Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19940510 AGE N D A ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING May 10, 1994, Tuesday 4:30 P.M. 2nd Floor Meeting Room ci ty Hall I. COMMENTS . commissioners Planning Staff Public II. ~C MINUTES III. REFERRAL A. Aspen Highlands village General Submission, Leslie Lamont IV. ADJOURN MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Senior Planner Tim Malloy, Senior Planner DATE: May 10, 1994 RE: Referral - Aspen Highlands Village General Submission SUMMARY: The Commission first reviewed the Aspen Highlands Village at a meeting August 17, 1993. Throughout the fall, the commission continued to review the first general submission of the Village proposal. Based upon City and County P&Z review and a conceptual review by the BOCC, Gerald D. Hines Interests has revised their development application. Because of the substantial revisions to the original application, this project has been remanded back to the Planning and zoning Commission for further review. REVIEW PROCESS: Pursuant to Section 6-3.4 (B) (2) (A) of the County Land Use Code and consistent with Colorado State Statutes,, any proposal within two miles of a municipality shall be referred to that jurisdiction for review. Aspen Highlands Village (AHV) is approximately 1.5 miles from the City of Aspen boundary and the AHV General Submission application is being forwarded to the Commission for review. This application is being considered in conjunction with an application for a master plan for rezoning to AF-ski and improvements to the Aspen Highlands ski area. However, since this aspect of the project does not involve subdivision, its review by the City P&Z is not required. The County review process divides project review for significant developments into three categories, general submission, detailed submission, and final plat. General submission is designed to flush out threshold issues such as affordable housing requirements, infrastructure capacity, density, compatibility with existing land use code, etc. Detailed submission would include information regarding the number of sale verses rental affordable housing units, the mix and income categories, number of shuttle vans to operate the transit system, etc. This first level of review is also intended to identify missing elements that must be included in detailed submission. This type of review could be compared to the City's conceptual verses final PUD development review. Again, staff's goal in the review of the application for referral to the County is to provide constructive comments. The intent is to enable the applicant to make adjustments, during the County review process, and design and build a project that meets our community goals. 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). Our reasoning is twofold. It does not make sense to recite the County Land Use Code standards or base our review upon the City Land Use Code standards. 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. It is also the policy document that guides our land use reviews and legislation. 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. Recently Council has relied upon the Commission's recommendation of a project's consistency with the AACP. APPLICANT: Gerald D. Hines Interests Limited Partnership LOCATION: Aspen Highlands Ski Area and Base of Highlands ZONING: AF-1 (agricultural/forest), AR-1 (accommodations/ recreation), and R-30 (residential) BACKGROUND: I. Site Description - According to the application, the site is bordered by the Aspen Highlands Subdivision, metes and bounds single-family lots, and the Moore family property to the east. The USFS (ski area) is to the south, and the Heatherbed Lodge and the Le Chamonix Condominiums are to the west and north. The site is 188.6 acres and is improved with the Maroon Creek Lodge, three ski lifts, and the Aspen Highlands Ski Area base facilities which include four tennis courts. According to the application, there are approximately 780 off- street parking spaces in the existing lot and the Highlands RFTA bus route terminates in the same parking area. Currently, there is a total of 39,194 square feet of commercial space (22,890 sq. ft. retail/office space, 1,970 sq. ft. skier services, and 14,334 sq. ft. maintenance/storage) . This space will be demolished. Over the past seven years Pitkin County has awarded general submission land use approval to the Aspen Highlands Resort and the Lodge at Aspen Highlands. The Highlands Resort previously received 200 tourist accommodation GMQS allotments and obtained credit for 18 existing on -site tourist accommodation units for an existing total credit of 218 lodge GMQS allotments. 2 The Lodge at Aspen Highlands previously received BOCC approval f or 49 tourist accommodation units (replacing the 49 units that were demolished), 8 affordable housing units and 6,300 square feet of accessory space. The total lodge units available today for development are 267 units. II. Proposed Development - Base Village The Applicant proposes to demolish all of the existing structures on the highlands property and construct a mixed use development. Generally, the development'is comprised of a central village area flanked on either side by two separate pods of detached, single- family and duplex homes, which are located slightly up the face of the mountain. In the revised plan, land uses within the development are broken down as follows: 46 single-family, detached, free-market dwelling units; 31 free-market, townhomes; 73 tourist accommodation condominium units located in four separate buildings within the Village; 69 affordable housing units broken down as follows: 9 single-family, disbursed throughout the neighborhoods 6 duplex, disbursed throughout the neighborhoods 4 townhomes, category 4, disbursed throughout the neighborhoods 8 townhomes, category 1, in village 8 townhomes, category 2, in village 28 townhomes, category 3, in Village 6 townhomes, category 4, in