle trips over the Castle Creek bridge to 1993 levels (Primary Transportation Policies 1 and 2); and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for promoting public awareness of and access to alternative transportation modes, while also maintaining the reliability and improving the convenience of transit services (Transportation Policies I.3-4); and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan calls for expanding and improving bike parking and storage options, while also improving the convenience, safety, and quality of experience for bicyclists and pedestrians (Transportation Policies II.2-3); and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to explore the benefits of separating on-site parking spaces from their respective residential and commercial units in appropriate areas, such that parking spaces could be rented or purchased separately (Transportation Policy V.1.d); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to amend the City Land Use Code to establish a maximum number of parking spaces associated with development to discourage automobile use, rather than a minimum (Transportation Policy V.1.e); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to amend zoning, the Commercial Design Guidelines, Residential Design Guidelines and Historic Design Guidelines as needed to implement the policy to maintain Aspen’s small town character (Growth Management Policy I.6.a); and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan provides for the City to amend the Commercial Design Guidelines, Historic Design Guidelines and zoning as needed to ensure that the Code supports innovative development that respects our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, form and a diversity of heights (Growth Management Policy V.3.b); and WHEREAS, amending the City’s parking requirements is necessary to use land more efficiently, and therefore to accomplish the commercial design goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health safety and welfare; and P337 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 3 of 19 NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO THAT: Section 1. Chapter 26.515 of the Land Use Code is amended to read as follows: Chapter 26.515 TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT Sections: 26.515.010 Purpose 26.515.020 Applicability 26.515.030 Transportation Mitigation 26.515.040 Parking Requirements 26.515.050 Meeting Parking Requirements 26.515.060 Procedures for review 26.515.070 Off-Street Parking Requirements 26.515.080 Special review standards 26.515.090 Cash-in-lieu for Parking Requirements 26.525.100 Amendments 26.515.010. Purpose This Chapter establishes unified transportation and mobility standards to promote the city’s policies relating to mobility, access to employment opportunities, and sustainability. This chapter implements policies from the Aspen Area Community Plan to: • Limit vehicle trips into Aspen to 1993 levels, and reduce peak-hour vehicle-trips to at or below 1993 levels, • Use Transportation Demand Management tools to accommodate additional person trips in the Aspen Area, • Maintain the reliability and improve the convenience of City of Aspen transit services, • Expand and improve bicycle parking and storage within the Urban Growth Boundary, • Improve the convenience, safety, and quality of experience for bicyclists and pedestrians on streets and trails, • Require development to mitigate its transportation impacts, and • Develop a strategic parking plan that manages the supply of parking and reduces the adverse impacts of the automobile. This Chapter establishes a variety of ways for property owners and developers to mitigate their impacts on the transportation network. As new development and growth occur, increased P338 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 4 of 19 burdens on the transportation system can make it more difficult for the City to meet its transportation and air quality goals. To the extent that increased travel demand can shift away from automobile dependence, development and growth can be compatible with, and even support, these goals. To promote this shift in travel behavior, the City has transformed its approach to parking requirements to focus on the promotion and expansion of mobility options, including more walkable development patterns and a more efficient parking system, as well as the provision of public and development-based mobility resources. This will directly improve the travel experience and quality of life within growth areas, while helping to maintain the City's transportation-system and air-quality standards. This is accomplished through a new integrated approach, which incorporates the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines with Off-Street Parking Requirements. Where the TIA serves to evaluate the potential adverse effects of proposed projects on Aspen’s transportation systems, the off-street parking regulations focus on on-site mitigation needs resulting from the provision of parking. Applicants will use a simplified two-tiered process that: 1. Determines the TIA’s applicability and calculates a project’s “parking requirement” (which generates a project’s off-street parking requirement, see Section 26.515.010.B Definitions), and 2. Provides a Mobility Plan that includes the applicant’s mitigation requirements, which includes the provision of parking and/or utilization of cash-in-lieu options and mobility provisions. These are reviewed together as part of the land use application. A. Adoption of Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines Pursuant to the powers and authority conferred by the Charter of the City, there is hereby adopted and incorporated herein by reference as fully set forth those standards contained in the City of Aspen’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, as may be amended, updated and expanded from time to time by City Council Resolution (referred to in this Code as the “TIA Guidelines”). At least one (1) copy of the TIA Guidelines shall be available for public inspection at the Community Development, Engineering, and Transportation Departments. B. Definitions. As used in this Section, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall be defined as follows: Mitigation Impact Fees. Mitigation fees required to meet mobility requirements for properties located on the Aspen Pedestrian Malls. Mobility Commitments. Pre-approved alternative mobility measures included in a development application. These include the TDM and/or MMLOS Mitigation Tools (located at the following link: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and- Zoning/Current-Planning), and include: P339 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 5 of 19 • Transportation Demand Management (TDM), which is the application of strategies and policies to reduce travel demand (specifically that of single-occupancy vehicles), and • Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS), which evaluates transportation services of roadways from a variety of modes including pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities (these are located in Appendix C of the TIA Guidelines). Mobility Plan. A complete development mitigation plan that includes both TIA and Impact Requirement analyses. Parking Maximum. The maximum number of parking spaces allowed on-site for a designated use. Parking Minimum. The minimum number of parking spaces that must be provided on-site for a designated use. Parking Requirement. The sum of a project’s Parking Units, as provided in Section 26.515.020.C.2. Parking Space, Reserved. A parking space that is managed to limit access to specified individuals or specific on-site land uses. Parking Space, Accessory. A parking space that is managed to limit access to individuals engaged with on-site uses (residents, tenants, and their guests/customers), but are shared between all on-site land uses across different peaks in service throughout a 24-hour period. Parking Space, Public. A parking space that is managed to provide at least 12 hours of public use in any 24-hour period, with approved signage to effectively identify these hours of public access. Parking Space, Priced. A parking space – whether reserved, accessory, or public – that is priced comparable to market rates at all times of operation. Parking Space, Municipal. A parking space that is provided within City of Aspen facilities, or directly managed by the City of Aspen, whether located in a private or City-owned parking facility. Parking Unit. A measure of a project’s parking impact, valued at $38,000 per parking space, which must be mitigated and/or accommodated via mobility commitments, parking provision, and/or cash-in-lieu. Shared Parking. Parking that is shared between multiple, distinct land uses, on the same site or between proximate sites, to make more efficient use of spaces and reduce overall supply needs. Shared parking can be used to seek provisional approval to either reduce a project’s Parking P340 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 6 of 19 Requirement, or to facilitate the use of off-site parking to meet the Parking Requirement. Shared parking may include priced parking spaces. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Technical analysis guidelines for potential transportation impacts generated by development projects within the City of Aspen. 26.515.020. Applicability. This Section applies to all development and redevelopment, unless otherwise specifically exempted or limited. A. Determination of Applicability. The applicant may request a preliminary pre-application conference with staff from the Community Development Department to determine the applicability of the requirements of this chapter for the proposed development. The following chart details the applicability of the requirements for varying project types: P341 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 7 of 19 Figure 1: Applicability chart illustrating how to create a Mobility Plan P342 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 8 of 19 C. Requirements. This Chapter requires all development and redevelopment to submit a Mobility Plan, which includes the following: 1. Transportation Mitigation. Mitigation for impacts on the City’s multi-modal transportation networks through the Transportation Impact Analysis process, and 2. Parking Requirement. Mitigation for impacts on the City’s public and private parking system and the City’s efforts to reduce parking demand through the use of mobility improvements, cash in-lieu of parking, and/or parking provision. 26.515.030 Transportation Mitigation. A. General requirements. All development shall accommodate its projected transportation impacts as provided in this Chapter. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis for project applicability. B. Approved Trip Reduction Measures. Trip reduction measures, also known as Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS) measures, which are approved and implemented for a development pursuant to the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, shall be maintained for the life of the development. These credits will be used to satisfy TIA requirements. All requirements shall be incorporated in the project’s Development Agreement, pursuant to Chapter 26.490, Development Documents. C. TIA Credits. Upon completion of the TIA analysis, the program will be reviewed for surplus measures, where credits provided over the minimum TIA requirements may be applied towards Parking Requirements. 26.515.040 Parking Requirements. A. General requirements. All development shall accommodate its projected parking impacts as provided in this Chapter. B. Parking Minimums and Maximums. 1. Parking Minimums. Development and redevelopment shall satisfy the minimum Parking Requirement, as calculated in Table 26.515-1. 2. Parking Maximum. In order to create appropriate site planning and provision of parking, development and redevelopment shall not provide on-site parking in excess of 125% of the Parking Minimum requirement in the form of Reserved Parking P343 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 9 of 19 Spaces or Accessory Parking Spaces, unless at least 20 on-site spaces1 are provided as Public Parking Spaces. C. Parking Requirement calculation. Parking Requirements shall be met for each use according to Table 26.515-1, where requirements are calculated as Parking Units (defined in Section 26.515.010.B): D. Parking Requirement when fractional requirement computed. When any calculation of Parking Requirements results in a fractional unit, that fractional unit may be paid through a cash-in-lieu payment, or satisfied through one whole additional on-site parking or mobility commitment credit. 1 Or the total number of on-site spaces in excess of 125% of the Parking Requirement, whichever is greater. P344 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 10 of 19 Key to Table 26.515-1: • (1) = Up to 100% of required Parking Requirement, may be provided through cash-in-lieu. • (2) = A reduction in Parking Requirement may be approved, pursuant to Chapter 26.430, Special review and according to the review criteria of Section 26.515.080 Table 26.515-1 Parking Impact Requirement Calculations Use Aspen Infill Area All Other Areas Parking Requirement (in units) Parking Requirement (in units) Parking Maximum (in units) Commercial 1 unit /1,000 sf Net Leasable Space 1.25 units / 1,000 sf NLA(1) 3 units per 1,000 sf NLA Residential – Single-Family and Duplex(4) Lesser of 1 unit per bedroom or 2 mobility units per Dwelling Unit Greater of 1.25 units per bedroom or 2.5 mobility units per unit(1) Lesser of 1 unit per bedroom or 2 per unit Residential – Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses(4) 1 unit per Dwelling Unit 1.25 units per unit(1) 1 unit per ADU(3) Residential – Multi-Family (as a single use) 1 unit per Dwelling Unit 1.25 units per unit(1) Lesser of 1 unit per bedroom or two mobility units per Dwelling Unit. Residential – Multi-Family within a mixed-use building 1 unit per Dwelling Unit 1.25 units per unit(1) 1 per Dwelling Unit. Fewer units may be approved, pursuant to Chapter 26.430, Special Review and according to the review criteria of Section 26.515.080. Hotel/Lodge 0.5 units per Room or Lodging Unit 1.25 units per unit 0.7 units per Room of Lodging Unit(2) All Other Uses (civic, cultural, public uses, essential public facilities, child care centers, etc.) Established by Special Review according to the review criteria of Section 26.515.080. N/A Established by Special Review according to the review criteria of Section 26.515.080. P345 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 11 of 19 • (3) = A reduction in Parking Requirements may be approved, pursuant to Chapter 26.520, Accessory dwelling units and carriage houses. • (4) = All Single Family and Duplex dwelling units, as well as ADUs and Carriage Houses shall provide their Parking Requirement as off-street parking spaces. • SF = Square feet • NLA = Net leasable square feet of commercial space 26.515.050. Meeting Parking Requirements. Parking Requirements shall be satisfied through the following provisions, or a combination thereof: 1. Cash-in-lieu. Cash-in-lieu payments may be made to satisfy Parking Requirements as outlined by zone district in Table 26.515-2, and according to Section 26.515.090. 2. On-Site Parking. May be provided on-site in applicable zone districts, with Reserved and Accessory spaces not to exceed the Parking Maximums outlined below in Table 26.515-1. Shared parking may be counted provided that a Shared Parking Agreement and a shared-parking analysis, as approved by the Community Development Director. 3. Off-Site Parking. Off-site parking may be counted toward the requirement, provided that a Shared Parking Agreement and a shared-parking analysis, as approved by the Community Development Director. 4. Mobility Commitments. Mobility commitments, as defined in Section 26.515.010.B, may be provided, as follows: a. Where projects are TIA exempt, pre-approved alternative mobility measures may be provided to satisfy Parking Units as outlined by zone district in Table 26.515- 2. b. Where projects are TIA subject, pre-approved alternative mobility measures generated over minimum requirements may be provided to satisfy Parking Units as outlined by zone district in Table 26.515-2. The extent to which a project may satisfy its Parking Requirements with Mobility Commitments, On-Site Parking provision, and Cash-in-Lieu will vary by location, according to Table 26.515-2 below. (Refer to the TIA for policies and regulations on parking structures.) P346 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 12 of 19 Table 26.515-2 - Parking Requirements by Zone District Location Options for Meeting Parking Requirements Additional TIA Credits (Projects Subject to TIA) Mobility Commitments (Projects Exempt from TIA) On-Site Parking Provision Cash-In-Lieu of Parking Fee Payment Commercial Core and Commercial-1 zones Up to 2 Additional TIA Credits Up to 2 Mobility Commitments * Up to 20% of the Requirement. Up to 100% of the requirement if subgrade. Up to 100% of the Requirement Remaining Commercial Zones (Mixed Use, Neighborhood Character, Service/Commercial/Indus trial) 1 Additional TIA Credit (equal to 1 Parking Unit) 1 Mobility Commitment (equal to 1 Parking Unit) At least 60% and up to 100% of the Requirement Up to 40% of the Requirement Remaining Infill Area 1 Additional TIA Credit (equal to 1 Parking Unit) 1 Mobility Commitment (equal to 1 Parking Unit) Up to 100% of the Requirement Up to 100% of the Requirement All other Areas 1 Additional TIA Credit (equal to 1 Parking Unit) 1 Mobility Commitment (equal to 1 Parking Unit) At least 60% and up to 100% of the Requirement Up to 40% of the Requirement Parking Requirements are subject to the following standards based upon the character of the development: 1. If the Parking Requirement is subject to establishment by adoption of a Planned Development final development plan, review is subject to Chapter 26.445, Planned Development. P347 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 13 of 19 3. If the Parking Requirement is established through a special review, the standards and procedures of Section 26.515.080, Special Review Standards apply. 4. If the Parking Requirement is met via cash-in-lieu, the standards and procedures set forth at Section 26.515.090, Cash-in-Lieu of Parking apply. 6. For properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, a waiver of the ParkingRequirement may be approved, pursuant to Chapter 26.430, Special Review, and according to the review criteria set forth below. 7. For lodging projects with flexible unit configurations, also known as “lock-off units,” each separate “key,” or rentable division, shall constitute a unit for the purposes of this section. 8. The Parking Requirement for projects with multiple, distinct land uses (residential, commercial, lodging or other) may be lowered, if the applicant submits a shared-parking analysis, approved by the Community Development Director., which results in a peak-parking-demand measure that is less than the Parking Requirement established by Table 26.515-1. The application for a shared parking analysis shall be reviewed by The Transportation, Parking, Engineering, and Community Development Departments and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission as a Special Review (Section 26.430). *9. Off-street parking provision is prohibited on a lot that abuts an Aspen Pedestrian Mall. Uses on those lots shall provide all Parking Requirements through the payment of Cash-in-Lieu (Section 26.515.090). 