The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.sp.Willoughby Park56aAA,,\-� �-)� �n CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED:— •� �(� CASE N0. 2735 ! 31-I(, 00/ DATE RECEIVED COMPLETE: STAFF: PROJECT NAME: APPL ICANT : CLf �- 04 HST Applicant Addr ss/Phone: REPRES EN TAT IV E: Representative Address/Phone: Type of Application: I. GMP/SUBDIV IS ION/PUD (4 step) Conceptual Submission Preliminary Flat Final Plat II. SUBDIV IS ION/PUP (4 step) Conceptual Submission Preliminary Plat Final Plat YIII. EXCEPT ION/EXEMPT ION/REZ ON ING (2 step) IV . SPECIAL RW IEW (1 step) Special Review Use Determination Conditional Use Other: ($2,730.00) ($1,640.00) ($ 820.00) ($1,900.00) ($1,220.00) ($ 820.00) ($1 .0 0) /i%U A-0— ($ 660.00) M ETING DATE: PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO Il /1� DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: REFERRALS: City Atty Aspen Consol. S.D. School District City Engineer Mtn. Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Cas Housiri; Dir. Parks Dept. Stateiiwy rept (Glemid) Aspen Water Holy Cross Electric Statefiwy relt (Gr.Jtn) City Electric Fire Marshall Bldg: Zoning/Inspectn Envir. Hlth. Fire Chief Other: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: 3 Za INITIAL: City Atty —x— City Engineer X Building Dept. Other : FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: C-�-os Other : To V,40C—1 CASE DISPOSITION: _� �; I,t1, llc�•�liby P,,rCcrPA Revi ewed by: 1. cn P&Z City Coun__1 spa �x� j • �� T.� rl l!1 }�•, • 3 � I �?` Z•.t�p t, t!. (Y �,+i �i�t �' ,. < �L�.Y �t,,1 < ; � A! - : �,. i�'. �� T� � � 1 1 A•�+'v •�I ti r 1 .�;"b:. L,�.o-1:.' l. i�. �.a',��i Jr._ .YiI �I•. ••ir: L•^y e.� G'.i �'. ... 1,' ,.+'� :t�..n ��.1'i �, tle. 1 �+ ti�� i ! ( Y. Conditional Use approval shall be considered at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 5. z. A GHP exemption for essential public projects shall be considered at the Precise SPA Plan stage. y. 3. The property shall be rezoned to Public prior to consideration of the Conceptual or Precise SPA Plan for the Museum. �. k. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted as part of the Precise SPA Plan for the Ski Club. 6. Any drainage problems should be addressed in detail at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 7. A new parking plan shall be developed showing all full size spaces. A more detailed parking demand study shall be submitted with the Club Precise SPA Plan. If ACR remains on the site and the museum is also be located here, at least nine more parking spaces shall be provided. 8. Dean Street shall have a pavement width of 30 feet in order to accommodate two lanes of traffic and parallel parking on both sides of the street. 9. It shall be determined if the development proposed protrudes into the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane. If the Ski Club Building does so protrude, Viewplane Special Review shall be considered at the time of Precise SPA Plan review. 10. Historic Preservation Committee review of the Ski Club building shall be conducted prior to approval of the Precise SPA Plan. r! .7h 1tr, 1 . i; 1c c (�3 f. �({ "•� A. ,!C 1�. _ l�v t Q^ 1 �•^l i 61 JZ^ 7h�n fc�,a, �jL� (.:% i..e (A-, diJ ,n -kl GUI. ( 4 �C �'!L' Tt'/1 ['�AAt��v/J{ (�iy(x�! r"✓�'ll�, f Fix:r t �Yrt:.� M;� i ,•. — `�c 1 / 2 j.r, 7 $; ITPolc `( C i"rr•i�;9 j'7., 5 ,„ !g4rr � / t', C' j and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET / ASPEN, CO.81611 / 303.925-4755 January 21, 1986 Mr. Alan Richman Planning and Development Director City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Ski Museum: Stallard House Site Dear Alan: Enclosed please find a copy of a Site Plan and a draft of Proposed Expansion Plans for the Stallard House (Aspen Historical Museum). The Proposed Plans call for an expansion program to add 15,000 square feet to the existing Historical Society Facilities. Included in this expansion is approximately 3,300 square feet for a Ski Museum. This 3,300 square feet is approximately equal to the 3,000 square feet of gallery and storage space allocated in the Lift One/Museum Program. This assumes administrative and support facilities can be shared and/or absorbed in other allocations within the expansion plans. I have attached a comparative analysis of the Llft One and Stallard House sites for your review. If you require additional input, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, o Bill Poss William John Poss and Associates BP/jt Enclosure architecture and planning WILLIAM JOHN POSS AND ASSOCIATES CITY OF ASPEN: LIFT ONE/WILLOUGHBY PARK PROJECT COMPARISON Lift 1/Site Parcel Site (Approx.) 