Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.apz.021-94RESOLUTION OF THE ~SPEN PL~'~NING ~ND ZONING COHMISSION TO THE PITKIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE AMENDED GENERAL SUBMISSION COMPLIANCE WITH THE ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Resolution No. 94-~_ WHEREAS, the Aspen Highlands Village (the "Project") is located within 1.5 miles of the city limits of Aspen and was referred to the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission for their advisory comments pursuant to Section 6-3.4 B.2A of the County Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission's review of the project as a referral agency to the County is to provide constructive comments enabling an applicant to make adjustments during the County review process, and design and build a project that meets our community goals; and WHEREAS, the Planning staff believes that the most efficient way to review the proposal is to consider the application based upon it's consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) for two reasons: it does not make sense to recite the County Land Use Code standards or base a review upon the City Land Use Code standards and the AACP was adopted for the metro area and is intended to provide guidance for decisions regarding growth and land use issues that are metro in scope and the AACP is also the policy document that guides our land use reviews and legislation; and WHEREAS, secondly, if the applicant requests city water, the water policy of 1993 requires Council approval and their review entails consideration of the project's consistency with the AACP and in the past the Council has relied upon the Commission's recommendation of a project's consistency with the AACP; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission first reviewed the Aspen Highlands Village General Submission August 17, 1993; and WHEREAS, the applicant has substantially amended the General Submission application which requires another review by the Commission; and WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the application again on May 10, 1994 and June 2, 1994; and WHEREAS, the Commission, using the AACP, made findings with regard to the Aspen Highlands Village proposal's consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, while utilizing the AACP as a guide for review of the project the Commission recognizes that there exist inherent inconsistencies between the goals and recommendations within the 1 AACP; and WHEREAS, the Commission believes that it would be difficult for a large complex project to comply with all the recommendations and goals of the AACP; and WHEREAS, the Commission, having reviewed the Aspen Highlands Village proposal, believes that the project is in substantial compliance with the AACP and its general direction, concepts and goals; and WHEREAS, although the Commission believes that the project is a good project, there are areas that still need work and revision such as compliance with the overall rate of growth and the impacts of the new project on the population cap as identified in the AACP; and WHEREAS, the Commission encourages the land use review process to continue through the County Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners review process. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the Aspen Highlands Village General Submission proposal is consistent with the following goals/policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan: 1. The integration of affordable dwelling units within the two neighborhoods is consistent with the AACP Housing Action plan that recommends the integration of free-market and affordable units. In addition, the applicant is consistent with the AACP's goal to develop family-oriented housing. 2. The AACP recommends the development of sale affordable dwelling units. The revised application indicates that all the affordable dwelling units will be sale units. 3. The revised Highlands proposal is consistent with several Housing action plan policies to promote a micro community, develop neighborhoods to accommodate permanent residents, enhance neighborhood character, promote mixed housing types and uses, and provide usable open space and convenient public transportation. 4. Consistent with the AACP, the AHV proposal promotes infill development within the existing urban area preserving open space and rural areas, enables more employees to live near their work, and locate permanent resident housing near desired activity centers. 5. The proposal is consistent with Action item #15 (AACP) - to work with the landowners to ensure that future development of property along Maroon Creek Road and near the schools emphasizes a mix of free market and affordable family oriented housing and recreational uses. 6. The Village proposal utilizes vertical zoning within the Village and proposes affordable housing and tourist accommodations above commerical/retail space. 7. Consistent with the AACP the proposal provides local serving businesses but the applicant shall ensure that the neighborhood serving commerical will remain accessible and will not eventually become higher end commercial space. 8. The revised AHV plan is still consistent with the AACP policy to promote of expansion of existing ski areas first. 9. The amenities such as new nordic trails, climbing rock, and access to the mountain in the summer, are consistent with the policy in the Open/Space/Recreation/Environment action plan to encourage projects that not only develop affordable housing but integrate the preservation of open space. However, the expansion at Highlands could increase the impacts on Parks and Recreation facilities. It is still unclear what summer recreational activities Highlands is proposing and therefore what the impact on city facilities will be and how these activities will accommodate users. 10. The transportation mitigation proposals are consistent with items from the Transportation Action Plan (AACP): #19 - develop intercept lot at Brush Creek Road/State Highway 82, Buttermilk and/or other appropriate locations; ~25 - increase the frequency, service and length of hours of bus service throughout the Aspen Area. #33 - evaluate the establishment of the dial- a-ride concept within the Aspen metro area; and #38 study, fund and implement improvements to improve safety for bicyclist on Castle Creek, Maroon Creek (roads)... 