Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.041-00RESOLUTION NO. 41 (SERIES OF 2000) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE ASPEN GOLF' AND TENNIS CLUB/TRUSCOTT HOUSING PROPOSED AT THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, applicant, for a Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval for redevelopment o£the Aspen Golf Course parking lot and Truscott Affordable Housing to include additional affordable housing and recreational facilities on land currently described as Lot #1 and Lot #2 of the Aspen Golf Course Subdivision, parcel numbers 2735-111-09-001 &2735-111-09-702, including land within said Subdivision described as "golf course support area;" and, WHEREAS, the application was referred to the relevant referral agencies including the Fire Marshall, Colorado Department of Transportation, USWEST Communications, the Pitkin County Community Development Department, Holy Cross Electric, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the Roaring Fork Transit Agency, City Water Department, Environmental Health Department, City Engineering Department, Parks Department, and the Building Department; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the propoSed Conceptual PUD and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual PUD approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, Conceptual PUD review by the Planning and Zoning Commission does not require a public hearing, but this application was reviewed under a public hearing to garner input from surrounding property owners and other interested citizens; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on February 15, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to consider an overview presentation of the project and continued the public hearing to March 7, 2000, to consider transportation related issues, continued the public hearing to March 21 to consider recreation components of the plan, and continued the public hearing to April 4, 2000 to consider the residential components of the plan and, by a six to zero (6-0) vote, recommended City Council approve the Concepthal Planned Unit Development, with the findings and conditions listed hereinafter; and, Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page I WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development propOsal aCcording to the provisions of Section 26.445, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Conceptual PUD proposal, with the findings and conditions listed herein, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, wHEREAS, the proposed development is further subject to Final PUD, Rezoning, Subdivision, Growth Management, and Residential Design approval pursuant to the Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, this Conceptual PUD approval shall allow the applicant to apply for a Final PUD Plan approval within one year of the adoption date of this resolution, unless otherwise extended according to the provisions of said section, except for "Phase Three" of the residential portion of the project which may apply for Final PUD at any time with no one-year limitation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: The City Council finds 'as follows with regard to the Conceptual PUD Plan for the Aspen Golf and Tennis Club/Truscott Housing: · Intersection andsite access. The intersection design and entrance to the project shall be a signalized light with a short intervening cycle for a 2-3 car cue and a built-in delay for re-triggering the cycle. A sensing device that accotmts for the traffic volume on Highway 82 would be helpful in reducing delays. Other options that were disposed-of for various safety, emergency access, and practicability reasons included a stop sign (existing condition), an interchange, a ½ interchange, and a no left-turn scenario. The intersection should be developed once and not in phases or in a manner requiring multiple expenditures to rebuild the same improvements. This intersection should be developed prior to initiating construction of the project. In fact, the development team should be directed to finalize the intersection designs and proceed to construction of this improvement as soon as possible. The concept of this proposed development is not expected to change significantly during Final PUD review and the intersection itself is not proposed on the Truscott site and not subject to a Final PUD approval. A second but least desirable alternative, would be for flaggers to monitor construction access throughout the project development. · Transit Opportunities. The high percentage of existing Truscott residents that use transit on a regular basis indicates this site as a good site for high-density affordable housing. This site represents an opportunity for a true Transit Oriented Development Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 2 and for Transportation goals of the AACP to be realized. The use of internal remote parking (on-site but not directly adjacent to the residences) will aid in promoting transit usage as many residents' cars will be no more convenient than the free transit service. No impact fee provision of the Land Use Code exists for transit impacts and no impact assessment shall be paid, or otherwise accommodated, to the Roaring Fork Transit Agency. Pedestrian connections. A Highway 82 underpass for pedestrians shall be accomplished to ensure the highest level of safety. The location of the Highway 82 underpass is appropriate considering the limitations of the site although a location east of the intersection would be closer to the residential development. The pedestrian underpass under the entrance way is important in reducing the conflicts between automobiles and bicyclists. To the extent practicable, the pedestrian underpasses should be coordinated with construction of the intersection and of infrastructure improvements. Parking Garages. A remote parking facility will serve community goals related to infill housing and a study of appropriate locations for such a facility is underway. This pending study may determine the Truscott site as a preferred location for such a facility, but no determination on the best alternative has been finalized. The physical design of the surface parking lot shall consider the possibility of a future parking