38,650 SF Total Program Floor Area 8,400 (1) Floor Area Ratio (External) .22:1 Adjacent Zoning (F.A.R.) L-1, L2 (l:l) Lot Coverage (2 Story) .11 Parking (Lot Coverage) 30 Cars (.18) Net Open Space 71% 1. Lift One/Willoughby Park Building Program (Total 8400 SF) Ski Club 2400 SF Ski Museum 6000 SF 2. Historical Society Building Program (Total 20,000 SF) Stallard House 2700 SF Carriage House 2700 SF Future Barn 5000 SF Future Building 10000 SF 20400 Stallard House 60,000 SF 20,400 (2) .34:1 R-6 (.11:1) .17 On Street (0) 83% WILLIAM JOHN POSS AND ASSOCIATES CITY OF ASPEN: LIFT ONE/WILLOUGHBY PARK PROGRAM ANALYSIS ASPEN SKI MUSEUM COMPONENT ROOM SIZE NET SF PLUS X NET(1) GROSS SF ADMINISTRATION Curator 14X14 200 0.20 240 Ass't/Sec/Reception 1505 225 0.20 278 SUB -TOTAL 425 518 GALLERY/DISPLAY 4@x50 2080 -- 2080 COLLECTION STORAGE 20x50 1000 -- 1000 (Future Expansion) 3000 3000 SUB -TOTAL SUPPORT Lobby 10x20 200 -- 208 Sales/Control 1@x15 150 0.28 180 Work Room 18x20 200 0.20 240 Workshop 1@x20 200 1.20 248 Toilets -- -- -- -- Coat Room 600 60 -- 60 Meeting Room 15x25 375 -- 375 Projection Capability Bx10 Be -- 80 Chair Storage 8x10 80 -- 80 Kitchenette Bx10 Be -- 80 SUB -TOTAL 1425 1535 TOTAL 4850 5045 CONTRIBUTION TO TOTAL BUILDING Mechanical/Janitorial 18X 500 Public Spaces 20% 1000 Vestibule, 1Receptions, Corridors, Exits, Stairs, Toilets, Closets, Archive Storage (Basement) (I) Contribution to Total Component Size (Partition and Internal Circulation 20X) NOVEMBER 19, 1905 ME MORANDU M TO: Aspen City Council THRU: Hal Schilling, City Manage LO FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office RE: Willoughby Park Conceptual SPA Review - Public Hearing DATE: January 20, 1986 LOCATION: Willoughby Park, Block 7, Eames Addition, City of Aspen, southeast corner of South Aspen and Dean Streets. ZONING: P-Park . LOT SIZE: Approximately 36,800 s.f. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The City of Aspen is applying for conceptual SPA approval to locate a site for a new building for the Ski Club on the Willoughby Park property. The City is also requesting conceptual approval of a building envelope for a Ski Museum, if it is decided that a museum should be located on this site. Following is the proposed Statement of Intent for the Conceptual SPA: The City of Aspen, as the applicant for this SPA, desires to develop a ski -related recreational building(s) on the Willoughby Park site while retaining the park -like atmosphere, retaining open space and facilities for outdoor recreation purposes, and creating a better opportunity to view and appreciate the historic Lift 1 lift structures and boat tow. BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: As a condition of the Aspen Mountain FUD, John Roberts has committed to construct a replacement building for the Ski Club consisting of at least 1,500 square feet which would be finished, and 500 square feet left unfinished. The City of Aspen assumed responsibility during the Aspen Mountain PUD review to find a site for the Ski Club building in order to allow completion of the Koch Lumber Land Trade. Interest was expressed by Council during September in exploring options of building a multi- purpose structure to house the Ski Club, a Ski Museum, Nordic Council Office, and Aspen Central Reservations in Willoughby Park, at the base of Aspen Mountain Lift 1. Bill Poss and Associates was contracted to do conceptual site analysis for the building. After several meetings with Council it was determined that the Nordic Council and Aspen Central Reservations should not be accommodated in the new building. Council determined that the Ski Club Building was appropriate for this site and that a ski museum building envelope should be identified for this site and for the Stallard House site. It was thought that ultimately the existing two story structure used by Aspen Central Reservations should be removed from the site. The four schemes before you have been developed as alternatives to accommodate Council's directives. The Conceptual SPA plan before you deals only with land planning. Building development will be addressed at the Precise Plan stage, at which time the City along with the Ski Club will be the developer. A building development plan for the Ski Museum is not expected to be presented at that time, and will be subject to future determinations as to the appropriate site for that use, funding availability, and similar concerns. Therefore, the only reason to identify the ski museum envelope at this time is to protect its potential development location while we plan for and approve the Ski Club Building. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE MNICIPAL CODE Section 24-3.4 as amended by Ordinance 20 of 1985, requires that all area and bulk requirements in the P-Park Zone District must be set by an adopted Specially Planned Area (SPA) plan. Section 24-7 .3 (a) as amended by Ordinance 20, Series of 1985, states the requirements for a conceptual SPA plan submittal, as follows: "The conceptual submission shall include a statement of the intent and a conceptual description of the type of development which is proposed to take place on the parcel, including but not limited to use categories, overall project density, and design concepts to be employed". The details of the proposal are not to be reviewed until the Precise Plan is under consideration, as explained in Section 24-7.7. A "recreation building" is one of the conditional uses in the Park zone district, according to the Use Tables in Section 24-3.2. Section 24-3 .3 (b) states the criteria of suitability by which the Planning Commission shall review a proposal, including compliance with zoning code requirements, consistency with zoning code objectives and purposes, and compatibility with surrounding land uses. When a building design is presented at the Precise Plan stage, we will also take this project through Conditional Use Review. Section 24-11 .2 (e) state the conditions by which a GMP exemption for the purpose of constructing essential public facilities shall be considered. This proposal appears to be eligible for consideration of such an exemption. Again, formal consideration of this issue should occur at the Precise Plan stage. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Each of the four schemes show building envelopes for a Ski Club building footprint of 1200 to 1400 square feet and a ski museum building footprint of 3,000 to 4,000 square feet. Two story structures could then be designed to accommodate 2000-2800 square feet and 6000-8000 square feet respectively. An off-street parking area for 21 to 23 vehicles would be located off of Dean Street. 2 A brief description of major features of each scheme follows: Scheme l: The Ski Museum and Ski Club are aligned on Aspen Street in front of the Lift #1 Bullwheel structure. A pull -in parking area for 23 vehicles is located off of Dean Street. Scheme 2: The Ski Club is located on the corner of Aspen and Dean Streets and the Museum is in the center of the northern portion of the site, encroaching on the present site of the volleyball courts. Scheme 3: The Ski Museum is on the corner and the Ski Club is in the center, juxtaposed from Scheme 2. Scheme 4: The Ski Club is in the center and the Ski Museum is located on the volleyball courts, either attached or separated by 15 feet. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The following concerns generally apply to each of the Schemes and should be considered in reviewing this application for SPA Conceptual approval. 1. Appropriateness of Use: At this stage we are mainly concerned with the location of the Ski Club in Willoughby Park and secon- darily with the Ski Museum. In addition, it should be noted that the Aspen Central Reservation use presently in place is non- conforming in the Park Zone District. The Ski Club appears to be a recreation use closely associated with Aspen Mountain. We feel that this use is appropriate on the subject site due to the proximity and accessibility to Lift 1. A museum should probably not be considered a "recreation build- ing", which is a conditional use in the Park zone. In the Public zone museums are permitted; therefore, it would be appropriate to rezone the site to Public at such time as siting a museum here would be further pursued. 2. Suitability of the Structure on the Site: The entire park is approximately 36,800 square feet. Contained on the gently sloping site is the historically designated Lift #1 Bullwheel structure and tower, the ACR building, volleyball courts and several groves of trees. There is also an unofficial parking lot along Dean Street which local skiers have customarily used. It has been the initial reaction of City Council that with proper siting and sizing of buildings it is possible to accommodate a structure or structures without disrupting the park atmosphere or necessarily removing the volleyball courts. We concur with this position. Several open space areas of significant size and the north --south open corridor can be maintained even if the site is developed as proposed. 3. Landscaping and Hillside Disturbance: It is important that the 3 site location and development techniques disturb the hillside as little as possible and that a landscaping, plan is developed to retain or increase the number of trees on the site. Any new berm or retaining walls should be designed with the objective of main- taining the existing natural character of the park as much as possible. Drainage does not appear to be a problem on the site, although it should be studied at the precise plan stage. 4. Parking and Width of Dean Street: All the schemes show an off- street double row of straight -in -parking, with either 21 or 23 spaces. The ACR presently has approximately 9 spaces in its lot. It is projected that the Ski Club will generate the need for 6 parking spaces and the museum 8 spaces. The City Engineer reviewed the projected parking needs with the Planning Office on December 12, 1985. Our opinion is that on ordinary days, the parking demand from the Club and Museum will not be greater than projected. Excellent pedestrian access from the lodge district and commercial core, and skier access off Aspen Mountain will reduce the need for vehicular access. However, when there are special Club trips or special Museum activities, a greater demand is likely. If the ACR were removed, then 9 more spaces would be available. However, if ACR remains, then a larger parking area should be provided. In either case, at precise plan stage parking genera- tion should be more fully addressed. The "compact car" spaces in the row next to the hill are substan- dard. We recommend that the full 17 foot length be provided, probably necessitating pushing deeper into the hillside and providing a retaining wall. Dean Street would be made 25 feet wide in this proposal. At the present time the Dean Street pavement varies in width and spreads to over 65 feet in places. This situation has allowed the area to be used as a "free-for-all" area in which local skiers park. While we do not feel that it is necessary to use the park to accommodate day skiers, we do recommend that the Dean Street road width be set at 30 feet. This would accommodate 2 lanes of traffic and curbside parallel parking. 