Village Total employees housed 187; 21,600 square feet of retail space located in various buildings throughout the central Village; and 8,,125 square feet of restaurant space located in various buildings throughout the central Village. The original plan proposed: 77 single-family detached dwelling units; 85 lodge rooms; 3 105 tourist accommodations condominium units located in four separate buildings; 138 affordable housing units located in four separate buildings to accommodate 264 local residents all within the Village; 37,440 square feet of retail space; and 14,385 square feet of restaurant space. The Village will have a two -level parking structure for 450 cars for skiers. One level of the garage will be below grade. An additional 137 parking spaces will be provided underground for the tourist accommodation and affordable housing units. Parking in the single-family neighborhoods will presumably be in garage stalls and driveways. The townhomes will all have parking garages. Vehicle access from Maroon Creek is provided via two entry drives. These access points are located at either end of the proposed main parking lot on the north side of the village. There are two loop roads that serve the central village, one on the north side of the village and one that runs through the center of the village core. The roads for the residential neighborhoods will intersect the main loop road at either end of the village. Also discussed as a future element of the development is a gondola connection to the Tiehack Ski Area. This gondola is shown as entering the site from the north across the main parking lot and terminating in a tower located between two of the central buildings in the village. This tower structure would be built when the village is constructed and used for some other purpose until such time as the gondola connection was approved. Another possible future element related to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area is a ski lift from the High School, through the Moore property and up to the top of the Powderbowl run. This lift would only be available to Aspen public school students, residents of the Meadowood and Aspen Highlands subdivisions, and future residents of the Moore property. The proposed project would also include several trail improvements. An extension of the Maroon Creek Bike Path is proposed along the west side of Maroon Creek Road to connect the base village with Iselin Park where the public trail currently ends. In addition, nordic skiers will be able to access the village and ski area via a new nordic trail which extends from the Moore property along the north side of Thunderbowl Lane and under the roadway via grade separated crossings. The application states that these trails will be connected to trails on the Moore property when it is developed. 4 CONSISTENCY WITH AACP Based upon staff's review of the revised Highlands proposal, the following is a summary of staff' s findings as the proposal relates to the AACP. 1. Housing In previous review, staff had found the proposal inconsistent with the Housing Action plan's emphasis on family -oriented housing. The revised Highlands proposal includes 9 single-family and 6 duplex affordable housing units within the free-market neighborhoods. This proposal is more consistent with the AACP and addresses the "balance" issue within individual neighborhoods better than the previous proposal. Originally, all the affordable dwelling units were located in the base Village. In addition, the revised application indicates the income category of the affordable units and that all the units will be sale units. The AACP recommends that every new subdivision shall provide a 600 affordable - 40% free market split of housing, this refers to people housed. This application represents a 43% affordable - 570 free market split which does not include the 73 tourist accommodation units. (Staff has concluded that the tourist units should be excluded from this calculation because they are seperate from the residential subdivision.) The 60%-40% split has not been codified. Although staff believes this is an important goal of the AACP we cannot enforce this recommendation until it becomes institutionalized within the Land Use Codes. The revised Highlands proposal is still consistent with several Housing action plan policies. The proposal promotes a micro community or neighborhood development to accommodate permanent residents, neighborhood character, mixed housing types and uses, usable open space and convenient public transportation. The AHV proposal is still consistent with other policies that encourage infill development within the existing urban area to preserve open space and rural areas, enable more employees to be near their work, and locate permanent resident housing near desired activity centers. The proposal is also consistent with Action item #15 - 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. Finally, Action plan item #30 recommends the establishment of a salvage program for demolition material from homes and commerical A structures. The applicant should address salvage of the materials for future builders. 