garage and shall not be developed in a manner that eliminates the future conversion. The Final PUD application is not required to propose a structured parking facility. Due to impacts on the tennis facility, no parking structure under the tennis courts should be included in the Final PUD Plan. Recreation Parking. A capacity near that of the existing surface lot is expected to adequately meet the demands of the recreation components of this plan. The tennis facility is not expected to require additional parking and may even require fewer parking spaces than the current ball field. The applicant should, however, investigate ways to reduce parking demand by recreational users. Clear indication, and enforcement, of the recreation parking lot is needed to prevent residents from using this parking. A suggested solution would be to prohibit parking from 3 a.m. to 6 a.m. and for a towing company to remove any offending cars. This method would also allow for more efficient snow removal. Residential Parking. Single occupancy should be a priority for residential units which have less convenient automobile access. Handicapped units should be assigned parking in close proximity. A less than 1:1 ratio of parking spaces to residential units may be appropriate if parking spaces are rented to residents rather than provided free of charge. An increase in the internal street parking should be considered by the applicant. Internal circulation. The internal three-way intersection needs to maintain clear sight triangles. The landscape plan submitted for the final application should depict this requirement. Strategies to reduce automobile Speeds Within the Project ShOuld be Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 3 sought by use of a curved street, speed tables, and/or on-street parking. The final plan should include lighted sidewalks or pathways. · Infrastructure. In order to coordinate with pending scheduled upgrades and reduce overall public costs, the applicant team is directed to design and install major infrastructure to the extent that efficiencies are available. This will allow the utility improvements to be completed with a "dig once" approach. The basic locations of land uses and structures are not expected to change significantly during the Final Review in a manner that would affect these utilities. The utilities should be designed in a manner that does not prohibit, or significantly complicate, development of a parking garage on the surface parking lot in the future. To the extent practicable, every utility should be developed underground. · Construction Plan. A construction plan describing timing of construction components, areas of disturbance, contractor parking, and a physical plan for maintaining adequate access, including emergency access, to land uses remaining active, including residential, during construction shall be provided with the Final PUD application. · Phasing Plan. A detailed phasing plan that describes overall timing of specific project phases, including the intersection, and describing construction affects on the golf course operation and leaseholders shall be provided with the Final PUD application. · Tennis courts. The six court plan with one court having stadium seating for events is preferred.. If clay bourts are developed, proper drainage should be included in the designs. The design of these courts and surrounding landscape needs to address the visual and noise impacts from Highway 82. · Golf practice area. The location of the golf building and the pro-shop proximate to the golf practice area will address the current conflicts with pedestrians, autos, and golf carts. · Servicing. The service area for the restaurant should be designed to reduce carrying distances and to eliminate conflicts with outdoor seating. A service area attached to the main building may accommodate these issues if a basement service area is developed. Otherwise, the final plans should strive for easy service delivery, especially to the restaurant. The service area needs to be developed in a flexible manner that can accommodate a future parking garage. The final application should depict adequate trash areas. · Emergency access. The Final application should demonstrate adequate turning radii, turn-around areas,, any pedestrian ways that double as emergency routes, and maximum emergency vehicle-to-event distances required for adequate emergency service. Clubhouse. The location of the clubhouse is appropriate considering the uses on the parcel, circulation of carts, and the proximity to golf starts, the nordic facilities and Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 4 the tennis facilities. The architectural style presented in the application is preferred. The plan also allows for Golf employees to monitor golf starts and for patrons to observe golfers practicing, finishing, etc. from the restaurant. Restaurant. The restaurant is expected to remain a use accessory to the recreational facilities on the site by virtue of its location and size. Therefore, no special restrictions shall be required. Outdoor spaces. The drop-off area for the clubhouse works to reduce conflict between pedestrians, autos, and carts. The outdoor spaces for the residential portion of the development shall accommodate play areas for children. Accessory uses. The amended location of the golf carts (north of the tennis courts) is the next best location to the previous plan for storage under the clubhouse (see attached drawings). The locker room facilities should be designed to accommodate all of the intended uses. For residential, the "community center" should be developed. Laundry facilities should be developed as needed. Administrative Offices. The administrative offices for Golf, Housing, and a housing maintenance shop should be located at this site. Affordable housing mitigation for the associated employee generation should be provided as would be required for any other office development. Jr. Golf Facility. Re-use of the existing pro-shop as the Jr. Golf facility is a good idea and the building should be la-ansferred. This Conceptual approval shall not require use of this structure by Jr. Golf. Safety issues for children accessing the recreational facilities from this location should be considered. Residential Aesthetics. The basic