11. The proposal is consistent with the policy to increase transportation choices by proposing a bus/shuttle system from Highlands to downtown Aspen with 10 to 15 minute headways. The revised proposal integrates this system with the existing RFTA service. A dial-a-ride system will also be operational for Village residents and this will help to reduce dependency on the single occupant vehicle. 12. Other measures that the applicant should pursue that would be consistent with the Transportation Action Plan are: * development of the gondola connection to the Tiehack Ski Area; * utilization of trip generation rates that more accurately reflect existing conditions; * participation in off-site improvements that have the potential to reduce VMT by approximately 2,500 vehicle miles per day for the base village only (includes 450 space skier parking) and any additional VMT that may be generated by the ski area improvements; * preparation of a Transit Plan which is approved by RFTA; * construction of remote parking stalls accommodate transit users destined for the village and ski mountain; to * implementation of all proposed transportation mitigation measures outlined in the application; * working closely with CDOT on the Buttermilk to Aspen EIS (Entrance to Aspen) relative to potential improvements to the SH 82 and Maroon Creek Road intersection; * provision of design widths and exact locations of the proposed trail from Highlands to town; and * separation of bicycles/electric cart (small scale) corridors from pedestrian corridors. * a seperate transportation corridor for some transit mode other than rubber wheel vehicles must be defined around the parking lot at the base of the base village. AND, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the Aspen Highlands Village General Submission proposal is inconsistent with the following goals/policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan: 1. The applicant has complies with the 60%-40% split as it was intended to be implemented. However, the methodology has yet to be determined; therefore, the applicant should continue 4 to work with the County to comply with the intent of the 60%- 40% split. 2. The base area upgrades will have significant impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, transportation patterns, environmental quality and service needs. Many of which impacts are proposed to be mitigated but where those impacts are not mitigated are inconsistent with the open space, recreation, environmental policy which prefers expansions that have minimal impacts. 3. Upon review of the revised AHV proposal, the Commission still finds that the Highlands proposal is not consistent with the Growth Action Plan for three reasons: * First, the projected buildout analysis is based upon current zoning and the AACP does not recommend, other than for affordable housing development, rezoning to achieve the goals of the AACP. Unless another developable parcel, within the metro-area were to be downzoned or effectively sterilized from future development, the development of 46 single-family free market homes will further the imbalance between seasonal and permanent housing as was identified in the AACP. In addition, the growth rate analysis did not anticipate the rezoning or added free market homes which will throw off the 30,000 population cap and the 2% growth rate recommendation. * Second, goal of a permanent community is not consistent with a conversion of GMQS allotments for lodge units to free-market singly family homes. Nor is it consistent with the goal to balance growth between tourist accommodations and the permanent community. * Third, significant development of single- family homes (visitor/seasonal) with a de- emphasis on tourist accommodations eliminates an appropriate area designated for tourist accommodations. This point is more accentuated by the elimination of the lodge accommodations from the revised plan. In order to preserve the necessary balance, as recommended in the AACP, between permanent resident and tourist accommodations, land that is most appropriate for tourist accommodations should be preserved for that land use. 5 4. The reduction in commercial space in not consistent with the desire to reduce VMT because of the lack of support services and commerical space that would encourage residents and visitors to leave the Village for commercial activity. The balance of "critical mass" of commerical space must be characterized by support services, public/common space and tourist oriented space. The applicant must continue to work with the staff to define that balance. Maintenance of the "critical mass" should have a net effect of reducing VMT. AND, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Commission was split as to their support of Finding #3 (the inconsistency with the Growth Action Plan) and the basis for their differences are as follows: 1. Some members support the conversion believing it is less impactive and requires less mitigation than lodge development and therefore is not inconsistent with the overall goals of the AACP. (Free market homes may become permanent residences while second homes are an alternative form of "tourist accommodations". 2. Other members believed that the substantial amount of free market homes proposed in the development were not contemplated in the AACP and therefore is a "balance" issue when compared to the goals of the AACP. 3. The majority of the Commission believed that the concept of the conversion was acceptable but the conversion rate and the number of units lost and gained was not acceptable. Some conversion rates do not relate especially given delivery, service, transportation issues. Perhaps an integrated property management system would help reduce some of those impacts. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on June 2, 1994. W. Bruce Kerr, Chair Jan ~-rn~y, Deputy Clerk 6