2. Commercial/Retail - The intent of the commercial/retail action plan is to provide incentives for managed strategic growth by locally serving commercial and office uses and small lodges. The Village proposal is consistent with the recommendation to use vertical zoning. The Village proposes affordable housing and tourist accommodations above commerical/retail space. The revised Highlands Village plan eliminates the traditional lodge accommodations and has downsized the commercial/retail element from 51,825 to 29,725 square feet. The existing Highlands Resort and Lodge approvals are for 36,500 square feet of commercial/retail space and 250 lodge rooms. The original application included 51,825 square feet which staff believed was too great an increase over what was anticipated for the Highlands Base area. There was an overall concern about adding additional commercial space when the goal of this section of the Plan is to reduce the amount of commercial square footage from a likely buildout of 700,000 sq. ft. to 400,000 square feet. Staff has two concerns regarding the reduction in commercial space in the revised plan. One is that the reduction in square footage e may be too great and may jeopardize the objective of creating an activity center at the base. The original intent, which staff supports, was to create a base area that attracts skiers thus reducing the peak traffic flows and enhances the vitality of the neighborhood village. The second concern is that the reduction in commercial square footage will come out of the neighborhood serving commerical space which was proposed previously for tourists and residents to reduce trips into town. Staff would recommend maintaining the amount of commercial/retail space that was approved with the Highlands Resort development approvals. The loss of the lodge at the base of the ski area reduces the amount of short term accommodations within the metro area. There are currently no plans to increase lodge space elsewhere in the metro area to compensate for this loss. The overall reduction in the base area commercial activity detracts from the village concept and is inconsistent with the current lodge zoning. The short-term accommodation land use in this location was supported in the AACP and in the Maroon Creek/Castle Creek neighborhood caucus plan. Staff also continues to have concerns regarding how the applicant will ensure that the neighborhood serving commerical will remain 6 accessible and will not eventually become higher end commercial space. 3. open Space /Recreation and Environment - It is the policy of the OSRE action plan to support ski area expansions that are found "to have minimal impacts on land development, environmental quality and service needs (i.e., expansion to existing areas) over ski expansions which are found to have substantial impacts on land development, environmental quality and service needs (i.e. expansions involving new base villages or major infrastructural extensions or upgrades or expansions into existing wilderness areas). The revised AHV plan is still consistent with the AACP policy of expansions to existing areas. But staff finds the significant base area upgrades to be inconsistent with the OSRE policy which prefers expansions that have minimal impacts. The amenities such as new nordic trails, climbing rock, and access to the mountain in the summer, are still included within the revised AHV proposal and are consistent with the policy in the OSRE action plan to encourage projects that not only develop affordable housing but integrate the preservation of open space. 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. 4. Growth - Upon review of the revised AHV proposal, staff 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. Although the proposed density has been reduced, staff still has the same concerns regarding the increased number of free-market dwelling units. 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. Secondly, as staff pointed out during the last review, the goal of a permanent community is not consistent with a conversion of GMQS allotments for lodge units to free-market singly family homes. VA While the applicant is still pursuing the conversion from lodge units to residential units, the conversion has been modified from the 1 lodge unit to 1 free market home conversion formula. The revised conversion utilizes the following formula: 2.5 lodge rooms = a 3 bedroom or less single-family dwelling unit 2.9 lodge rooms = a 4 bedroom single-family dwelling unit 3.3 lodge rooms = a 5 bedroom single-family dwelling unit This conversion formula is based upon employee generation/mitigation requirements in the County Land Use Code and the size of the units as was suggested during the first round of review. However, the applicant has not committed to using only a percentage of the allotment for conversion. Finally, as staff believed during the last review, 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. Limited base areas should not be lost to seasonal homes. 5. Transportation - As staff outlined in the last review, the intent of the AACP Transportation Action Plan is to provide a balanced integrated transportation system for residents, visitors, and commuters that reduces congestion and pollution. The goal outlined in the Transportation Action Plan is to move from an auto dominated transportation system to a balanced system which limits auto use while increasing mobility via transit, carpooling, pedestrian and bicycle modes. The Action Plan recommends items that would make the use of the single -occupant vehicle less convenient while developing more attractive transportation alternatives. The revised AHV plan has reduced the overall density and size of the development. However, the applicant has not changed the transportation improvements plan that was developed for the original application. Attached, as Exhibit 1, is a full review of the transportation mitigation plans. The Applicant proposes a lengthy list of travel demand management strategies and transit improvements that are consistent with the goals of the Transportation Action Plan which seek to limit auto use while increasing mobility through transit and .other alternatives. The applicant has attempted to address the traffic impacts generated by this development in a comprehensive and creative manner. The transportation mitigation proposals are still consistent with action items: #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) ... The application 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. The applicant was a participant in the proposed Buttermilk intercept parking lot on Highway 82. Currently, the BOCC has directed staff to analyze an intercept lot at the, airport before further consideration of the Buttermilk lot. If the Buttermilk