26.515.060. Procedures for Review. Development and redevelopment applications shall be reviewed pursuant to the following procedures, as well as standards and the Common Development Review Procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304. A. Review Authority. All applications will be reviewed administratively for compliance with this Chapter and relevant guidelines in conjunction with a project’s land use application, unless otherwise specified. In all circumstances, the final land use review body shall approve the TIA, after considering a recommendation from the Engineering, Transportation, and Community Development Departments. B. Review Process. For all development, expansions of existing development, and redevelopment, Mobility Plan review is completed in conjunction with relevant land use reviews. Pursuant to Section, 26.304.020 of this Title, Pre-application conference, applicants are encouraged, although not required, to meet with a member of the Community Development Department to clarify requirements of this Section and to determine applicability. P348 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 14 of 19 For development only subject to administrative level land use reviews, or development meeting a threshold established in the Guidelines but not subject to a land use review, the City Engineering and Transportation Departments may, on behalf of the City of Aspen, determine that the project meets or exceeds the requirements set forth in this Chapter and the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. When development meets an established threshold, but does not require a land use review, review for compliance with this Chapter and the Guidelines shall be completed as part of the building permit application. In all circumstances, the final land use review body shall approve the TIA, after considering a recommendation from the Engineering and Transportation Departments. C. Review Criteria. All development and redevelopment projects are required to submit a Mobility Plan, which shall include a project’s TIA and Parking Requirements and outline subsequent mitigation obligations. The Engineering, Transportation and Community Development Department staff shall determine whether the project conforms to this Chapter requirements using the following standards: 1. Project TIA analysis and the resulting mitigation program meets requirements for exempt, minor, or major project categories as outlined in the TIA Guidelines. 2. Project provides full mitigation for the Parking Requirements pursuant to Section 26.515.050. 3. Development does not reduce the number of existing Parking Units required for that development, unless expressly exempted by this Chapter. 4. If existing development is expanded, additional Parking Requirements shall be provided for that increment of the expansion as if it is a separate development. 5. If existing development is expanded or redeveloped, on-site parking deficits may be maintained if all parking, or at least 20 spaces, whichever is greater, are provided as Public parking. Projects failing to meet the requirements of this section may apply for a variation to the Planning and Zoning Commission through the Special Review process (Section 26.430). 26.515.070. Off-Street Parking Requirements. A. Applicability. Where off-street parking spaces are provided as part of a Mobility Plan, the following regulations apply. B. General. Each off-street parking space shall consist of an open area measuring eight and one half (8½) feet wide by eighteen (18) feet long and seven (7) feet high with a maximum longitudinal slope of twelve percent (12%) and a maximum cross slope of five percent (5%). Each parking space, except those provided for detached residential dwellings and duplex dwellings, shall have an unobstructed access to a street or alley. Off-street parking provided for multi-family dwellings which do not share a common parking area may be exempted from the unobstructed access requirement subject to special review pursuant to Chapter 26.430, Special P349 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 15 of 19 review and the standards set forth at Section 26.515.040, Special review standards, below. Off- street parking must be paved with all-weather surfacing or be covered with gravel. For residential development, a grass ring or grass-paver-type surface may be used. All parking shall be maintained in a usable condition at all times. All development or redevelopment must be in conformance with, or bring existing parking into conformance with, Engineering Design Standards, including but not limited to the access requirements outlined in Chapter 4 Transportation Design. C. Use of off-street parking. Parking spaces shall be used for the parking of vehicles and shall not be used for non-auto related uses such as storage units or trash containers. No off-street parking area shall be used for the sale, repair, dismantling or servicing of any vehicles, equipment, materials or supplies, nor shall any such activity adjacent to off-street parking spaces obstruct required access to off-street parking areas. D. Location of off-street parking. Off-street parking shall be located on the same parcel as the principal use or an adjacent parcel under the same ownership as the lot occupied by the principal use. For all uses, parking shall be accessed from an alley or secondary road, where one exists unless otherwise established according to this Chapter. E. Detached and duplex residential dwelling parking. Off-street parking provided for detached residential dwellings and duplex dwellings is not required to have unobstructed access to a street or alley, but shall not block access of emergency apparatus to the property or to structures located on the property. This allows for "stacking" of vehicles where a vehicle is parked directly behind another. F. State Highway 82 off-street parking. All parking required for uses fronting State Highway 82 shall, if an alley exists, take access from the alley and shall not enter from or exit onto State Highway 82. G. Surface parking. Surface parking is prohibited or requires conditional use review as a principal use of a lot or parcel in some Zone Districts (See Chapter 26-710). Where surface parking is permitted and eight (8) or more spaces are provided, the parking area shall include one (1) tree with a planter area of twenty (20) square feet for each four (4) parking spaces. Planter areas may be combined, but shall be proximate to the parking spaces. The Planning and Zoning Commission may waive or modify this requirement on a per case basis. Parking within structures is exempt from this landscaping provision. H. Restrictions on drainage, grading and traffic impact. Off-street parking spaces shall be graded to ensure drainage does not create any flooding or water quality impacts and shall be provided with entrances and exits so as to minimize traffic congestion and traffic hazards. I. Restrictions on lighting. Lighting facilities for off-street parking spaces, if provided, shall be arranged and shielded so that lights neither unreasonably disturb occupants of adjacent residential dwellings nor interfere with driver vision. All outdoor lighting shall comply with the outdoor lighting regulations, Section 26.575.150. P350 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 16 of 19 26.515.080. Special review standards. Whenever the transportation, mobility, and parking impacts of a proposed development are subject to special review, an application shall be processed as a special review in accordance with the common development review procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 and be evaluated according to the following standards. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. If the project requires review by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Community Development Director has authorized consolidation pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B, the Historic Preservation Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the special review application. A special review for establishing, varying or waiving transportation, mobility, or off-street parking requirements may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on its conformance with all of the following criteria: 1. The transportation, mobility, and off-street parking needs of the residents, customers, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, any shared parking opportunities, expected schedule of parking demands, the projected impacts on the on- street parking of the neighborhood, the proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees. 2. An on-site mitigation solution meeting the requirements and guidelines is practically difficult or results in an undesirable development scenario. 3. Existing or planned on-site or off-site facilities adequately serve the needs of the development, including the availability of street parking. A. Commercial Parking Facilities. Special Review is required for a commercial parking facility. A special review to permit a commercial parking facility may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with its adherence to Commercial Design Standards and the policy goal of provision of publicly-accessible parking in areas with high public parking demand (in order to reduce vehicle congestion and emissions due to vehicles circling for parking) is not offset by the proposed commercial parking facility’s potential adverse impacts of the City’s multi-modal transportation system. 26.515.090. Cash-in-lieu Requirements. A. General. The City conducted a parking facility analysis in the fall of 2016 and determined the costs associated with developing new parking facilities to serve the demands of development. While not all potential facilities represented the same potential expenditure, facilities considered likely to be developed by the City required an expected thirty-eight thousand dollars ($38,000) per space to develop in 2016 dollars. P351 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 17 of 19 B. Cash-in-lieu. Mobility improvements serving commercial and mixed-use development is a public amenity and serves the mobility needs of the general population. As such, the mobility needs of the general population can be improved through various means other than the provision of on-site parking spaces, including cash-in-lieu. A cash-in-lieu payment, for those types of development authorized to provide parking via cash-in-lieu, may be accepted by the Community Development Director to satisfy the Parking Requirement, as described in Section 26.515.040, above. 1. Time of payment. The payment-in-lieu of parking shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit. All funds shall be collected by the Community Development Director and transferred to the Finance Director for deposit in a separate interest bearing account. 2. Use of funds. Monies in the account shall be used solely for the construction of a public parking facility, transportation and mobility improvements, including vehicles or station improvements, transportation demand management facilities or programs, shared automobiles or programs and similar transportation or mobility-related facilities or programs as determined appropriate by the City. 3. Refunds. Fees collected pursuant to this Section may be returned to the then-present owner of the property for which a fee was paid, including any interest earned, if the fees have not been spent within seven (7) years from the date fees were paid, unless the Council shall have earmarked the funds for expenditure on a specific project, in which case the time period shall be extended by up to three (3) more years. To obtain a refund, the present owner must submit a petition to the Finance Director within one (1) year following the end of the seventh (7th) year from the date payment was received by the City. For the purpose of this Section, payments collected shall be deemed spent on the basis of "the first payment in shall be the first payment out." Any payment made for a project for which a building permit is revoked or cancelled, prior to construction, may be refunded if a petition for refund is submitted to the Finance Director within three (3) months of the date of the revocation or cancellation of the building permit. All petitions shall be accompanied by a notarized, sworn statement that the petitioner is the current owner of the property and that the development shall not commence without full compliance with this Chapter and by a copy of the dated receipt issued for payment of the fee. 4. Periodic review of rate. In order to ensure that the payment-in-lieu rate is fair and represents current cost levels, it shall be reviewed every two years. Any necessary amendments to this Section shall be initiated pursuant to Section 26.310.020, Procedure for amendment. 26.515.100. Amendments. Amendments to an approved Mobility and Parking Requirement review by the Community Development Director in coordination with the Engineering and Transportation Departments as needed. P352 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 18 of 19 A. Amendments to Trip Reduction Measures. Off-site MMLOS infrastructure measures that have been implemented may not be amended at any time. Off-site MMLOS infrastructure measures that have not been implemented, and any on-site TDM and MMLOS measures, may be amended as outlined below. Changes shall be reviewed by the Engineering, Transportation, and Community Development Departments to ensure the proposed change is appropriate given the site’s context. 1. Insubstantial Amendment. Any amendment to TDM or MMLOS measures resulting in the same or more number of trips mitigated as the original approval may be approved administratively by the Community Development Department, after considering a recommendation from the Engineering and Transportation Departments. A land use application is required, pursuant to Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures. The applicant shall demonstrate how the new measure(s) is appropriate given current site conditions. 2. Substantial Amendment. Any amendment to TDM or MMLOS measures that reduces the number of trips mitigated shall be reviewed by City Council, after considering a recommendation from the Community Development, Engineering, and Transportation Departments. A land use application is required, pursuant to Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and the review shall be conducted in a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E), Public Notice. City Council shall find the following standards are met: a) The proposed change responds to changed site conditions or circumstances, including but not limited to changes to land uses, site topography, or site plan. b) The proposed changes will not adversely impact the immediate vicinity. c) The proposed change meets the original intent of the approved measures. d) The proposed changes have been approved by the Community Development Director. B. Appeals. An applicant may challenge a determination made by the City in their enforcement of the requirements of this Chapter by filing with the Community Development Director a written notice of appeal as provided in Section 26.316.030, Appeals procedures, with a full statement of the grounds for appeal. Appeals shall be reviewed by City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals. Section 2. Chapter 26.630 Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines is repealed by the adoption of this ordinance Section 3: Any scrivener’s errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 4: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. P353 VII.A. 1.9.17 Second Reading, Ordinance 32, Series 2016 Parking and Mobility Page 19 of 19 This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 7: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the ____ day of _____, 2016, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _____ day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _____th day of _____, 2016. Attest: _____________________________ ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor Approved as to form: _____________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P354 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 1 of 13 1 Memorandum To: Mayor Skadron and City Council From: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director Phillip Supino, Principal Long-Range Planner Meeting Date: November 28, 2016 RE: AACP - Land Use Code Coordination Ordinances Second Reading: Ordinance 29, Series 2016: 26.700 Use Mix & Dimensional Standards Ordinance 30, Series 2016: 26.575 Miscellaneous Regulations & 26.104 Definitions SUMMARY: The following code amendments are the result of the process to achieve Council’s Top Ten Goal of “reconciling the Land Use Code with the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), so the Land Use Code delivers what the AACP promises.” For efficiency of process, the proposed code amendments are divided into 6 ordinances, each amending a different section of the Land Use Code in accordance with the policies adopted by Council in Resolution #147, Series 2016. The ordinances scheduled for consideration at this hearing are Ordinance 29, Series 2016 Use Mix & Dimensional Standards, and Ordinance 30, Series 2016 Miscellaneous Regulations & Definitions. For each ordinance, a public hearing must be opened which includes public comment and Council discussion following the staff presentation. The ordinances are the same as the drafts considered at the November 14th First Reading hearing. The memos for each ordinance provide additional information based on Council feedback and questions. To facilitate discussion, specific elements of the ordinances have been called out with a number in the left margin. Those numbers correspond to numbered sections in each ordinance memorandum. The numbers look like this: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of Ordinances 29 and 30 to December 5, 2016. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This meeting is to review the implementation of regulations related to Use Mix into the Land Use Code. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three-step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should the pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. P355 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 2 of 13 QUESTIONS FROM FIRST READING: At the November 14th first readings hearing, City Council asked a number of questions regarding the content of the draft ordinances, and provided additional direction for policies and concepts to pursue for possible inclusion in subsequent drafts. Those questions and comments are listed below for Council’s reference: 1. City Council requested additional information about how the second tier spaces developed under the proposed regulations would be successful. The proposed code changes work together to create viable second tier commercial spaces. This includes language in the attached Use Mix Ordinance, the Growth Management Ordinance, and the Commercial Design Ordinance. In order to facilitate the success of second tier spaces in commercial development, the Commercial Design Guidelines include language which will help create inviting and visible spaces. There are guidelines ensuring direct access and visibility from the street into pedestrian amenity areas where second tier spaces may be located. Guidelines are also included regarding way finding systems to and within second tier spaces. The relationship between pedestrian amenity space and second tier space access ensures that there will be open and inviting public places near businesses in second tier spaces, creating activity and vitality. Also in the Commercial Design Standards Ordinance (Ordinance 33) is a definition of second tier space, which ensures that staff and applicants are calculating the correct spaces. A tiered percentage is proposed for the commercial zone districts, which lists the amount of space required for all development. These percentages will work to ensure a critical mass of second tier spaces in Aspen. It is also worth noting that commercial property owners will be interested in ensuring stable, successful tenants in second tier spaces, which will serve as a market-driven incentive to developing spaces where businesses may be successful. Within the Growth Management Ordinance (Ordinance 31), mitigation rates for second tier spaces are proposed to remain the same as today (60%), while other commercial development is proposed to increase up to 80%. As mentioned later in responses to other first reading questions, additional discussion is needed on whether Council desires to increase the general mitigation rate. Additionally, a commercial replacement requirement is proposed, which would require that existing second tier spaces be replaced as part of any redevelopment. Attached as Exhibit B is language from the other ordinances referenced above related to second tier spaces. 