5. Wheeler Opera House Viewplane: It should be determined if the development proposed protrudes into the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane, and thereby is subject to Special Review. 6. Historic Preservation Committee Review: Ordinance 37, Series of 1974, gave historic designation to the Lift 1 Bullwheel, First Tower and Third Tower. HPC review of this project should be undertaken concurrently with P&Z's Precise Plan review. Following are more specific evaluations of each scheme: 4 Scheme 1: Although Scheme 1 has the least amount of impact on existing conditions, we feel that it is not acceptable because it hides the historic lift structures and other views east from South Aspen Street. The building envelope is also so confined on the site that the building design as well as landscaping buffers would be limited. Scheme 2: In this scheme, the Ski Club dominates the corner, and blocks some views of the museum, which probably will be the more outstanding architectural statement. The Museum location also breaks up the open space, and makes north -south passage within the park very difficult. Scheme 3: The Ski Museum is on the corner and serves as the main focus of the development. The museum building envelope probably should be moved some five feet north away from Dean Street. The structure will affect some views from the Southpoint apartment building. However, the main north -south view corridor would remain. open. The Ski Club building has less impact on breaking up the open space. Some aspen trees may need to be removed, however, new land- scaping can screen the building. The volleyball courts would remain, although the Club building may cast an afternoon shadow on the courts. Scheme 4: The main disadvantages in this scheme are that the volley- ball courts must be relocated (likely location is Koch Park) and the north -south view from Dean Street would be blocked. The Museum's site is certainly one of the most choice available. There would be abundant space for a variety of footprints. The area is level, and views to the north would be excellent. ADVISORY COMMITTEE VOTE: On December 17, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed a motion, 4 in favor and 3 opposed, to recommend conceptual SPA approval of Scheme 3, subject to the conditions listed in the recommendation below. A motion was defeated, 4 opposed, 3 in favor, to state that it is the sense of the P&Z that a ski museum should not be located on the Willoughby Park site. RECOMMENDATION: Alternatives 3 and 4 are the most desireable in our opinion. The Planning Office and the Planning Commission recommend conceptual SPA approval of Scheme 3 subject to the following condi- tions: 1. The Ski Club building envelope should be moved as close to the volleyball courts (west) as possible in order to preserve the "ski down" in its present location. 2. Conditional Use approval for the Ski Club Building shall be considered at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 3. A GMP exemption for essential public projects shall be considered at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 4. The property shall be rezoned to Public prior to consideration of the Precise SPA Plan for the Museum. 61 5. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted as part of the i Precise SPA Plan for the Ski Club. 6. Any drainage problems should be addressed in detail at the Ski Club Precise SPA Plan stage. 7. A new parking plan shall be developed showing all full size \� spaces. A more detailed parking demand study shall be submitted with the Club Precise SPA Plan. If ACR remains on the site and the museum is also be located here, at least nine more parking spaces shall be provided. 8. Dean Street shall have a pavement width of 30 feet in order to accommodate two lanes of traffic and parallel parking on both sides of the street. 9. It shall be determined if the development proposed protrudes into the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane. If the Ski Club Building does so protrude, Viewplane Special Review shall be considered at the time of Precise SPA Plan review. 