lot is not developed, the applicant has still committed to providing a skier intercept lot in the vicinity of the Tiehack ski area as a point of origin for day -skiers riding transit to the Highlands Ski area. Whether it was the skier/commuter lot or just a skier intercept lot, this has been identified as one of the Applicant's traffic mitigation measures. The Applicant should also consider other intercept lot locations to ensure transit usage to the development. A bike/pedestrian path will be constructed along Maroon Creek Road connecting Aspen Highlands to the end of the path at Iselin Park. A nordic trail will connect the Village with the trail system on the Moore property. An area that is questionable, in terms of its consistency with the AACP Transportation Action Plan (concept of reducing congestion and air pollution) , is the developments increased VMT. The revised proposal reduces the estimated VMT to what was expected with the previously approved Highlands Resort development. However, staff 0 requests that the Applicant pursue additional mitigation measures to mitigate any increase in VMT du to redevelopment. Other measures that the applicant should pursue are as suggested: The development of the gondola connection to the Tiehack Ski Area should be explored as it could potentially eliminate VMT as skiers would have access to other mountains without reliance on the private auto. At the time of detailed submission, the Applicant should consider utilizing trip generation rates that more accurately reflect existing conditions. The Applicant should participate in off -site improvements that have the potential to reduce VMT by approximately 2,500 vehicle miles per day. This is for the base village only (includes 450 space skier parking) and any additional VMT that may be generated by the ski area improvements. The applicant should prepare a Transit Plan which is approved by RFTA. The Applicant should construct remote parking stalls to accommodate transit users destined for the village and ski mountain. The Applicant should implement all the proposed transportation mitigation measures outlined in their application. The Applicant should work 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. Design widths and exact locations of the proposed trail from Highlands to town should be provided. For safety reasons bicycles/electric car corridors should be separated from pedestrian corridors. RECOMMENDATION: Staff 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. 10 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 be near their work, and locate permanent resident housing near desired activity centers. 5. The proposal is consistent with Action item #15 - to work with the landowners to ensure that future development of property along Maroon Creek Road and near the schools emphasizes a nix 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 AH-V 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: #19 - develop intercept lot at Brush Creek Road/State Highway 82, Buttermilk and/or other appropriate locations; 11 #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 to accommodate transit users destined for the village and ski mountain; * 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 car corridors from pedestrian corridors. 12 Staff finds the Aspen Highlands Village General Submission inconsistent with the following goals/policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan: 1. The AHV application represents a 43% affordable - 57% free market split. Although the 60%-40% split has not been codified, staff finds that the applicant is inconsistent with the AACP recommendation that 60% of the people housed in all new subdivision must be housed in affordable housing. 2. The significant base area upgrades are inconsistent with the Open/Space/Recreation/Environment policy which prefers expansions that have minimal impacts to surrounding neighborhoods, transportation patterns, environmental quality and service needs. 3. Upon review of the revised AHV proposal, staff 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 hones 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, as staff pointed out during the last review, the 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. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt staff's findings as related to the Aspen Highlands Village General Submission and the proposal's consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan." 13 "I move to direct staff to refer these adopted findings to the County for their review and to the City Council for their review." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Aspen Highlands Village Transportation Improvements Plan 2. Revised Site Plan 14 EXHIBIT 1 - TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PLAN In an effort to minimize potential traffic impacts from the base village project, the Applicant proposes a series of transportation improvements. Some of the transportation improvements proposed are physical improvements while others are travel demand management measures. The Applicant has offered the following measures to mitigate the impacts associated with the proposed development: A) Physical Improvements The Applicant has stated that upon final approval of the plan, the Applicant will contribute $650,000 to be used to pay for the physical improvements listed below. If the improvements cost less than the $650,000, the remainder of the monies may be used by Pitkin County for other transportation improvements in the area. 1) State Highway 82/Maroon Creek Road Intersection - the applicant states that a long-term solution for the redesign of this intersection will have to wait due to pending decisions on SH 82 corridor. The "Entrance to Aspen" Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will commence by the end of 1993 and CDOT has estimated that it take two (2) years to complete this EIS. The Applicant suggests that it would not be prudent, at this