2. Council members requested additional information on the potential viability of formula business or chain regulations. P356 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 3 of 13 To date, Council has adopted strong use mix policies, specifically the creation of second tier commercial spaces, the maintenance of commercial zones for primarily commercial uses, and providing flexibility for use and design proposals in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zones through the Essential Business Overlay zone. These policy priorities are the framework for the regulations proposed in the Use Mix, Miscellaneous and Definitions ordinances presented to Council, and they are supported by the AACP and Resolution #47, Series 2016. Based on Council direction at the November 14th First Reading hearing, and following research by staff and consultants and public comment on the issue, a memorandum on the costs and benefits of the regulation of formula commercial uses has been developed and included as Exhibit C. Given Council’s policy preferences, staff proposes to further support Council’s use mix policy goals through the adoption of regulations to control the development of formula commercial uses on ground floors in the CC and C1 zone districts through a conditional use review process. Staff and Council have received public comment throughout the AACP- LUC coordination process that the proliferation of branded, corporate formula commercial businesses has a detrimental effect on the economic wellbeing and character of the Aspen community. Some in the community feel that downtown sits at a ‘tipping point’, where the continued proliferation of such uses may alter the character of downtown irrevocably. Adoption of regulations to limit the further proliferation of such uses may slow this economic trend. The impacts from such uses are most acute in the Commercial Core and Commercial Area zone districts. Discussions with the public, consultants and local stakeholders have demonstrated that an essential component of the formula for such uses is locating near existing, similar or symbiotic uses. Limiting the scope of the regulations to the CC and C1 zones through the application of conditional use review criteria may therefore have a strong effect on the availability of commercial real estate that fits the formula commercial business model. Therefore, regulations targeted at those zone districts may have the effect of slowing or stopping their proliferation. Staff and the consultants continue to have concerns over the potential breadth of formula business regulations. However, if Council chooses to adopt regulations to address this issue, the approach favored by staff and the consultants is a conditional use review for proposed business in the CC and C1 zones that meet the definition of formula commercial uses. Because the focus of this issue relates to prime tenant spaces, staff recommends that a Conditional Use Review be required for ground floor spaces in the CC and C-1 zone district, and that chains be permitted in the basement and the second floor. The process for Conditional Use Review is already established and includes the following: • Recommendation by the Community Development Department regarding compliance with established criteria (note that some additional criteria specific to formula businesses should be crafted). • Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. The review would be based on criteria including the relationship of the proposed use to the City’s P357 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 4 of 13 and neighborhood’s existing use mix, aspects of the business “formula” (such as signage, displays, uniforms, sales practices, product sourcing, and merchandise diversity) and site specific conditions. The Commission would then determine whether to grant a conditional use approval to the use in the proposed location. • If approved, the applicant would be able to apply for and receive a business license. If denied, the applicant would have the opportunity to appeal to City Council. This process is similar to that developed and employed by a number of communities around the Country. While some communities have faced legal challenges to their unique approach to regulating formula commercial uses, the conditional use process described above has been upheld to this point. There are legitimate concerns about the effectiveness of such regulations, not least of which is the complexity of applying conditional use criteria and the difficulty of measuring the impact of the regulations on use mix over time. However, should Council favor developing additional regulatory controls in an effort to achieve its use mix goals, the conditional use model is an option that would fit into existing City review processes. 3. Council members requested additional information on the potential viability of a Legacy Business Program. Another approach to preserving the City’s existing use mix, and ensuring that essential, local-serving businesses remain viable, is the development of a Legacy Business Program (LBP). The model for such a program is the City of San Francisco, which adopted such a program in 2015. To counter the impacts of rapidly inflating rents and wages, and the immense pressure on the commercial real estate market in San Francisco, the City partnered with non-governmental entities to preserve iconic, landmark and important local business unable to compete in the current market. A summary of the costs and benefits to such a program is attached as Exhibit D. The goals of the program are to ensure the ongoing financial viability of landmark neighborhood businesses such as restaurants, bars, grocers, retailers and other institutions of community interest. Businesses may voluntarily choose to opt in to the program and receive incentives in exchange for agreeing to remain in business for a set number of years. The incentives available to businesses include rent subsidies, code compliance assistance, and tax incentives through historic preservation programs. The LBP was developed in conjunction with economic development and historic preservation groups in San Francisco, and those groups are essential partners in the implementation of the program. This collaborative model is an important component of the programs financial and administrative viability. While the program leverages public funds, it is not solely reliant on those funds for its programming. The partner organizations administer aspects of the program, including selecting businesses, participant consultation, financial management and other program elements. The partnership between government, non-profits and the business sector distributes the responsibility of financing and managing the program, ensuring it is administered equitably and at minimal public cost. P358 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 5 of 13 Were the City to develop and administer such a program, it would be challenging to ensure that public funds were granted to legacy businesses equitably. The public-private partnership model eliminates some of those concerns. To date, no such partnership has been included in discussion of how a LBP might work in Aspen. Another challenge to developing a LBP is whom in the City administration would administer the program. In San Francisco, the program is rooted in both economic development and historic preservation policies, and bodies involved in those initiatives are included in the administrative structure. Without a coalition of non-governmental entities to support the City, it would fall on City staff alone to include program management in its existing staffing and budget. While these hurdles could be overcome through future budgetary processes, there is no clear path for financing the program in the short term. Staff does not recommend moving forward with a Legacy Business Program at this time. Because it is a voluntary program is can be discussed following the moratorium when there is more opportunity to weigh into the pros and cons. 4. City Council members requested information on whether the proposed ordinances would ensure than some future development would be “smaller” than current development patterns. The proposed dimensions in Ordinance 29 are lower than what is permitted today in nearly all zone districts. For instance, the Commercial Core currently allows buildings up to 38-40 feet in height and a FAR of 2.75:1. The proposed dimensions limit the height to 28 feet and the FAR to 2:1. Additionally, the Use Mix requirements in conjunction with the Commercial Design Standards require the creation of second tier spaces with access from Pedestrian Amenity spaces that today can be paid through cash-in-lieu. These requirements are tightened in the proposed Commercial Design Guidelines. Staff can provide additional detail on these changes at the second reading of the Commercial Design Standards Ordinance on December 12, 2016. 5. City Council suggested a streamlined process whereby projects with approvals that have not yet been built may amend their approval to come closer to the new requirements of the land use code following adoption of the ordinances proposed under the AACP-LUC coordination process. This would be an amendment to the Common Development Review Procedures portion of the land use code, which states how projects with vested land use approvals are reviewed. Staff will continue to work with the City Attorney and consultants to draft language for inclusion in the Miscellaneous Ordinance at its next public hearing date. Overall, staff believes this would be a key addition to the land use code to enable vested projects to come more closely into alignment with the current land use code. 6. City Council requested additional information and discussion on the effect of increasing the commercial affordable housing mitigation rate. P359 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 6 of 13 This will be addressed on December 5, 2016 at the second reading on Ordinance 31, which covers the Growth Management Chapter. 7. City Council requested clarification on the 30% mitigation requirement for free-market residential units. This will be addressed on December 5, 2016 at the second reading on Ordinance 31, which covers the Growth Management Chapter. 8. City Council requested staff explore potential new regulations that would allow commercial developments in certain zones to transfer and concentrate residential uses in specific buildings to eliminate the impact of residential uses on commercial uses within a given building. This topic most closely related to the Growth Management chapter, as it addresses where affordable housing mitigation could be located. Staff will provide additional information on how such a system could work at the December 5, 2016 second reading of the GMQS Ordinance. 9. Council members sought greater clarity on where a potential project’s parking requirement is listed in the draft parking regulations. This will be addressed on December 5, 2016 at the second reading on Ordinance 32, which covers the Off-Street Parking Chapter. 10. City Council requested that “minimal impact” be defined within the fore-ground, mid- ground and back-ground respectively within a view plane. This will be addressed at the first reading of the View Planes Ordinance on December 5, 2016. 11. Council members noted that the terms Pedestrian Amenity and Public Amenity are both used to describe the same concept, and suggested using one term uniformly. The history of the different terms and the suggested change to Pedestrian Amenity will be addressed on December 12, 2016 at the second reading on Ordinance 33, which covers the Commercial Design Standards. 12. City Council members suggested staff reach out to property owners and the development community to review how the proposed changes are likely to impact development in Aspen. Staff has continued to reach out to all members of the community to review the proposed changes, and has worked with local consultants who have experience in commercial real P360 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 7 of 13 estate as well as land use planning. These conversations will continue to take place. While a formal study is not in the scope of this work, staff will continue working with Karen Setterfield, Mark White, and Alan Richman to understand how the proposed changes are likely to impact development going forward. In addition, staff will continue to reach out to others in the real estate and development industry for their feedback. USE MIX AMENDMENT DETAILS The draft use table included in the ordinance is an example of the approach devised by the project consultants to address Council’s direction regarding use mix. In work sessions, Council directed staff to develop general use categories to classify various land uses in the community. Given the number of commercial and mixed-use zone districts in the community and the sometimes widely different characters of those zones, parsing which uses within the general categories are appropriate in which zones is important. The table was devised to balance the general approach favored by Council with the specific lists needed to provide clarity in land uses by zone and denote which uses are Permitted or Conditional uses (requiring a higher level of review). The table and individual zone district permitted use lists will continue to be refined and coordinated prior to second reading based on additional Council direction and work by staff and the consultants. In addition, changes to permitted uses have been made to reflect Council and AACP direction. This includes banning new free-market residential units in the S/C/I and NC zones as well as the MU zone except when part of a 100% residential building (i.e. single family, duplex, and multi- family development). Lodging uses have been removed as allowed in the NC zone district. These changes have been made to reinforce the commercial nature of these zone districts. The purpose statements in all zone districts have been updated to reflect the policies in the AACP and to reflect the updates to allowed uses and dimensions. The draft ordinance limits one’s ability to generate affordable housing credits from units developed in commercial zones. The ability to generate credits from affordable housing is a strong financial incentive. Given the importance of commercial areas remaining predominantly commercial, removing the credits incentive is a simple way to ensure that, to the extent affordable housing is developed in commercial zones, it is done so as on-site mitigation of commercial space and not as the primary objective of the project. The ordinance also states that affordable housing must be an accessory use to commercial uses in the zones. Keeping affordable housing as an accessory use support the same objectives as eliminating credits from such projects. The only exception to this limitation is in the Mixed-Use zone district, which continues to allow affordable housing projects to establish Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits. A note in all commercial zone districts has been added indicating that dimensions are the maximum achievable and may not be achievable in all scenarios. Heights for all commercial, lodging, and mixed-use building heights in the CC, C-1, NC, and MU zones are proposed to be limited to 28 feet in all but the Service/Commercial/Industrial 1 3 5 2 4 P361 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 8 of 13 zone, where the height limit would remain the same as is in place today at 35 feet. This amendment removes the distinction in allowed height for properties on the north and south sides of streets in the downtown zones. The reduced height will allow for the development of two story buildings that comply with the Commercial Design Guidelines. Minimum floor-to-ceiling heights are maintained within the 28-foot maximum to preserve historic architectural patterns and create vibrant commercial frontages and an engaging pedestrian experience. Staff and Council may continue to examine whether the established height ratios are appropriate in all zones at the current heights. Additionally, included in Ordinance 30 (the Miscellaneous and Definitions Ordinance) is a proposed height allowance for decorative features, such as a parapet, cornice, or pediment, in the CC, C-1, and NC zones only if approved by P&Z or HPC as part of a Commercial Design Review to enable varying height limitations, which is encouraged in the current and draft Commercial Design Guidelines (Ordinance 33). In conjunction with the reductions in height for commercial and mixed-use buildings, maximum floor area ratios (FAR) have been lowered as follows: • Commercial Core (CC): lowered from 2.75:1 to 2:1. • Commercial (C-1): lowered from 2.5:1 to 1.75:1 • Mixed-Use (MU): for areas outside the Main Street Historic District lowered from 2:1 to 1:1 with the ability to increase to 1.5:1 through Special Review. Areas in the Main Street Historic District are unchanged at 1:1 by right and 1.25:1 through Special Review. • Neighborhood Commercial (NC): is unchanged at 1.5:1 • Service Commercial Industrial (SCI): is unchanged at 2.25:1 Based on feedback from the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z), the maximum FAR for affordable housing as a portion of a mixed-use building is proposed at 0.75:1. P&Z felt strongly that affordable housing is an essential aspect of the City’s development regulations with regard to ensuring downtown Aspen remains vibrant and accessible. Members also felt that the AACP policy prioritizing on-site mitigation should be reflected in the maximum affordable housing FAR in those zones. While P&Z generally agreed with the policy that the use mix in commercial areas should be predominantly commercial, they did not feel that the potential for affordable housing to erode that character was sufficient to warrant severely limiting its presence in future development. The net livable areas have been updated to reflect overall goals for residential development. Category affordable housing units continue to have no net livable limitation, while a 1,500 square foot net livable limitation has been added for Resident-Occupied affordable housing units. Free-market residential unit size limitations have been standardized in all zone districts to 1,500 square foot per unit and the total net livable space is limited to what currently exists on the parcel. This limitation ensures there is no overall expansion of the amount of free-market square footage on a parcel. Additionally, TDRs can be landed to increase the individual unit size for both free-market residential units and RO units to a maximum of 2,500 square foot. This maximum is consistent 6 7 8 P362 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 9 of 13 with current allowances and ensures an important Historic Preservation incentive remains, while further limiting the amount of free-market residential space that can be developed. The commercial to residential ratios have been updated in the CC, C-1, and NC zones. These ratios ensure that in mixed-use development the majority of the space is dedicated to commercial uses. The proposed code amendments include general clean ups, such as updated references for applicable Pedestrian Amenity, and trash, recycle and utility area reviews, as well as correcting language in the references to Referendum 1 applicability, which erroneously listed Castle Creek as a river. In all commercial zones, new free market residential was eliminated as an allowed use to preserve the commercial character of the zones. In the Mixed-Use zone, free market residential was retained as an allowed use, but only as a standalone use on a lot. This distinction is in deference to the historic character of the Main Street historic district, where residences are a character defining feature. Section 26.710.340 establishes the Essential Business Overlay Zone (EBO). This tool is intended to provide Council with the opportunity to offer incentives, use mix allowances, setback reductions and to partner with developers seeking to create spaces for small and locally serving businesses in the S/C/I and NC zones. The tool does not change the underlying zoning of a property, and the rezoning process required to obtain the designation ensures that Council and P&Z have discretion as to the opportunities provided to development through the tool. In the future, the EBO may be used to facilitate