massing, scale, proportion, and heights are acceptable. The design team should continue with the architectural style portrayed in the Conceptual Plan. To accommodate the density goals while maintaining the variable roof heights, the provision of a fourth floor should be considered. Residential A high density re-development of Truscott represents an opportunity to promote Transportation, Growth, and Housing Goals of the newly adopted AACP as well as meeting the goals of the Interim Citizen Housing Plan. The project should first and foremost strive for a high density. With a good design, a high density can be achieved with a'high level of"livability." To achieve a high level of livability, a community center, play areas for children, and variable roof heights should be accommodated. The concept of a possible fourth floor in some locations is acceptable, subject to final review. A one parking space per residential unit ratio is expected to be sufficient. Additional and short-term parking should be considered along the internal street. The preferred site plan is attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution. Possible modifications within this general concept are expected and will be considered during final review. The combination of Phases #1 & #2 should accomplish a range of 91 units/108 bedrooms to 108 units/120 bedrooms. Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 5 Phase #3 should include 75-85 units in the configuration, or closely related configuration, as presented With the same number of parking spaces in an underground parking structure. Phase #3 is expected to occur in 2006 and this conceptual approval shall allow for a Final PUD application to be submitted beyond the one-year limitation of Conceptual approvals. Growth Management. This Conceptual Plan approval indicates the manner in which the various components of this project will be reviewed under the Growth Management Quota System. A final GMQS review shall be conducted during Final PUD Plan review. The residential portion of this development may be exempted from the scoring and competition procedures of GMQS by the City Council upon a recommendation of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authoritv. The Commercial portion of this development, which includes the pro-shop, the Jr. Golf facility, and the restaurant, may be exempted from the competition and scoring procedure of GMQS by the Community Development Director to the extent that no additional commercial square footage is created (beyond what exists today) and that affordable housing mitigation is provided for the commercial space as if it were newly constructed. In determining this housing mitigation, 3.5 employees per 1000 square feet of net leasable space shall equal the number of employees generated. 60% of the employees generated shall be mitigated. The mitigation may be provided via construction of new units on-site, off-site, or by financial contribution to the remainder of the Truscott Housing project. The occupancy Standards of the Housing Guidelines should~be used in determining the number of employees housed per unit type. The administrative offices may be exempted from the scoring and competition procedures of GMQS by the City Council as "essential public facilities" upon a finding that the impacts are adequately mitigated. The affordable housing impacts should be mitigated at the same rate as other office development. The mitigation methods for the commercial development, described above, should be used for these facilities. Overall Plan. The proposed locations and intensities of land uses proposed in the conceptual PUD are appropriate. The Conceptual Plan approval applies to the entire development, including all portions of recreation, residential, accessory uses, and phasing. The Final application shall be reviewed as one aggregate project. This will allow the entire plan to be contemplated as a "total package." In the alternative, Phase #3 Housing may be removed from the Final PUD application and be submitted closer to the time of actual construction. The Conceptual PUD approval shall grant the applicant the ability to apply for a Final PUD on Phase #3 Housing at any time, including beyond the one-year anniversary of Conceptual Plan approval. Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 6 Section 2: Pursuant to Section 26.445, and to the findings set forth in Section One above, the Aspen City Council hereby grants Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval for the Aspen Golf and Tennis Club/Truscott Housing project, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Final PUD application shall reflect and demonstrate compliance with the findings of the City Council, as described above. 2. The Final PUD application shall include: a. An application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, Growth Management, and Residential Design Standards. A pre- application conference with a member of the Community Development Department is required prior to submitting an application; b. Delineation of all dimensional provisions to become requirements of the PUD. e. A proposed subdivision plat and PUD plans. d. Responses to the referral memoranda from the City Transportation/Parking Department and the City Environmental Health Department. e. A construction plan describing timing of construction components, areas of disturbance, contractor parking, and a physical plan for maintaining adequate access, including emergency access, to land uses remaining active during construction shall be provided with the Final PUD application. f. A detailed phasing plan that describes overall timing of specific project phases, including the intersection, and describing construction affects on the golf course operation and leaseholders. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: 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. Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 7 Section 6: A duly noticed public hearing on this Resolution was held on the 24th day of April, 2000, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this oq~L day of 2000. Approved as to form: l~orney Approved as to content: Attest: Clerk Attachments: A -- Annotated Conceptual Plan C:Shome\CHRISB\CASES\TRUSCOTT~CC RESO.doc Resolution No. 41, Series of 2000 Page 8