time, to invest in major reconstruction of this intersection until the EIS has been completed. Staff would agree with their logic in that a comprehensive look at the "entrance to Aspen" will be conducted during the EIS process. The Applicant has recommended that simple geometric and signalized improvements of the intersection could result in beneficial operating conditions. The following modifications to the intersection are suggested: * Extend the length of the right turn acceleration lane from Maroon Creek Road onto eastbound SH 82. This would help to eliminate queues back onto Maroon Creek Road. * Extend the right turn deceleration lane on eastbound SH 82 into Maroon Creek Road. This extension would remove those right turn vehicles from the through lane on SH 82. * Extend the length of the westbound left turn lane on SH 82 into Maroon Creek Road. Morning peak hour demand for this movement can result in left turn queues that extend into the westbound through lane. Widen the Maroon Creek Road section between the SH 82 intersection and the Castle Creek Road intersection to provide for a left turn lane from southbound Maroon Creek Road onto Castle 1 Creek Road. Currently, vehicles making the left turn movement must wait because of the amount of traffic on northbound Maroon Creek Road and back up into SH 82. There will be some widening of Maroon Creek Road necessary south of the Castle Creek Road intersection to provide proper transitioning of the lanes. The Applicant has recommended that some of this width be utilized to extend the northbound left turn lanes for the down valley movement onto SH 82. * The Applicant has recommended that a "Do Not Block Intersection" sign be posted on northbound Maroon Creek Road prior to the Castle Creek Road intersection. * It is recommended that a right turn arrow indication be added to the signals facing the northbound approach on Maroon Creek Road. It would operate when all movements are allowed to leave Maroon Creek Road onto SH 82 and when left turns from SH 82 onto Maroon Creek Road are being provided their protected phase. * The Applicant -will pay for the use of a traffic control officer at the Maroon Creek Road/Sh 82 intersection when needed during afternoon peak hours during the peak season. 2) Castle Creek Road/Maroon Creek Road Intersection - The Applicant is recommending that consideration be given to changing the traffic control for the right turn from Castle Creek Road onto Maroon Road from the present YIELD sign to a STOP condition. The concern is that the YIELD condition creates several hazardous conditions and the STOP sign would enhance the safety of this intersection. 3) Maroon Creek Road/School Campus Area * Enhanced sign program. * Pedestrian activated traffic signal should be considered. * The RFTA bus stop at the intersection of the Maroon Creek Road/Upper School Road would be modified to include a shelter. 4) The Applicant would construct a separate bicycle path from the Aspen Highlands base to Iselin Park. B) Travel Demand Management Program The Applicant has prepared a travel demand management program which includes both incentives to utilize alternative travel modes as well as disincentives to automobile use. This is similar to the philosophy embodied in Aspen's Transportation Implementation Plan which states that transportation alternatives alone (incentives) will not achieve the desired reductions in traffic. An effective program must be accompanied by disincentives that will encourage drivers to seek alternative transportation modes. The Highlands proposal recommends the following program: 1) Provision of Housing/Lodging at Base of the Mountain - The concept of providing accommodations at the base of the ski mountain is to reduce the need to travel from Aspen or other parts of the valley to ski. 2) Provision of Support Commercial in the Village - This would provide opportunities for residents and guests staying in the area to fulfill their trip purpose within the village. 3) Free Remote Parking - The Applicant will participate in the development of an intercept lot in the SH 82 corridor to provide free parking and free transit service from the parking lot to the ski area base. 4) Regional Transit Service - The Applicant has stated that regional transit service to the Aspen Highlands will be continued and expanded through participation in RFTA. 5) Demand Responsive Van Service - A dial -a -ride van service is proposed for the residential area of the community. 6) Lodge Shuttle Service - The tourist accommodations will provide van service for their guests and the focus of this program will be pick-up and drop-off services between the airport and Aspen Highlands to reduce the need for visitors to, rent cars at the airport. 7) Provision of Electric Vehicles - The Aspen Highlands development will make available an electric cart to each single family residence. Initially, these carts would be primarily utilized to travel between the residences and the village core. The Applicant has also suggested that these vehicles could be a viable alternative for travel between Aspen Highlands and Aspen and would develop a separate path system for their use. 8) Promotional Materials regarding all aspects of the transportation alternatives will be provided. 9) Accommodations Discount - Discounts will be offered to guests staying in the village in the tourist accommodations that do not bring cars while parking fees will be charged to those who arrive with cars. 10) Time Restriction - The time period from 3:25 pm to 3:45 pm has been identified as a critical period for school traffic. In an effort to discourage mixing skier traffic with school traffic, the Applicant will charge an additional surcharge to their parking fee during this time period. 3 11) Extended Lift Hours - The Applicant has proposed to extend the hours of operation of the lower lifts beyond those normally experienced at the ski area; this could help to reduce the peak impacts of traffic. 4