the development of a business incubator, a live-work development or other non-traditional commercial and mixed-use developments that may be of value to Council and align with City policies. MISCELLANEOUS & DEFINITIONS AMENDMENT DETAILS: A number of definitions have been added for clarity, including Church, Multi-Family housing, Religious Land Use, Second Tier Commercial Space, and Vehicle Sales. The definition of net leasable has been updated to include Second-Tier Commercial Space. This means that Second Tier space is included in the overall commercial floor area and net leasable calculations. Also included in this section is an update to the definition of Planned Unit Development to correspond with the 2014 code amendment that changed the code section to Planned Development. A new Section has been added to Chapter 100 that will include all the definitions and information about different use types. These include all of the use categories. These general use category definitions are located throughout the ordinance, and each corresponds to a category listed in the use-zone matrix included in the Use Mix Ordinance (Ordinance 29, Series 2016). The use category definitions are included in the definitions section, as opposed to the zone districts section, of the code for ease of use and to ensure that definitions are not scattered 11 12 9 10 1 3 2 P363 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 10 of 13 throughout the code in various sections. Each general use category begins with statement of the use characteristics, which establishes the purpose and intent of the use category. This is followed by example accessory uses that may be present in conjunction with a use but may not be the primary use of a property. The definitions include example use types, which are meant to provide guidance to applicants without precluding specific uses from a zone district. The definitions also include specific use exemptions to inform applicants of those uses determined to be incompatible with the zone district in question. For example, Academic uses has been update to the new format and included as a general use category in the Use Mix Matrix included in Ordinance No. 32-2016. The character established for the category provides high-level context for the use and how it relates to possible accessory uses. The accessory uses area called out to provide guidance to applicants and review bodies as to what combined uses area acceptable. The examples illustrate the types of academic uses that may be considered. The exceptions ensure that applicants do not confuse similar but non- academic uses that belong in other use categories with purely academic uses. This format is repeated for all of the general use categories listed in the use matrix. With the relocation of the Public Amenity (now Pedestrian Amenity) standards into the Commercial Design portion of the Land Use Code, the section is rescinded and readopted to include existing regulations regarding Outdoor Merchandising. Some language is updated for clarity, but no policy changes have been made to the language. The section retains regulations allowing pedestrian amenity spaces and private property to be used for outdoor dining areas. The prohibition of permanent structures on outdoor dining areas is maintained. A section is proposed to be added to the measurement of height for commercial buildings in the downtown. The amendment would enable the P&Z or HPC to approve decorative elements such as parapet, cornice, spire, pediment, to extend up to 18 inches above the roof of the building. This section has been added to respond to comments received from P&Z and HPC regarding a desire to see varying roof heights in the downtown. This addition of this section limits the ability to accept a land use application when on-going enforcement issues are on the property. This addition of this section relates to changes in section 26.515, Parking and Mobility. The proposed amendment ensures that commercial parking facilities are required to adhere to the Special Review Standards outlined in the Parking and Mobility section of the code. PREVIOUS ACTION: In addition to the programs and regulations supported by Council in the October 24th Policy Resolution, there were a number of potential options presented to Council during that AACP- LUC coordination process that were not pursued. To ensure Council has all of the information needed to consider the proposed direction of Ordinance 29, the following is a list of those options (taken from the August 9, 2016 work session memo) not pursued by Council: Zone District Approaches 4 6 5 7 P364 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 11 of 13 • Expand/modify zone district boundaries – rezone some areas to NC/SCI or modify district standards to include specific references to the desired business types. • Tailor dimensional standards – revise list of uses and/or dimensional requirements within commercial zone districts to allow or encourage desired uses and disallow or discourage undesirable uses. Use Limitations • Use size restrictions – impose either a basic cap on size or tie size to a requirement to demonstrate use is locally serving. • Use caps and spacing requirements – limit the number of designated uses permitted in a district or requiring a minimum distance between designated uses. • Chain store/formula retail restrictions – restrict, cap, impose discretionary review, or outright ban chain stores. • Conditional use/special review – modify conditional use lists and review criteria or apply a discretionary review to uses that exceed a designated threshold, such as FAR. Design/Incentive Approaches • Height/floor area bonus – create bonuses for encouraged uses. This could mean downzoning current height or floor area allowances and providing incentives to certain uses that would align with current zone district dimensions. • Parking or affordable housing reductions – allow reductions in parking or affordable housing requirements to encourage desired uses. • GMQS scoring – create a competitive growth management system that encourages certain uses. The City revised its scoring system in 2007, but repealed it in 2014 due to lack of competition for allotments. • Legacy business program – create a registry for qualifying businesses that could provide incentives. Impact-Oriented Systems • Mitigation standards/fee-in-lieu – require mitigation or fee-in-lieu for new development that would fund establishment of local serving businesses. • Ratio-based program – develop an optimum ratio of locally serving business and high end commercial that could not be exceeded. • Commercial replacement requirements – require certain uses to be replaced when a building is redeveloped (this approach was modified and incorporated into the second tier commercial replacement requirements found in Ordinance 33) LINKAGES: The proposed ordinance is supported by the following 2012 AACP policies: I.4. Identify opportunities to reduce the “boom-bust” nature of the economy. (Managing Growth p. 24) V.1. Encourage a commercial use mix that is balanced, diverse and vital and meets the needs of the year-round residents and visitors. (Managing Growth p. 26) P365 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 12 of 13 V.2. Facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs. (Managing Growth p. 26) IV.3. On-site housing mitigation is preferred. (Housing, p. 42) VII.2. Ensure that new development and redevelopment mitigates all reasonable, directly- related impacts. (Managing Growth, p. 27) The amendments proposed in this ordinance work together with other proposed amendments to achieve Council’s goals for the AACP-LUC coordination process. The reductions in building height and floor area ratio ensure that new development maintains the Aspen’s historic and community character. The changes to the allowed uses in commercial zones will help preserve the character of each unique zone, particularly the NC and S/C/I, where so many important local businesses are located. Affordable housing remains an important issue for the community, and providing the means for commercial development to mitigate its housing impacts in accordance with AACP policies provides more opportunities throughout the community for the workforce to live where they work. This achieves a wide range for AACP policies and will support the downtown economy through seasons and economic cycles. NEXT STEPS: Staff seeks additional direction from Council on each element of the proposed text amendments in Ordinances 29 and 30. Ordinances 31 through 34 will be presented to Council for second reading per the schedule below: December 5, 2016 • Ordinance 31, Series 2016: 26.470 Growth Management • Ordinance 32, Series 2016: 26.515 Parking & Mobility • Ordinance 34, Series 2016: 26.435 View Planes (First Reading) December 12, 2016 • Ordinance 33, Series 2016: 26.412 Commercial Design Review & Guidelines • Ordinance 34, Series 2016: 26.435 View Planes RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to continue Ordinances 29 and 30, Series 2016, to December 5th.” ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Staff Findings Exhibit B – Second Tier Spaces related code section Exhibit C – Chain Store Regulations Memo Exhibit D – Legacy Business Program Memo P366 VII.A. 11.28.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 29 (Use Mix) and Ord 30 (Misc.), Series 2016 Page 13 of 13 P367 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination – Ord. 31 (Growth Management), Series 2016 Page 1 of 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director Phillip Supino, Long-Range Planner RE: Land Use Code Amendments – Public Hearing Growth Management – Ordinance No. 31, Series 2016 MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016 SUMMARY: This draft ordinance amends the Growth Management chapter of the Land Use Code to include requirements for second tier commercial space replacement, to increase the required mitigation percentage for commercial and lodging development, and to include requirements that mitigation be provided for existing commercial space that has not previously been mitigated. The proposed code amendments coordinate the requirements of the Land Use Code with the policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan, as outlined in Council’s Top Ten Goals. As with the first reading ordinances, specific code sections discussed in this memo are identified by a number in the margin that looks like this: At the November 14, 2016 first reading hearing, Council asked specific questions of staff regarding content of Ordinance No. 31. Responses to those questions are included in this memo. The attached memo is identical to the memo included in the November 14th first reading packet. Following Council discussion of the ordinance, changes to the proposed code language will be drafted by staff for consideration by Council at the January 9, 2016 Council meeting. The numbers in the margins of the memo and ordinance identify those sections called-out for Council in the first reading memos, as well as, new content based on Council questions and discussion at the first reading hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of Ordinance No. 31, Series 2016, to the January 9, 2017 Council meeting. SUMMARY: The proposed amendments in the ordinance support and advance other text amendments which achieve a number of AACP policies and Council goals. The amendments are designed to ensure that goals related to the creation and replacement of second tier commercial space are address in the city’s growth management system. Additionally, it requires increased mitigation requirements for commercial and lodging development. Together, these amendments ensure coordination between various sections of the LUC amended under the AACP-LUC coordination process. QUESTIONS FROM FIRST READING 1 P368 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination – Ord. 31 (Growth Management), Series 2016 Page 2 of 5 1. Council requested additional information about how the second tier spaces developed under the proposed regulations would be successful. The proposed code changes work together to create viable second tier commercial spaces. This includes language in the attached Use Mix Ordinance, the Growth Management Ordinance, and the Commercial Design Ordinance. In order to facilitate the success of second tier spaces in commercial development, the Commercial Design Guidelines include language which will help create inviting and visible spaces. There are guidelines ensuring direct access and visibility from the street into pedestrian amenity areas where second tier spaces may be located. Guidelines are also included regarding way finding systems to and within second tier spaces. The relationship between pedestrian amenity space and second tier space access ensures that there will be open and inviting public places near businesses in second tier spaces, creating activity and vitality. Also in the Commercial Design Standards Ordinance (Ordinance 33) is a definition of second tier space, which ensures that staff and applicants are calculating the correct spaces. A tiered percentage is proposed for the commercial zone districts, which lists the amount of space required for all development. These percentages will work to ensure a critical mass of second tier spaces in Aspen. It is also worth noting that commercial property owners will be interested in ensuring stable, successful tenants in second tier spaces, which will serve as a market-driven incentive to developing spaces where businesses may be successful. Within the Growth Management Ordinance (Ordinance 31), mitigation rates for second tier spaces are proposed to remain the same as today (60%), while other commercial development is proposed to increase up to 80%. As mentioned later in responses to other first reading questions, additional discussion is needed on whether Council desires to increase the general mitigation rate. Additionally, a commercial replacement requirement is proposed, which would require that existing second tier spaces be replaced as part of any redevelopment. Attached as Exhibit B is language from the other ordinances referenced above related to second tier spaces. 2. Council requested additional information and discussion on the effect of increasing the commercial affordable housing mitigation rate. The ordinance includes language that would increase mitigation for commercial and lodge development from 60% to 80%. This is based on initial Council direction and is included for discussion purposes. Mitigation for second tier spaces is proposed to remain at 60%. It is difficult to predict how the pace of commercial development will be affected by the proposed increase to the affordable housing mitigation rate. However, the increased rate will increase the number of FTEs mitigated, increasing the amount of affordable housing overall. To the extent that commercial development activities continue under the increased rate and without the opportunity to generate credits for sale on the market, there will be more affordable housing developed off-site, through buy-downs and other mitigation methods. However, the number of P369 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination – Ord. 31 (Growth Management), Series 2016 Page 3 of 5 affordable housing units yielded per year is influenced as much by the amount of commercial development as by the mitigation rate. Therefore, it is difficult to know whether increasing the rate would necessarily yield more affordable housing units in any given period of time. Combined with the other code changes being contemplated, it may be worthwhile to consider a lower mitigation rate of 60% or 70%. 3. City Council requested clarification on the 30% mitigation requirement for free-market residential units. This amendment is designed to ensure that, to the extent that there is net livable area in residential properties below grade, it is included in the 30% affordable housing net livable requirement. That code section stipulates that free market residential uses mitigate their affordable housing requirement at a rate of 30% of the net livable area of the free market unit. Previously, this code section did not include subgrade areas. The amended language ties the 30% to net livable, which includes developed subgrade areas. This amendment will yield more affordable housing square footage than the previous methodology. 4. City Council requested staff explore potential new regulations that would allow commercial developments in certain zones to transfer and concentrate residential uses in specific buildings to eliminate the impact of residential uses on commercial uses within a given building. This concept is analogous to a transfer of development rights (TDR) program, insofar as it would create system whereby potential development from one site could be transferred to another without exceeding the development standards for the property. One significant difference is that unlike a traditional TDR program, allowing developers to concentrate their affordable housing mitigation off- site on other properties would not necessarily reduce the impacts from development on the parcels from which the units were transferred. The program would be challenging to facilitate within the current code and draft amendments, particularly the proposed changes to the allowable floor areas by use type in the dimensional standards section of the Use Mix ordinance. With the cap on affordable residential floor area in commercial zones further reduced, it would not be possible to concentrate residential uses on specific properties. Also, the over-all floor area ratios for the CC (2:1) and C-1 (1.75:1) may not be sufficient to make purely affordable residential projects financially feasible in those zones, given the restriction proposed on the development of affordable housing credits in those zone. Should Council choose to pursue this concept, it would require revision of a number of proposed amendments to the code sections currently being considered by Council. AMENDMENT DETAILS: The Growth Management rewrites include a reformatting for the chapter to better coordinate and align certain sections. For instance, the Calculations section is brought towards the front of the Chapter, as all applicants need to reference this section when comtemplating a development proposal. Similarly, the process for allotment roll over is moved to the end of the Chapter as it is primarily used by staff and Council. 1 P370 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination – Ord. 31 (Growth Management), Series 2016 Page 4 of 5 A number of sections have been edited for clarity, and tables and terms have been relocated. Additionally, certain terms are defined, such as Growth Management Year, and FTE. This section is updated to allow all conceptual design related reviews to be combined with growth management. Currently all conceptual level reviews, with the exception of Conceptual Historic Preservation Review may be combined. This update adds the ability to combine GMQS reviews with Conceptual Historic Preservation Reviews. This section updates text to include 2012 AACP language and references. The AACP 2012 did not establish a population ceiling, so this section has been removed from the code section. Citing Page 23 of the AACP, “Unlike the 2000 AACP, this plan does not identify a recommended maximum population. This decision was not made lightly, but was based on several important conclusions. First, staff research showed that population calculations made prior to the 2000 AACP were flawed, and should not continue to be relied upon for planning purposes. Staff then conducted studies on population segments, such as the number of year-round residents, commuters, lodging visitors, second home visitors and others. The exercise of breaking population down into segments is a valuable way of illustrating important trends that can help the community in future decision-making.” The last update of Growth Management in 2007 included a review of existing development and subsequent development allotments. The existing development numbers are slated to be updated as part of this amendment using Assessor’s data, and the resultant available growth allotments for each development type will be updated. The current code limits growth of commercial development to 2%, lodging development to 1.5%, and free-market residential to 0.5% of the existing development. The proposed language includes the same growth rates. Given the AACP’s focus on lodging an increase in the lodging growth rate to 2% could be included if Council desires. These sections update text to require mitigation for existing commercial space when a project undergoes redevelopment. This would apply to projects that trigger demolition, or include a change in use. Historic properties are exempted in an effort to retain the existing incentives for preservation of these properties. The City Attorney’s office and consultants continue to evaluate the ability to include this provision in the code. Code language has been updated to include a larger 80% mitigation requirement for commercial and lodge development. Existing mitigation requirements for historic properties are retained. Lodge development currently includes a sliding scale of mitigation rates, which has been updated to reflect the increased mitigation. This section updates mitigation requirements for new free-market residential space. The language requires 30% mitigation for all free-market net livable space created. Currently the code only requires mitigation for the amount of free-market residential development located entirely above grade. This section is updated to state that the form of mitigation provided by a project is at the discretion of the review body. Currently the code allows an applicant to decide between on-site housing and the use of credits. This is the only area in this code section that allows an applicant to override an 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 P371 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination – Ord. 31 (Growth Management), Series 2016 Page 5 of 5 APCHA recommendation unilaterally. This ability is removed and places the decision on mitigation forms with P&Z and City Council after considering the recommendation from APCHA. The Chapter has been updated to include a commercial replacement requirement for all second tier space. The section references the sliding scale replacement requirements established in the Commercial Design Chapter. The existing section on Alley Stores has been updated to refer to all Second Tier Commercial Space. These spaces would be required to provide 60% mitigation (the current mitigation rate) and would be an administrative review in an effort to incentivize the development of these spaces. The code currently states that Alley Stores that have no access besides from an alley are exempted from affordable housing mitigation, which is retained in the update. This section updates the lodge/residential conversion rate. The code allows conversion between these uses at a 1 residential unit to 3 lodge units. This has been updated to only allow the conversion from residential to lodge units in an effort to dis-incentivize the conversion of lodging to residential use. LINKAGES AND AACP IMPLEMENTATION: The proposed ordinance is supported by the following 2012 AACP policies: Managing Growth for Community & Economic Sustainability VIII.2 Create certainty in zoning and the land use process. VII.2. Ensure that new development and redevelopment mitigates all reasonable, directly-related impacts. Overall, the changes to growth management support the other AACP-Land Use Code coordination goals by ensuring a review for second tier commercial replacement, and incentivizing the creation of new second tier commercial spaces. Additionally, the increase in base mitigation for commercial and lodging development from 60% to 80% ensures development is further mitigating its impacts. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): “I move to continue Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2016, to the January 9, 2017 Council meeting.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Staff Findings Exhibit B – Second Tier Space Related Code Sections 9 10 11 P372 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 1 of 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director Phillip Supino, Long-Range Planner Reilly Thimons, Planning Technician RE: Land Use Code Amendments – Public Hearing Parking and Transportation Impact Analysis Regulations – Ordinance No. 32, Series 2016 MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016 SUMMARY: This draft ordinance amends the Parking of the Land Use Code to create an integrated Parking and Mobility program designed to achieve Council’s complimentary parking and transportation demand management goals. The proposed code amendments coordinate the requirements of the Land Use Code with the policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan, as outlined in Council’s Top Ten Goals. Council had one question for staff at the November 14, 2016 public hearing regarding the proposed code amendments. That question is addressed in this memo. The memo also identifies changes made to the ordinance from the November 14th first reading draft, and provides additional information based on Council feedback and questions. To facilitate discussion, specific elements of the ordinances have been called out with a number in the left margin. Those numbers correspond to numbered sections in each ordinance memorandum. The numbers look like this: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of Ordinance No. 32, Series 2016, to January 9, 2017. SUMMARY The proposed parking and mobility amendments are designed to transform the City’s approach to off- street parking regulations and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) by combining LUC section 26.515, Off-Street Parking and 26.630, Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Combining these sections creates integrated parking and TDM regulations designed to simultaneously increase the availability of parking in commercial areas while decreasing demand for parking and associated vehicle trips. The combined regulations also ensure that development looks at its parking and transit impacts holistically and develops strategies to address all aspects of its impacts on the community. To satisfy this combined mobility and parking requirement, developers will have three, primary options: 1. Provide on-site parking. 2. Commit to on-site mobility amenities and/or TDM programs, beyond the minimum required for the project’s Transportation Impact Analysis. 1 P373 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 2 of 7 3. Contribute funding to the provision of public parking, mobility, and TDM programs. This is designed to generate direct provision of private amenities and programs, as well as funding for public amenities and programs. It also provides optimal levels of flexibility for private and public investments to respond to changes in parking demand and mobility opportunities, as modal options and preferences evolve. QUESTIONS FROM FIRST READING 1. Council requested greater clarity on where a potential project’s parking requirement is listed in the draft parking regulations. A fundamental change to City parking regulations proposed in the draft ordinance is the reformatting of parking requirements as parking-impact requirements. This new term, on page 5 of the ordinance, includes Table 26.515-1, which provides the standards by which a project’s parking-impact unit requirement is assessed. The parking impact is assessed similarly to how a project’s parking requirement would be assessed under the existing code, by calculating the net leasable area or number of units and multiplying that by the number of parking spaces required for the development type. For example, if a commercial development is proposed at 2,000 square feet of net leasable area, and the parking impact is assessed at one unit per 1,000, then that development’s parking impact unit requirement would be two (2)1. Under the proposed ordinance, that requirement could be met through a combination of parking spaces, cash-in-lieu, Transportation Demand Management and Multi-Modal Level of Service improvements. Additional details are provided below on how projects may satisfy their parking-impact unit requirements. AMENDMENT DETAILS Several sections of the Transportation and Parking Management Chapter have been rearranged to create a more cohesive narrative for applicants. Specifically these include: Applicability, Transportation Mitigation, Mobility Improvements (now called Parking Impact Requirements), and Procedures for Review. To further clarify and outline the new combined off-street parking and mobility regulations, additional background and explanatory text has been added to provide a clearer understanding to applicants of the new application process and mitigation options. Specifically, an introduction to the mobility plan describes in detail the TIA Guidelines process, and the two-tiered process which encourages TDM and MMLOS improvements together with parking and/or cash-in-lieu fees. A number of definitions were changed or added to support the combined off-street parking and mobility regulations and coordinate those regulations with other City regulations, standards and definitions. Definitions of note include: • Parking-Impact Unit – Responding to Council’s direction for greater clarity on parking requirements, mobility units have been renamed to parking-impact units where mitigation must be met through TDM measures, mobility improvements, parking improvements, and cash-in-lieu. Nelson/Nygaard have worked on a study that would justify an increase to the 1 Calculation as follows: 2,000 sq ft proposed / 1,000 per Parking Impact Unit = 2 Parking Impact Units Required 1 2 P374 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 3 of 7 cash-in-lie fee to $60,000. Staff and consultants will present options at the December 5th meeting outlining potential ways to apply this number in different zone districts. See Exhibit B for details on Nelson/Nygaard’s study. • Parking-Impact Requirement – The sum of a project’s parking-impact units. • Approved TDM and MMLOS Package – A proposal for TIA-exempt development2 that allows the substitution of one (1) parking-impact unit for a pre-approved TDM and MMLOS package that has been approved for a project’s proposed uses and floor area. The approved package concept was developed in coordination with the Directors of Transportation, Parking and Engineering as a means to streamline the compliance process and create parity between the various options for satisfying a parking-impact unit requirement. Each TDM/MMLOS package contains a suite of capital programs or projects that research and best practice have demonstrated will cost-effectively reduce vehicle travel and resulting parking demand. Rather than each applicant for every TIA-exempt project having to consult with the various departments on how to develop a customized, unique suite of improvements that meet their requirements under the code, the TDM/MMLOS packages provide: o An “off the shelf” pre-approved option for applicants to implement that are proven to reduce vehicle travel and resulting parking demand, and o Assurance to community members and the City that a project’s TDM / MMLOS proposal meets the City’s standards for the program and will accomplish the Council’s mobility goals. • Parking Space (Reserved, Accessory, Public, Priced, and Municipal) – These definitions create a distinction between the different types of parking improvement for the purposes of encouraging specific development outcomes where stand-alone parking dedicated only for the development’s uses/users is dis-incentivized and public, shared, and/or municipal parking are incentivized through a points system. A definition of Parking Maximums was added. This definition, along with table 26.515-1 creates the “soft maximum” ceiling for the number of off-street parking spaces provided by a development. The soft maximum is designed to achieve a number of complimentary goals, as follows: • The soft maximum acts as a disincentive to over-park a development with private parking dedicated only for the buildings uses/users that is of little public benefit due to its inaccessibility to the general public, and • Were a development to exceed the soft maximum, the City now has a tool to require that the development offset the negative impacts to the transportation system caused by the additional vehicle trips generated by the site as a result of the additional off-street parking. The options provided to development seeking to exceed the soft maximum are additional TDM improvements through the TIA process, payment of vehicle trip impact fees, or conversion of some or all of the off-street spaces as shared/public parking. The TIA-based option would ensure that multi- modal improvements in excess of those normally required would be installed and maintained on the 2 Certain small projects are exempt from the TIA requirements, including: projects that add no more than 2 lodge units, 500 sq ft of commercial space, 500 sq ft of essential public facility space, or 1 residential unit. 3 P375 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 4 of 7 property. The impact fee option would generate additional revenue to fund new or expanded TDM programs throughout the City. Finally, the shared /public parking option would increase the supply of publically-accessible, off-street parking (if the developer chose to develop some/all of the spaces in excess of the soft maximum as shared/public parking). All three of these potential outcomes would advance AACP policies and Council’s mobility and built environment goals. This section outlines applicability, shifting all applicability statements into a single section where all development and redevelopment activity is subject to the “Transportation and Parking Management” Chapter. All proposed development activities subject to the code section must submit a Mobility Plan as outlined in the section. This Section also formalizes that relationship between the TIA and Parking sections of the code and the existing TIA Guidelines for the provision of TDM and MMLOS mitigation measures. It introduces the Mobility Plan requirements, which include Transportation Mitigation and Parking-Impact Requirement assessments. This section, formerly titled Mobility Improvements has been updated in name only from the first reading version to more accurately identify that mitigation through TDM improvements, mobility improvements, parking provision, and cash-in-lieu result from a project’s projected parking impacts. The new terminology, Parking-Impact Requirement, is carried on throughout the rest of the draft ordinance. Under the current code, a redevelopment project may maintain an existing “deficit” of off-street parking. The draft ordinance eliminates the parking deficit provision and requires that redevelopment must meet the standards of section 26.515 regarding both off-street parking and mobility improvements. On a case-by-case basis, the elimination of this provision may not yield a net increase in off-street parking for individual development projects as under the current code. This is because the proposed new regulations are “mobility centric” rather than “parking centric” so they require a mix of both parking and mobility measures to be implemented in an integrated fashion. However, the expected result from the changes to this section would be that redevelopment projects would provide a net increase in new and expanded TDM and MMLOS measures that may not otherwise be present, as well as additional off-street parking capacity (either from making existing facilities more efficient and user friendly or, where appropriate, new parking facilities that are appropriately-sized, context-sensitive, and mixed-use). The minimum number of required parking-impact units establishes the baseline amount of overall parking, TDM, and MMLOS enhancements required for a project. Table 26.515-1 has been updated from first reading to reflect the new terminology and is titled “Parking-Impact Requirements.” The table identifies the minimum and maximum mobility improvement requirement for specific land uses inside and outside the Infill Area. Each section has been updated to illustrate that calculations are derived by Net Leasable Area, Dwelling Unit, Rooms, or Lodging Units, where Parking-Impact Units are used as the measurement to calculate Parking- Impact Requirements. Additionally, this table makes explicit that development outside of the Infill Area, will not have a “soft maximum” placed on their Parking-Impact Requirements. Soft maximums in the Infill Area work as a disincentive to ensure that projects in close proximity to transit, public parking, and bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure do not over park their site. Outside of the Infill Area, the City's planning and policy goals are not as significantly compromised by development projects that provide standalone dedicated parking to meet peak demand at their site. 7 4 5 6 P376 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 5 of 7 Footnote 1 in the Table allows for 100% of commercial parking requirements to be provided through cash-in-lieu in the infill area. The same provision applies to hotel and lodge uses in the CC and C1 zones. The third column, “Maximum Spaces Allowed,” sets the soft maximums. The soft maximum may be satisfied by cash-in-lieu for all applicable uses in all applicable zones. Single Family and Duplex dwelling units, as well as ADUs and Carriage Houses, would continue to require on-site parking spaces to meet their requirement. Section 25.515.050 establishes the process and standards by which projects will meet their Parking- Impact Requirements and the standards that apply to fulfilling their Parking-Impact Units, including the use of Additional TIA credits and Approved TDM and MMLOS Packages. Table 26.515-2 outlines the credit system through which applicants can meet their Parking-Impact Requirements. This system, based on the consultant’s analysis of downtown Aspen parking patterns, strengths and weaknesses, places an emphasis on more efficient (larger, shared, or publically- accessible) parking facilities and mobility improvements and disincentivizes inefficient (smaller, reserved) parking facilities. Inefficient parking facilities are assessed in negative numbers (i.e. Reserved Spaces are assessed at -0.25 Credit), while more efficient parking facilities are assessed in positive numbers (i.e. Public Spaces at 1 Credit). In order to satisfy its overall Parking-Impact Requirement, a development project must produce enough Credits (including cash-in-lieu) to bring their assessed Parking-Impact number to zero. Staff will present some options related to how parking is addressed within the CC and C-1 zone districts at the December 5th meeting. Table 26.515-3 identifies the Parking-Impact Requirements by Zone District. In the Commercial Core and Commercial-1 zones, an emphasis is placed on creating opportunities for second tier commercial spaces. Applicants in those zones are encouraged to provide either TIA credit, an approved TDM or MMLOS Package, or cash-in-lieu. On-site parking in these locations is capped at no more than 10% of the total required to ensure that the allowable building envelope is utilized efficiently to achieve the goal of facilitating second-tier spaces and impacts from the automobile are minimized to enhance the pedestrian-priority environments of these zones. The remaining Commercial Zones are allowed to provide off-street parking at a significantly higher rate, 60-100% of the total required, to ensure that essential businesses such as grocers have the opportunity to continue to provide parking to customers as part of potential future redevelopment. TIA Credits, and for TIA-exempt projects, TDM and MMLOS Packages have been reconfigured so that one additional TIA Credit or one approved TDM and MMLOS Package equals one Parking- Impact Unit. Projects are capped at being allowed to use one or two Credit or Package to satisfy one Parking-Impact Unit, depending on project location. This change differentiates projects that are TIA subject and TIA exempt, and it encourages both project types to satisfy their Parking-Impact Unit Requirement by providing alternative transportation improvements to reduce parking demand, in addition to providing off-street parking and/or cash-in-lieu to increase the efficiency and capacity of off-street parking in the Infill Area. . Through various development reviews and discussion, staff has identified the need for a clear definition in the code of a lock-off unit. This definition will allow staff to clearly assess the division of lodge units in projects with a lock-off format proposed. Accurately assessing the number of lock- off units in a project has implications for how the project is assessed in the Growth Management 8 10 9 11 P377 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 6 of 7 section of the code. Staff intends to add a definition of lock-off unit to the Definitions Ordinance for Council consideration at a hearing in January, 2017. A requirement prohibiting off-street parking on parcels adjacent to the Pedestrian Malls has been added. The economics of development along the Pedestrian Malls (including land costs and building height restrictions) make it unlikely that off-street parking would be developed along the Pedestrian Malls, and the pedestrian focus and historic development patterns of the malls would be undermined by the presence of off-street parking. In addition, Council has identified preserving the malls as a central element of preserving the historic character of downtown. This provision will ensure the preservation of the historic built environment and pedestrian experience on the Pedestrian Malls by prohibiting development projects from utilizing scarce land in these areas with off-street parking and thereby preventing parking access ramps and curb cuts across the pedestrian realm. The cash-in-lieu received from redevelopment projects on the Pedestrian Malls would offset the parking and mobility impacts of that development by making additional funds available for capital expenditures to allow the City implement new or expanded multi-modal programs in the Infill Area. Section 26.515.070 has been updated to include additional standards for parking stalls from the Engineering Department in order to provide clearer guidelines on the general measurements of parking stalls. The update includes a maximum longitudinal slope of 12% and a maximum cross slope of 5% for all parking areas. This section outlines standards for the development of shared and/or public off-street parking. Allowing projects to develop shared and/or public off-street parking facilities is a central policy to the overall parking amendments, because shared/public parking is an efficient and sustainable means to increase the overall efficiency and capacity of off-street parking available to the public. Using the ULI Shared Parking model, which is the industry standard for shared parking calculations, provides developers with the flexibility to more efficiently park multiple uses with different parking demand patterns on their property (e.g. an office use and a dining/drinking use). It simultaneously increases the availability of off-street parking for the visitors to and customers of that property and possibly the general public, depending on the configuration of parking and the shared parking agreement that will govern any shared parking facility. Defining the use of shared spaces is important to ensuring the new shared space requirements achieve their intent. The definitions in this code section establish the time such spaces shall be available to the public, how they are to be made available to the public, and where such spaces may be located to count toward development projects’ provision of shared, public parking. Based on Council direction, the use of cash-in-lieu funds has been further enumerated to ensure that those funds collected in lieu of mobility improvements or off-street parking spaces are dedicated to applications directly related to mobility and parking (including reducing parking demand or increasing the efficiency or capacity of the parking supply). LINKAGES The proposed ordinance is supported by the following 2012 AACP policies: Transportation 13 12 14 15 P378 VII.A. 12.5.16 Council Meeting AACP-LUC Coordination - Ord 32 (Parking and Mobility), Series 2016 Page 7 of 7 1. Use Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tools to accommodate additional trips (p. 35) 2. Continue to limit daily vehicle trips over the Castle Creek bridge to 1993 levels (p. 33), I.3. Actively promote public awareness of transit alternatives for visitors and second homeowners, including bus routes and the pedestrian/bicycle trail system. (p. 35) I.4. Maintain the reliability and improve the convenience of City of Aspen transit services. (p. 36) II.2. Expand and improve bicycle parking and storage in the UGB. (p. 35) II.3 Improve the convenience, safety and quality of experience for bicyclists and pedestrians (p. 35), III.3 Require development to mitigate for its transportation impacts. (p.36) V.1 Develop a strategic parking plan that manages the supply of parking and reduces the adverse impacts of the automobile. (p. 36) Parking has a significant impact on the character of the built environment and land use decisions. Current off-street parking requirements promote on-site mitigation for new development, which directly impacts height, massing, and commercial design outcomes, as well as maintains and incentive for the creation of inefficient, private parking facilities dedicated to a single building and its uses/users. The availability of parking facilitates economic activity downtown, but it also incentivizes vehicle trips that may otherwise be avoided through other multi-modal options that reduce parking demand as well as through more efficient shared/public parking facilities. The integrated regulatory approach outlined in the ordinance avoids the binary “either/or” for a “both/and” approach that will support economic activity, promote alternatives to driving, and help to ensure that off-street parking is right-sized for individual developments and the downtown as a whole. Staff therefore believes that this approach will help achieve Council’s goal of increasing the efficiency and sustainability of the City’s transportation system as well as support a number of Council’s goals for the AACP-LUC coordination process. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): “I move to continue Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2016, to the January 9, 2017 hearing.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Staff Findings Exhibit B – Cash-In-Lieu memo P379 VII.A. First Reading, Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 – Mountain View Plane Review December 5, 2016 Page 1 of 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director Phillip Supino, Long-Range Planner RE: Land Use Code Amendments – Public Hearing Mountain View Plane Review – Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016 SUMMARY: The proposed amendments to the Mountain View Planes section of the Land Use Code (LUC) are important to achieve Council’s goals and policy objectives to preserve and enhance protections of the downtown Aspen viewshed. The proposed amendments are designed to support the policy objectives approved by Council in Resolution #47, Series 2016. As with the other AACP-Land Use Code coordination ordinances, specific code sections discussed in this memo are identified by a number in the margin that looks like this: If the proposed ordinance is approved at first reading, staff will bring a finalized ordinance for second reading at the December 12, 2016 Council Meeting. If additional revisions are required, subsequent drafts may be considered at additional hearings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 to the December 12, 2016 Council meeting. SUMMARY In general, the proposed ordinance achieves Council’s goals for increasing protections for view planes while providing for reasonable, non-impactful development activities to occur in those areas where it will not undermine the integrity of a view plane. The code language attempts to strike an effective balance between preservation and flexibility to ensure that the downtown view shed is unimpeded by future development. The existing view planes are illustrated in plan view in Exhibit B and in panoramic picture view in Exhibit C. The draft ordinance strengthens the effect of the view plane regulations while adding significant flexibility to the administration of the regulations and their applicability in different areas of Aspen. Within each view plane, the foreground, midground and background are defined and mapped, and distinct regulations and review criteria are described for the three zones. Exceptions are established for development within the midground and background that would have no material impact on the integrity of view planes. The Wagner Park view plane is proposed to be expanded to capture more of the development within the foreground, increasing the level of protection for the view to 1 P380 VII.A. First Reading, Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 – Mountain View Plane Review December 5, 2016 Page 2 of 6 Independence Pass. The process by which a property may apply for an exception to the view plane standards is more clearly described. Language was also added to exempt certain small-scale development activities which would pose no threat to the integrity of a view plane AMENDMENT DETAILS This section ensures that the strongest possible protections for a given view plane apply to development where more than one view plane crosses above the property. There are a number of properties on the south end of town and at the base of Aspen Mountain where multiple view planes overlap. This section stipulates that the most restrictive standard applies to parcels in those areas. In response to Council direction, the proposed ordinance defines foreground, midground and background zones within a view plane. These definitions are designed to provide for greater flexibility in application and administration of the view plane regulations while ensuring that those properties most important to the preservation of a view plane are subject to the strictest standards. The boundaries for each zone within a given view plane are tied to the underlying street grid, with the boundary lines drawn on the right-of-way centerline between blocks to eliminate any confusion as to which properties fall in which zone. To provide for the strongest possible protection, no development into a view plane is permitted in the foreground zone of any view plane. The midground and background zones include differentiated review criteria, which allows for various exceptions and exemptions for development activities that will have little to no impact on the integrity of a view plane. Additionally, this section includes visual maps of each view plane to increase usability and readability of the section. The legal descriptions have been retained, but are included at the end of the code section (see note 10). Based on the direction provided at the November 11, 2016 Council work session, the Wagner Park view plane has been expanded to provide increased protection to views of Independence Pass. In order to limit the capturing of a large number of additional, primarily residential properties east of downtown Aspen in the expanded Wagner Park view plane, the reference point has been expanded to become a reference line (or series of points) that is approximately 69 feet long. The reference line, as shown on the map, widens the scope of the view plane over the foreground (where the highest level of protection is needed) while limiting its expanded width on the east end of town. This approach provides the highest level of protection to an expanded view plane in the foreground while limiting the impact to background parcels, the redevelopment of which not undermine the integrity of the view plane. The updated view plane is illustrated on the next page: 2 3 1 P381 VII.A. First Reading, Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 – Mountain View Plane Review December 5, 2016 Page 3 of 6 The proposed ordinance includes a list of exempt activities such as accessory features like fences. The list includes activities that would not be visible from a view plane reference point, nor would they create a impact to the integrity of the view plane. The list of exceptions helps to ensure that minor development activities and improvements to properties would not be caught-up in the view plane regulations, avoiding some unintended consequences identified in public comment during the AACP- LUC coordination process. The foreground regulations are drafted to allow a one story building that would be limited to a certain height, inclusive of rooftop appurtenances such as railings, stairs, or mechanical equipment. The regulations are written to allow minimal development in areas directly across the street from a view plane origination. Any development over the to-be established height would require a variance and public vote consistent with the City Charter. Staff requests additional feedback from Council on this approach. The proposed language also allows for discretion to be applied by the Commission when any proposed development infringes upon a view plane but is located behind a designated historic building which already infringes upon the same view plane from the reference point. The proposed regulations would strike a balance between preserving the integrity and existing condition of view planes while allowing for site specific, contextually appropriate development activities to occur without significant administrative burdens. This applies to the midground and background view plane areas. 5 6 4 P382 VII.A. First Reading, Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 – Mountain View Plane Review December 5, 2016 Page 4 of 6 The midground regulations provide some flexibility for development to occur within a view plane, however, that flexibility is specific and clearly articulated in the proposed code language. As in the current regulations, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve or deny an application regarding development determined to have a minimal impact on the view plane. The standards for minimal impact are specified as follows: 1. The infringement involves the lowest building height possible, taking into consideration the lot size, topography, and the reasonable use of the property; and 2. The building and roof materials, colors and form are designed to blend into the mountain landscape, when viewed from the reference point; an 3. The building incorporates exceptional or innovative building design features that comply with the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines, and respect adjacent buildings, and the mountain landscape; and 4. Buildings and building elevations are sited in one or a combination of the following locations: a. at the edge of the lot that is furthest from the reference point; and b. at the side edges of the lot or where the building allows for a view of the mountains from the reference point. 5. The development cannot be seen with the naked eye from the reference point or does not materially alter the observer’s ability to see the preserved view from the reference point. If development is not determined to have a minimal impact a variance from the criteria and a public vote consistent with the City Charter are required. The concept of minimal impact is applied in the background regulations as well, with additional design criteria in place to ensure that development in the background does not detract from the integrity of a view plane. Development activities in the middle ground that do not exceed the minimal impact standards are generally not visible from the reference point of a view plane because of the blocking effect of foreground buildings. However, the background may be visible because of changes in topography. The proposed regulations for background zone development are a hybrid of design requirements and minimal impact standards which ensures that, to the extent acceptable, development activities may be visible from a reference point but are screen and blended with the surrounding context. This section provides the standards and process by which variances to the view plane regulations may be granted. The authority to grant variances lies with the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, who applies the standards in Section 2 to judge whether the exception is warranted. Those standards are written to ensure that, to the extent possible, exceptions do not infringe upon or undermine the integrity of a view plane. The standards include factors such as lot conditions, neighborhood context, proximity of a view plane, the extent of view plane coverage over the property, architecture and design elements, building height, project visibility and building features. The legal description for each view plane has been updated to current industry standard for accuracy. The descriptions are tied to GPS coordinates, which reduces the subjectivity and margin of error that currently exists in determining the reference point for a given view plane. The new descriptions do 8 9 10 7 P383 VII.A. First Reading, Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 – Mountain View Plane Review December 5, 2016 Page 5 of 6 not alter the dimensions of extent of the existing view planes. They will be used in 2017 to formally monument each reference point with brass caps which meet Engineering Department standards. This process will further eliminate the margin of error in surveying view planes as part of development review processes. The procedures for review of all ESAs has been updated to reflect current code language. No substantive changes have been made to the section, but additional detail has been added to clarify the process for review. This section also clarifies that the Historic Preservation Commission conducts reviews for designated properties or properties in a historic district. The proposed ordinance updates the requirements for applications for a view plane review. The updated language requires more specific visual analysis. It requires applicants seeking an exception to the regulations to demonstrate the actual impact of their development activity on a view plane through the process of visual resource analysis. This code section identifies the content of a visual resource analysis submittal, including renderings, maps, photographs and other visual depictions. LINKAGES The proposed ordinance is supported by the following 2012 AACP policies: V.3. Ensure that the City Land Use Code results in development that reflects our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, density and a diversity of heights, in order to: • Create certainty in land development. • Prioritize maintaining our mountain views. • Protect our small town community character and historical heritage. • Limit consumption of energy and building materials. • Limit the burden on public infrastructure and ongoing public operating costs. • Reduce short and long-term job generation impacts, such as traffic congestion and demand for affordable housing. (Managing Growth, p. 26) IV.4 Zoning and land use processes should result in lodging development that is compatible and appropriate within the context of the neighborhood, in order to: • Create certainty in land development. • Prioritize maintain our mountain views. • Protect our existing lodges. • Protect our small town community character and historical heritage. • Limit consumption of energy and building materials. • Limit the burden on public infrastructure and ongoing public operating costs. • Reduce short- and long-term job generation impacts, such as traffic congestion and demand for affordable housing. (Managing Growth, p. 25) VIII.2 Create certainty in zoning and the land use process. (Managing Growth, p. 27) The amendments proposed in this ordinance work together with other ordinances to achieve Council’s goals for the AACP-LUC coordination process. Preserving the downtown Aspen viewshed maintains an essential component of Aspen’s community character. Views from downtown Aspen create vitality, pedestrian interest and a sense of place, which contribute to a successful local economy. The view plane regulations also preserve a built environment that is respectful of Aspen’s historic character. The proposed amendments achieve a wide range of AACP policies and are supported by the policies approved in Resolution #47, Series 2016. 12 11 P384 VII.A. First Reading, Ordinance No. 34, Series 2016 – Mountain View Plane Review December 5, 2016 Page 6 of 6 RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): “I move to approve Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2016, on First Reading.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Staff Findings Exhibit B – Mapped View Planes Exhibit C – Panoramic Photographs of View Planes P385 VII.A. Moratorium & Land Use Code Amendments Use Mix, Dimensions, Definitions, and Miscellaneous Ordinance 29 and 30 P386VII.A. City Council Goal “Reconcile the Land Use Code to the Aspen Area Community Plan so the Land Use Code delivers what the AACP promises.” P387VII.A. Moratorium Area All Commercial Zone Districts •Commercial Core (CC) •Commercial (C-1) •Neighborhood Commercial (NC) •Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) •Mixed-Use (MUP388 VII.A. Code Amendment Topics 1.Commercial Mix 2.Free -Market Residential Uses 3.Housing Mitigation 4.Off -Street Parking & Mobility 5.Commercial Design Standards & Public Amenity Spaces 6.View PlanesP389 VII.A. AACP Topics Work Together P390VII.A. Reading the Ordinances P391VII.A. Reading the Ordinances P392VII.A. Discussion Outline •Commercial Uses •Essential Business Overlay •Use Lists •Second Tier Spaces •Formula Business Regulations •Legacy Business Regulations •Residential Uses •Limit Free-Market Residential •DimensionsP393 VII.A. Discourage detrimental usesEncourage appropriate uses What are We trying to Achieve •High-end commercial uses •Free-market residential •Non-active uses •Locally serving businesses •Unique businesses 9P394 VII.A. Essential Business Overlay –NC and SCI •Incentive-based tool to promote desired uses •Voluntary, achieved through rezoning process •Does not change underlying zoning •Incentives in exchange for desired uses or commercial spaces •Setback reductions •Project-based internal FAR amendments •Maintains existing 35 foot height in SCI •Ability to include new or different usesP395 VII.A. Use Lists •Create generalized use categories for commercial zones •Allowed uses in matrix-format table for ease of use •Revise zone definitions and purposes •Ensure long-term development of desired use types •Refine the allowed uses in NC & SCI to focus on essential business typesP396 VII.A. Tailor Use List “Neighborhood commercial uses. Commercial establishments engaged in the selling or renting of consumer goods and merchandise to the general public and the rendering of services incidental to the sale or rental of such products. Neighborhood commercial uses shall include retail uses (with the exception of restaurants and nightclubs and bars), post office branch, artist studio, commercial kitchen, bakery, food market, neighborhood café, broadcasting facility, movie theaters and the sale or rental of motorcycles, motor-drive cycles and motorized bicycles as defined by Section 42-1-102, C.R.S, nonmotorized vehicles such as bicycles, clothing, sporting goods, jewelry, books, videos, prescription drugs, liquor, hardware, furniture and art and similar uses and activities.” The definition of neighborhood commercial also includes clothing and jewelry:P397VII.A. Second Tier Spaces •Symbiotic to incentives in EB Overlay and Commercial Design Guidelines •Define where they may be located •Basements, alleys, upper floors, mid -block public amenity spaces •Proportion of net-leasable area •Set aside for EB usesP398 VII.A. Second Tier Spaces Defined as: •Located in a basement, or •Located on the 2nd floor (but not including rooftop pedestrian amenities), or •Has its principal point of access along an alleyway or a mid-block pedestrian walkway, or •Has its front façade and principal entryway on a subgrade courtyard or an enclosed interior courtyard or arcade.P399VII.A. Second Tier Spaces •Required to maintain existing spaces in redevelopment. •New and redevelopment has a sliding scale of required second tier space Zoning District Second tier commercial space provided Minimum Maximum Commercial Core (CC)20%75% Commercial (C)25%75% Service Commercial Industrial (S/C/I)35%-- Neighborhood Commercial (NC)35%-- Mixed Use (MU)25%50%P400VII.A. Formula Business Regulations •Definition •Trademark, logo, service mark •Multiple businesses (typically 11-15) •Standard (“formula”) •Service / Merchandise •Décor •Business method •Architecture •Layout •Uniforms •Type of business •Retail •Restaurant •Fast food •Exemptions •Offices •Gas Stations •Grocers •BanksP401 VII.A. Communities with Chain Regulations Jurisdiction State Jurisdiction State Arcata CA Jersey City NJ Bainbridge Island WA lslamorada FL Barnstable MA McCall ID Benecia CA Nantucket MA Bristol RI Ogunquit ME Calistoga CA Pacific Grove CA Carmel-by-the-Sea (Carmel)CA Port Jefferson NY Chatham MA Port Townsend WA Chesapeake City MD San Francisco CA Concord MA San Juan Bautista CA Coronado CA Sanibel FL Dennis MA Sausalito CA Duck NC Solvang CA Fairfield CT York ME Fredricksburg TXP402 VII.A. Formula Business Regulation Options •Allow by Right or Prohibit •Conditional Use •Caps and Quotas •Performance and Design Standards •typically used in addition to options aboveP403 VII.A. Formula Business Regulation Considerations •Determine location for limitations •By Zone District •By Historic District •By building level •By street location (corner or mid-block) •Establish defensible review standards •Transition Provisions •Triggers for Applicability •Remodels •Expansion of existing spaces •Relocation of existing chain businessP404 VII.A. Recommendation •Regulate chains in downtown and historic districts •Commercial Core, C-1, MU on Main Street •Conditional Use Review for all building levels in the above zones •Planning and Zoning Commission level review •Captured through Business License Applications •Establish clear review criteria •Business Saturation •Community Character •Location within a blockP405 VII.A. Next Steps –December 5 •Public Hearing: •Ordinance 31, Series 2016 •Growth Management •Ordinance 32, Series 2016 •Parking & Mobility •Public Hearing: 1st Reading •Ordinance 34, Series 2016 •View Planes P406VII.A. Next Steps –December 12 •Public Hearing: •Ordinance 33, Series 2016 •Commercial Design Review & Guidelines •Ordinance 34, Series 2016 •View PlanesP407 VII.A. Questions?P408VII.A. Moratorium & Land Use Code Amendments Use Mix & Dimensions, Ordinance 29 Definitions & Miscellaneous, Ordinance 30 Growth Management, Ordinance 31P409 VII.A. Code Amendment Topics 1.Off -Street Parking & Mobility 2.Commercial Mix & Dimensions 3.Free -Market Residential Uses 4.Housing Mitigation 5.Commercial Design Standards & Public Amenity Spaces 6.View PlanesP410 VII.A. COMMERCIAL USE MIX COMMERCIAL USE MIXP411 VII.A. AACP POLICIES Managing Growth I.4. Identify opportunities to reduce the “boom-bust” nature of the economy. (Managing Growth p. 24) Managing Growth V.1. Encourage a commercial use mix that is balanced, diverse and vital and meets the needs of the year-round residents and visitors. (Managing Growth p. 26) Managing Growth V.2. Facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs. (Managing Growth p. 26) COMMERCIAL USE MIXP412 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Preserve commercial areas for predominantly commercial uses COMMERCIAL USE MIX MOST IMPORTANT FUNCTION OF COMMERCIAL AREAS Public Outreach Report, p. 13P413 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Provide spaces for active, vital businesses •Provide publically accessible spaces •Commercial opportunities for locals and visitors COMMERCIAL USE MIX FUNCTION OF COMMERCIAL AREAS Public Outreach Report, p. 14P414 VII.A. COMMERCIAL USE MIX Policy Direction To Date –Use Mix Incentive-based Do not define Locally Serving Business Create Second Tier Spaces Develop Commercial Replacement standards Revise use tables Do not pursue Legacy Business Program Discuss Chain Regulations post-moratoriumP415 VII.A. Essential Business Overlay •Tool to promote desired uses in NC & SCI •Planned Development “Light” process •Achieved through voluntary rezoning process •Shorter process than PD •Does not change underlying zoning •Limit to areas north of Main Street? COMMERCIAL USE MIXP416 VII.A. Essential Business Overlay •Incentives in exchange for desired uses or commercial spaces •Setback reductions •Project-based internal FAR amendments •Maintains existing 35 foot height in SCI •Ability to include new or different uses •Other possible incentives? •Ability to include new or different uses •Bulk and mass bonuses COMMERCIAL USE MIXP417 VII.A. Use Lists •Create generalized use categories for commercial zones •Allowed uses in matrix-format table for ease of use •Revise zone definitions and purposes •Ensure long-term development of desired use types •Refine the allowed uses in NC & SCI to focus on essential business types USE MIXP418 VII.A. Tailor Use List “Neighborhood commercial uses. Commercial establishments engaged in the selling or renting of consumer goods and merchandise to the general public and the rendering of services incidental to the sale or rental of such products. Neighborhood commercial uses shall include retail uses (with the exception of restaurants and nightclubs and bars), post office branch, artist studio, commercial kitchen, bakery, food market, neighborhood café, broadcasting facility, movie theaters and the sale or rental of motorcycles, motor-drive cycles and motorized bicycles as defined by Section 42-1-102, C.R.S, nonmotorized vehicles such as bicycles, clothing, sporting goods, jewelry, books, videos, prescription drugs, liquor, hardware, furniture and art and similar uses and activities.” “Neighborhood commercial uses. Commercial establishments engaged in the selling or renting of consumer goods and merchandise to the general public and the rendering of services incidental to the sale or rental of such products. Neighborhood commercial uses shall include retail uses (with the exception of restaurants and nightclubs and bars), post office branch, artist studio, commercial kitchen, bakery, food market, neighborhood café, broadcasting facility, movie theaters and the sale or rental of motorcycles, motor-drive cycles and motorized bicycles as defined by Section 42-1-102, C.R.S, nonmotorized vehicles such as bicycles, clothing, sporting goods, jewelry, books, videos, prescription drugs, liquor, hardware, furniture and art and similar uses and activities.” The definition of neighborhood commercial also includes clothing and jewelry: The definition of neighborhood commercial also includes clothing and jewelry: USE MIXP419 VII.A. Second Tier Spaces •Symbiotic to incentives in EB Overlay and Commercial Design Guidelines •Define where they may be located •Basements, alleys, upper floors, mid -block public amenity spaces •Proportion of net-leasable area •Set aside for EB uses COMMERCIAL USE MIXP420 VII.A. Second Tier Spaces Defined as: •Located in a basement, or •Located on the 2 nd floor (but not including rooftop pedestrian amenities), or •Has its principal point of access along an alleyway or a mid-block pedestrian walkway, or •Has its front façade and principal entryway on a subgrade courtyard or an enclosed interior courtyard or arcade. COMMERCIAL USE MIXP421 VII.A. Second Tier Spaces •Required to maintain existing spaces in redevelopment. •New and redevelopment has a sliding scale of required second tier space Zoning District Second tier commercial space provided Minimum Maximum Commercial Core (CC)20%75% Commercial (C)25%75% Service Commercial Industrial (S/C/I) 35%-- Neighborhood Commercial (NC)35%-- Mixed Use (MU)25%50% COMMERCIAL USE MIXP422 VII.A. Key Questions •Any changes to direction on EBO? •Any changes to sliding scale for second tier spaces? COMMERCIAL USE MIXP423 VII.A. RESIDENTIAL USE MIX RESIDENTIAL USE MIXP424 VII.A. AACP POLICIES Housing II.1. “The housing inventory should bolster our socioeconomic diversity.” (Housing, p. 41) Housing IV.2. “All affordable housing must be located within the urban growth boundary.” (Housing, p. 42) Housing IV.3. “On-site housing mitigation is preferred.” (Housing, p. 42) Housing IV.5. “The design of new affordable housing should optimize density while demonstrating compatibility with the massing, scale and character of the neighborhood.” (Housing, p. 42) RESIDENTIAL USE MIXP425 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Housing adds vitality to downtown •Some affordable housing is appropriate in commercial zones RESIDENTIAL USE MIX RESIDANTIAL USE IN COMMERCIAL AREAS Public Outreach Report, p. 15P426 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Eliminate free-market residential from commercial zones •Keep Main Street residential character RESIDENTIAL USE MIX Strongly Agree 18 Agree 2 Neutral 3 Disagree 4 Strongly Disagree 5 I Don’t Know 4 Total Responses 36 “I believe the size of residential units in commercial buildings negatively impact Aspen’s downtown commercial areas:” Public Outreach Report, Appendix DP427 VII.A. Residential Uses •Preserve commercial areas for predominantly commercial uses •Allow for limited on -site affordable housing mitigation •Eliminate new free-market housing CC C1 MU SCI NC FREE MARKET X X O X X RESIDENT-OCCUPIED X X O X X AFFORDABLE HOUSING O O O O O RESIDENTIAL USE MIXP428 VII.A. Affordable Housing Details CC C1 MU SCI NC Permitted Use O O O O O Generate Credits X X O X X Maximum FAR 0.75:1 0.75:1 1:1 –1.25-1 1:1 –1.5-1 0.5:1 0.5:1 RESIDENTIAL USE MIXP429 VII.A. Key Questions •Any changes to ability to create Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit? •Any changes to locations for affordable or free-market housing? RESIDENTIAL USE MIXP430 VII.A. DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSP431 VII.A. AACP POLICIES Managing Growth I.6. “Establish lower maximum building heights to maintain Aspen’s small town character.” (Managing Growth, p. 24) Managing Growth V.3. “…development that reflects our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, density and a diversity of heights…(Managing Growth, p. 26) Historic Preservation II.1. …support the historic integrity of designated structures… ensure compatibility with the surrounding context in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, height and form. (Historic Preservation p. 56) DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSP432 VII.A. COUNCIL DIRECTION Reduce maximum floor area ratios (FAR) Match adjusted building height maximums Provide for appropriate scale development Allow for development of second tier spaces Reduce building heights 28 foot maximum on both sides of the street No dimensional bonuses for specific uses Maintain 35 foot maximum in SCI zone Update internal floor area ratios to reflect desired uses FAR allowances for individual use types (residential, lodging, commercial, etc.) Remove floor area allowances for undesirable uses DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSP433 VII.A. Proposed Dimensions CC C-1 MU NC SCI Height (Feet)28 28 28 28 35 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSP434 VII.A. Proposed Dimensions CC C-1 MU NC SCI Maximum Total FAR 2:1 1.75:1 1:1, Historic Dist: may be increased to 1.25:1 by Special Review Non-Historic: may be increased to 1.5:1 1.5:1 2.25:1 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSP435 VII.A. Proposed Dimensions CC C-1 MU NC SCI Commercial FAR 2:1 1.75:1 Hist. District: 1:1, increased to 1.25:1 by Special Review Non-Hist. District: 1:1, increased to 1:1.5 by Special Review 1.5:1 1.5:1; 0.25:1 for primary care offices if 0.75:1 of other commercial uses on same parcel Arts/Civic FAR 2:1 1.75:1 1:1 - Lodging FAR 0.5:1; 1.5:1 w/ sm. units 0.5:1; 1.5:1 w/ sm. units 0.75:1, may be increased to 1:1 by Special Review -- AH Res. FAR 0.75:1; cannot create housing credits 0.75:1; cannot create housing credits Limited to cumulative FAR 0.5:1; cannot create housing credits 0.5:1; cannot create housing credits FM Res. FAR Limited to existing FAR Limited to existing FAR Mixed Use Building: Limited to existing FAR Stand-alone building: 0.5:1; 0.75:1 w/ equal amounts FM & AH Limited to existing FAR Limited to existing FARP436 VII.A. Key Questions •Any changes to proposed dimensions? DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSP437 VII.A. AACP-LUC COORDINATION UPDATE DECEMBER 5, 2016 Growth Management P438VII.A. AACP POLICIES Managing Growth VII.2. “Ensure that new development and redevelopment mitigates all reasonable, directly-related impacts.” (Managing Growth, p. 27) GROWTH MANAGEMENTP439 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Public supports affordable housing •On-site mitigation is appropriate •Development should mitigate for its impacts GROWTH MANAGEMENTP440 VII.A. GMQS Amendments Increase Commercial AH Mitigation Existing rate = 60% New rate = 80% (with reduction incentives) Require mitigation for existing commercial spaces Assessed upon redevelopment Base 30% Residential Mitigation on Net-Livable Area Current code exempts sub-grade spaces from mitigation GROWTH MANAGEMENTP441 VII.A. GMQS Amendments Require retention and development of 2ND Tier Space Reduced 60% mitigation rate for 2nd Tier Spaces Redevelopment would have to retain existing net 2nd Tier Space square footage Empower P&Z/HPC/Council to decide how AH is mitigated Presently Applicants can decide; over-ride APCHA recommendation Proposed language would place the decision with the review body GROWTH MANAGEMENTP442 VII.A. Key Questions •Any changes to proposed dimensions? GROWTH MANAGEMENTP443 VII.A. AACP-LUC COORDINATION UPDATE DECEMBER 5, 2016 NEXT STEPS December 12th View Planes (Ord. 34) 2nd Reading Commercial Design Review (Ord. 33) 1st Reading Commercial Design Guidelines (Ord. 33) 1st Reading January 9th Use Mix (Ord. 29) 2nd Reading Misc. & Definitions (Ord. 30) 2nd Reading Growth Management (Ord. 31) 2nd Reading January 10th Continued 2nd Readings January 23rd Parking and Mobility (Ord. 32) 2nd Reading Commercial Design (Ord. 33) 2nd Reading View Planes (Ord. 34) 2nd Reading January 24th Anticipated Final AdoptionP444 VII.A. ? AACP-LUC COORDINATION UPDATE DECEMBER 5, 2016P445 VII.A. Moratorium & Land Use Code Amendments Use Mix & Dimensions, Ordinance 29 Definitions & Miscellaneous, Ordinance 30 Growth Management, Ordinance 31 Parking & Mobility, Ordinance 32 View Planes, Ordinance 34P446 VII.A. City Council Goal •“Reconcile the Land Use Code to the Aspen Area Community Plan so the Land Use Code delivers what the AACP promises.” P447VII.A. AACP Topics Work Together P448VII.A. Overall Policy Direction 1.Provide a mix of uses in the City’s commercial districts that supports locally serving and unique businesses; 2.Ensure development mitigates its reasonably related impacts. 3.Implement the City’s sustainability and mobility priorities in the off- street parking regulations; 4.Update the Commercial Design Guidelines to reflect development that is compatible with Aspen’s historic development pattern; 5.Update the Mountain View Plane regulations to simply and clarify their administration; and AACP-LUC COORDINATION P449VII.A. Code Amendment Topics 1.Off -Street Parking & Mobility 2.Commercial Mix & Dimensions 3.Free -Market Residential Uses 4.Housing Mitigation 5.Commercial Design Standards & Public Amenity Spaces 6.View PlanesP450 VII.A. Reading the Ordinances P451VII.A. Reading the Ordinances P452VII.A. Work Session Outline Parking and Mobility Commercial & Residential Use Mix Dimensional Standards Miscellaneous Regulations Growth Management AACP-LUC COORDINATION UPDATE DECEMBER 5, 2016P453VII.A. AACP POLICIES Transportation 1. “Use Transportation Demand Management tools to accommodate additional person trips in the Aspen Area.” Transportation I.4. “Maintain the reliability and improve the convenience of City of Aspen transit services.” Transportation II.2. “Expand and improve bicycle parking and storage in the Urban Growth Boundary.” Transportation II.3. “Improve the convenience, safety, and quality of experience for bicyclists and pedestrians on streets and trails.” Transportation III.3. “Require development to mitigate for its transportation impacts.” Transportation V.1. “Develop a strategic parking plan that manages the supply of parking and reduces the adverse impacts of the automobile.” PARKING & MOBILITYP454 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Proximity of parking to destination is a barrier to using public parking •Most use a mix of parking and mobility options PARKING DISTRIBUTION Public Outreach Report, p. 16 PARKING & MOBILITYP455 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Cost, access and availability “drive” parking decisions •Automobile needs and pedestrian safety are barriers to using alternative modes FACTORS IN PARKING CHOICE Public Outreach Report, p. 16 PARKING & MOBILITYP456 VII.A. WHAT WE HEARD •Sub-grade garages are preferred over every other type of parking facility PARKING FACILITY PREFERENCES Public Outreach Report, p. 16 PARKING & MOBILITYP457 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 1. Combined mobility and parking 2. Eliminate carried parking deficits 3. Parking maximums 4. Encourage Shared and/or public parking 5. Parking Impact Requirements by Zone District 7. Updated cash-in-lieu rate PARKING & MOBILITYP458 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 1.Combined mobility and parking •Current regulations treat mobility and parking separately •Counterproductive to City policies •Removed duplication for integrated approach •TIA and Parking -Impact Units work together to mitigate project mobility demand (Table 26.515-1) PARKING & MOBILITYP459 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 2.Eliminated carried parking deficits •Loophole in current code •Ensures parity between new projects and redevelopment •Increases mitigation of impacts from redevelopment PARKING & MOBILITYP460 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 3.Parking maximums •Currently no maximum amount of parking for projects •Ensures right-sized on-site parking facilities •Incentivizes parking to be publically accessible, shared •Leverages existing parking to meet district-wide demands •Assess fee for inefficient private parking above maximum PARKING & MOBILITYP461 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 4.Encourage Shared Parking •Current code discourages provision of shared parking •Leverage parking maximums to incentivize sharing excess supply when not otherwise in use •Flexible credit system allows for developers to design optimal parking format (Table 26.515-2) •New focus on district mobility needs, not project-specific PARKING & MOBILITYP462 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 5.Parking-Impact Requirements by Zone District (Table 26.515-3) •Current code is one-size-fits-all •Tailored approach ensures the right balance of TDM, parking and cash-in-lieu for each project •Flexibility for staff and developers to create parking and TDM solution that best fits the project PARKING & MOBILITYP463 VII.A. Parking: Key Changes 5.Updated cash-in-lieu rate •Reflects 2016 development costs •Current fee-structure based on 2005 analysis •Provides developers with additional option to mitigate impacts •District-based approach ensures parking where we need it and other modes where we don’t PARKING & MOBILITYP464 VII.A. Step-by-step application process P465VII.A. PARKING & MOBILITY Crystal Palace Commercial Net Leasable Area (NLA): 6,207 Sq/ft Lodging: 8,000 Sq/ft Lodge Units Proposed: 16 Zone District: Commercial Core (CC) Current Parking: 3 spaces on site (10.36 deficit)P466VII.A. PARKING & MOBILITY Sky Hotel Commercial Net Leasable Area (NLA): 3,480 Sq/ft Lodge Units: 104 units Zone District: Lodge Proposed Parking: 66.5 spaces (54 subgrade, 12.5 at grade)P467VII.A. PARKING & MOBILITY City Market Commercial Net Leasable Area(NLA): 12,000 Sq/ft Zone District: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Current Parking: 30 spacesP468 VII.A. Cash-in-lieu Assessment Districts *Preliminary proposed fee structure. Final proposal contingent upon further analysis following adoption of Ordinance No. 32,Series 2016P469 VII.A. Key Policy Questions for Council 1.Does Council support the integration of parking and mobility into Parking-Impact Units? 2.Should the parking code incentivize shared and public parking over private parking? 3.Should the ratios of parking, mobility improvements, and/or cash -in-lieu be tailored for different zone districts? 4.Does Council support increasing the cash -in-lieu rate to fully and fairly mitigate for shared parking and increased multi-modal improvements? 5.Any other key policy questions? PARKING & MOBILITYP470 VII.A. AACP-LUC COORDINATION UPDATE December 12, 2016 Council Meeting P471VII.A. AACP-LUC COORDINATION UPDATE COMMERCIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES P472VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Commercial Design in the AACP Development should “…reflect our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, density and diversity of heights…” (Growth Management Policy V.3)P473VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Character Areas Shapes the “box” Zone Districts Defines the “box” Basic lotP474 VII.A. ZONING VS DESIGN GUIDELINES COMMERCIAL DESIGNP475 VII.A. Previous Council Direction: •Overall design approach –Strictest in the Core, flexibility introduced outside •Revise the Character Area map –Better align boundaries to architectural character areas •Establish/Revise Character Area themes –Provide clear definition for four character areas •Commercial Core/Commercial Area updates –Reinforce historic character in Core •Public Amenity: off-site/cash-in-lieu –Continue to allow off-site and cash-in-lieu •Public Amenity: public accessibility –Create meaningful, accessible spaces Next StepsP476 VII.A. Key Topics to cover tonight: •General Changes •Pedestrian Amenity •Character Areas •Key Questions COMMERCIAL DESIGNP477 VII.A. New Format COMMERCIAL DESIGNP478 VII.A. Pedestrian Amenity Options •Current •On-site •Off-site •Cash-in-lieu •Alternative •Proposed •Street level •Upper level •Subgrade Courtyard •Midblock Walkway •Pedestrian Mall •Enclosed Interior Courtyard •Off-site COMMERCIAL DESIGNP479 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity -Requirement P480VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity –Street Level P481VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity –Upper Level P482VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity –Subgrade Courtyard P483VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity –Midblock Walkway P484VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity –Off -site/Courtyard/Cash/Malls P485VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Pedestrian Amenity –Covered Walkway (Off-site)P486VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP487 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP488 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP489 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP490 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP491 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP492 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP493 VII.A. Key Questions -Height •Zone Districts Proposed to be limited to 28 feet. Design Guidelines call for 2 foot variation in heights between buildings. •Does Council support a height allowance to enable variation only for key building elements? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP494 VII.A. Key Questions -Height •Zone Districts proposed to be limited to 28 feet. Height is measured to bottom of subgrade courtyards, which could be a dis-incentive for these “second-tier” commercial spaces. •Does Council support changing how height is measured for these elements? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP495 VII.A. Key Questions -Height •Zone Districts proposed to be limited to 28 feet. Sloped Sites (Aspen Core) •Does Council support changing how height is measured for sloped sites? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP496 VII.A. Key Questions –Chamfer Corners •Guidelines will now call out Chamfer corners as potential design option for corner lots. •Does Council support allowing chamfer corners in more areas? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP497 VII.A. Key Questions –Pedestrian Amenity •If a project proposes street level pedestrian amenity, the Guidelines will now call for a minimum of 1/3 of the required amount to be built at street level. •Does Council support having a minimum requirement? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP498 VII.A. Key Questions –Pedestrian Amenity •Second floor deck spaces are allowed to meet pedestrian amenity requirements. •Does Council support seeing the spaces or having them “hidden” by a parapet or other design element? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP499 VII.A. Key Questions –General •Any other comments or changes to the draft document? COMMERCIAL DESIGNP500 VII.A. Up Next –View Planes •Three development scenarios will be presented in detail on January 9 COMMERCIAL DESIGNP501 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Case Study Lot –Commercial Core P502VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Basic Zoning Allowance P503VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Mass, Scale, Height P504VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Alley, Parking, Service Areas P505VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN First Floor Elements P506VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGN Details & Materials P507VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP508 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP509 VII.A. COMMERCIAL DESIGNP510 VII.A. View Planes AACP-LUC COORDINATION DECEMBER 12, 2016P511VII.A. Council Direction •Strengthen View Plane protections •Distinguish between fore-, mid-, and background •Tie to the 8040’ Greenline •Expand the Wagner Park view plane •Improve ease of use and compliance •Modernize and simplify code language VIEW PLANESP512 VII.A. Strengthen Protections •Regulations expanded to include properties at least 50% within a view plane •Most restrictive view plane standard applies VIEW PLANES Wheeler View Plane towards Shadow Mountain P513VII.A. Fore-, Mid-and Background •Distinguish between the impacts and treatment of development at different distances. VIEW PLANES Wheeler Opera House –Fore-, Mid-and Background P514VII.A. 8040’ Greenline •Tie the boundary of each view plane to the 8040’ Greenline development standards VIEW PLANES Cooper Avenue View Plane & the 8040’ Greenline P515VII.A. Expanded Wagner Park •Reference point is now 69’ reference line •Captured more foreground •Limited effect on background •Increased protection of Independence Pass view VIEW PLANES New Wagner Park View Plane 69’ wide reference point P516VII.A. VIEW PLANES Existing Wagner Park View Plane original reference point P517VII.A. Review Process •P&Z or HPC review of infringements OR •Administrative Review for Exemptions and Exceptions •Strict criteria •Variances subject to Ref 1 •Require P&Z approval VIEW PLANES APPLICATION ADMINISTRATIVE or BOARD REVIEW ADMINISTATIVE DETERMINATION P&Z/HPC REVIEW APPROVAL or DENIAL VARIANCE = REF 1 APPROVAL or DENIAL DETERMINE APPLICABILITY (Fore-, mid-, background)P518VII.A. Foreground Criteria *Applies if a development proposal infringes on a view plane •“No mountain view plane shall be infringed” •No exemptions or exceptions apply •Properties restricted by view plane may build to one story •All variances subject to Ref 1 VIEW PLANES Main Street View Plane Foreground P519VII.A. Max Building Height Foreground Only Ground Floor = 13 feet Roof/Mechanical= 2 feet 15 feet VIEW PLANES Wheeler Opera House View Plane -Popcorn Wagon &Grey Lady P520VII.A. Midground Criteria *Applies if a development proposal infringes on a view plane •P&Z exemption for buildings blocked by historic properties •P&Z exemption for proposals with minimal impact •Lowest possible height •Blend with surroundings •Responsive design •Building placement •Invisible from reference point •Reduces existing infringement VIEW PLANES Courthouse A View Plane -Midground P521VII.A. Background Criteria *Applies if a development proposal infringes on a view plane •P&Z exemption for buildings blocked by historic properties •P&Z exemption for proposals with minimal impact •Invisible from reference point •Reduces existing infringement •Design standards •Mass and scale •Limited grading •Maintain open space •Materials and landscaping VIEW PLANES Glory Hole Park View Plane -Background P522VII.A. Minimal Impact –Mid-& Background Only •lowest building height possible •blend into the mountain landscape •building incorporates exceptional or innovative building design •sited at the edge of the lot that is furthest from the reference point; and •sited to allow for a view of the mountains from the reference point •cannot be seen with the naked eye from the reference point; or •does not materially alter the observer’s ability to see the preserved view from the reference point VIEW PLANES Courthouse View Plane P523VII.A. Exemptions •Administrative determination •Limited to mid-,and background •No foreground exemptions •Specific features and elements exempted with specified criteria Exceptions •Administrative determination •Granted based on strict criteria (26.435.050.B.3) •Only Accessory Structures or Attached Building Features •Must be constructed to lowest practical height •May not be visible from reference point VIEW PLANES Examples P524VII.A. Legal Descriptions •Updated with GPS coordinates •Moved to back of code section •Maps are the primary means of conveying view plane extents •Legals used by professionals VIEW PLANES Cooper Avenue View Plane Description Cooper Avenue:There is hereby established a view plane originating on the northerly side of Cooper Avenue easterly of Galena Street above which plane no land use or building shall project. The Cooper Avenue Reference Point bears S01°09'30"E a distance of 576.72 from GPS-5 of the City of Aspen GPS Control Mounumentation 2009, a Brass Cap found in a Survey Monument Box at the intersection of South Galena Street and East Hopkins Avenue, with all bearings being relative to S74°14’01”E between said GPS-5 and GPS-4 of the City of Aspen GPS Control Mounumentation 2009, a Brass Cap found in a Survey Monument Box at the intersection of South West End Street and East Hopkins Street. The elevation of said reference point is 7,926.75, NAVD88 Datum… P525VII.A. VIEW PLANES Key Questions 1.Does Council support the definition of minimal impact? 2.Does the approach to fore -, mid-and background allow for the flexibility requested by Council at the 11.2.16 site visit? 3.Does Council support the 15 foot maximum height and no exemptions for one-story, foreground buildings? 4.Does Council support the expanded Wagner Park view plane? 5.Any other questions?P526VII.A. 26.412.080. Second Tier Commercial Space The Aspen Area Community Plan establishes policies to encourage a balanced, diverse and vital commercial use mix that meets the needs of the year-round residents and visitors, and to facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs. These design standards ensure no net-loss of existing “second tier” space in commercial zones, allows for the redevelopment of commercial properties, maintains a meaningful ratio of commercial space that serves the day to day needs of residents and visitors, and allows for creative designs that add variety and interest to the City’s commercial areas. A. Applicability. 1. Development or redevelopment. This section applies to all new development and redevelopment in the CC, C-1, S/C/I, NC, and MU districts. Proposals that are 100% lodge projects shall be exempted from this requirement. 2. Second Tier Commercial Space. For purposes of this section, “second tier commercial space” means net leasable area that is reserved for and used for commercial uses (other than storage, and that: • Is located in a basement, or • Is located above the ground floor (but not including rooftop pedestrian amenities), or • Has its principal point of access along an alleyway or a mid-block pedestrian amenity, or • Has its front façade and principal entryway on a subgrade courtyard or an enclosed interior courtyard or arcade. Measurement of the space shall be pursuant to Section 26.575.020.I, Measurement of Net Leasable Area and Net Livable Area. B. Requirement. 1. The following minimum and maximum net leasable area shall be designed as second tier commercial space: Table 26.412.100-1 Zoning District Second tier commercial space provided1 Minimum Maximum2 Commercial Core (CC) 20% 75% Commercial (C) 25% 75% Service Commercial Industrial (S/C/I) 35% -- Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 35% -- Mixed Use (MU) 25% 50% 1 Numbers are for discussion only. 2 For discussion. The first floor provides a natural upper limit to the percent of second-tier commercial space. P527 VII.A. 2. The redevelopment of any building that includes second tier commercial space shall provide the following amount of second tier commercial space: a. If the existing second tier commercial space for the building subject to redevelopment is less than the amount prescribed by Table 26.412.100-2 above, the redevelopment shall include the second tier commercial space required by Table 26.412.100-3. a. If the existing second tier commercial space for the building subject to redevelopment is more than the amount prescribed by Table 26.412.100-4 above, the redevelopment shall preserve the existing amount of second tier commercial space instead of complying with the above standard. b. Pedestrian amenity is encouraged to provide access to second tier commercial spaces within a development. This access may be provided via a mid-block walkway accessing commercial space off the primary street frontage, a sub-grade courtyard, an internal enclosed courtyard, or access to upper level commercial areas. C. Reduction of requirement. The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a reduction in the required second tier commercial space pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Chapter 26.304.060 and Section 26.412.040. Reduction requests shall be combined with Growth Management Reviews required pursuant to Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. One of the following criteria shall be met: 1. Requirement met on another property: a. Property owners or applicants for development approval of at least one other lot or parcel agree to provide second tier commercial space in an amount that offsets the shortfall in required second tier commercial space on the property subject to the application for development or redevelopment; and b. All of the property owners enter into an enforceable development agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. The agreement shall provide assurances that the required second tier commercial space will be developed and ready for occupancy prior to the occupancy of the property that is authorized to have a shortfall and remedies if the space is not ready when the space on the subject property is ready for occupancy. 1. Hardship. If a sufficient site-specific hardship is present on the property preventing the provision of some portion of the total required. P528 VII.A. TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director RE: Election of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson MEETING DATE: January 3, 2017 At the first meeting of the year, the Planning and Zoning Commission is tasked with electing a Chair and Vice-Chair. The appointment is for one year and currently elected members can be re- elected. RECOMMENDED MOTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission may use this motion “I move to make a recommendation to elect ____________, as chairperson and _______________as vice-chairperson of the Planning and Zoning Commission for 2017.” P529 VII.B. RESOLUTION NO. ___ Series of 2017 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission is required to elect a chairperson and vice- chairperson as outlined in Section 26.212.030, Membership-Appointment, removal, terms and vacancies of the land use code; and WHEREAS, the term of each position is for one (1) year; and WHEREAS, the commission voted to elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson on January 3, 2017; and WHEREAS, __________________ was elected chairperson and _________________ was elected vice-chairperson; and WHEREAS, both positions shall expire on January 2, 2018; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of Aspen, Colorado, by this resolution that _______________be appointed as chairperson and ___________________ be appointed as vice-chairperson. DATED: January 3, 2017 _________________________ Keith Goode, Chair ATTEST:__________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager P530 VII.B.