10. Historic Preservation Committee review of the Ski Club building shall be conducted prior to approval of the Precise SPA Plan. PROPOSED MOTION: "Move to approve the Conceptual SPA Plan for Willoughby Park subject to the ten (10) conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and Planning Office." SB.4 G I hereby certify that on this 2� dayof , 198 a true and correct copy of the attached NotAce of ublic Hearing was deposited in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, to the adjacent property owners as indicated on the attached list of adjacent property owners d -to th-t in regard to the case named on the aforementioned public notice. Lla; !x- � 4 , " a = ) �� -A L Jan Lynn R zak PUBLIC NOTICE RE: WILLOUGHBY PARR CONCEPTUAL SPA REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, January 27, 1986 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the City Council of Aspen, Colorado, in City Council Chambers, Community Center, Aspen, Colorado, to consider a conceptual SPA request to identify a building envelope for a proposed new 2,000 square foot building for the Aspen Ski Club on the Willoughby Park property near Aspen and Dean Streets. The applicant (the City of Aspen) is also requesting conceptual approval of a building envelope for a Ski Museum, if at some future date it is decided that a museum should be located on this site. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2020, ext . 223 . s/Wil l iam L. Stirling Mayor, City Council of Aspen, Colorado Published in the Aspen Times on January 2, 1986. City of Aspen Account. ME MORANDU M TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office RE: Willoughby Park Conceptual SPA Review DATE: December 12, 1985 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- LOCATION: Willoughby Park, Block 7, Eames Addition, City of Aspen, southeast corner of South Asper. and Dean Streets. ZONING: P-Park. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The City of Aspen is applying for conceptual SPA approval to site the Ski Club on the Willoughby Park property. The City is also requesting, conceptual approval of a building envelope for a Ski Museum, if it is decided that a museum should be located or this site. Following is the proposed Statement of Intent for the Concep- tual SPA: The City of Aspen, as the applicant for this SPA, desires to develop ski -related recreational buildings on the Willoughby Park site while retaining the park -like atmosphere, retain- ing, open space for outdoor recreation purposes, and creating a better opportunity to view and appreciate the historic Lift 1 lift structures and boat tow. BACKGROUND: John Roberts has committed to construct a replacement building for the Ski Club consisting of at least 1,500 square feet which would be finished, and 500 square feet left unfinished. The City of Aspen assumed responsibility during the Aspen Mountain PUD review to find a site for the Ski Club building in order to allow completion of the Koch Lumber Land Trade. Interest was expressed by Council during September in exploring, options of building a multi- purpose structure to house the Ski Club, a Ski Museum, Nordic Council Office, and Aspen Central Reservations in Willoughby Park, at the base of Aspen Mountain Lift 1. Bill Poss and Associates was contracted to do conceptual site analy- sis for the building. After several meetings with Council it was determined that the Nordic Council and Aspen Central Reservations should not be accommodated in the new building. Council determined that the Ski Club Building was appropriate fer this site and that a ski museum building envelope should be identified for this site and for the Stallard House site. It was though that ultimately the existing two story structure used by Aspen Central Reservations should be removed from the site. The four schemes before you have been developed as alternatives to accommodate Council's directives. The Conceptual SPA plan before you deals only with land planning. Building development will be addressed at the Precise Plan stage, at which time the City along with the Ski Club will be the developer. A building development plan for the Ski Museum is not expected to be presented at that time, and will be subject to future determinations as to the appropriate site for that use, funding availability, and similar concerns. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE Section 24-3.4 as amended by Ordinance 20 of 1985, requires that all area and bulk requirements in the P-Park Zone District must be set by an adopted Specially Planned Area (SPA) plan. Section 24-7 .3 (a) as amended by Ordinance 20, Series of 1985, state the requirements for a conceptual SPA plan submittal, as follows: "The conceptual submission shall include a statement of the intent and a conceptual description of the type of development which is proposed to take place on the parcel, including but not limited to use categories, overall project density, and design concepts to be employed". The details of the proposal are not to be reviewed until the Precise Plan is under consideration, as explained in Section 24-7.7. A "recreation building" is one of the conditional uses in the Park zone district, according to the Use Tables in Section 24-3.2. Section 24-3 .3 (b) state the criteria of suitability by which the Planning Commission shall review a proposal, including compliance with zoning code requirements, consistency with zoning code objectives and purposes, and compatibility with surrounding land uses. When a building design is presented at the Precise Plan stage, we will also take this project through Conditional Use Review. Section 24-11 .2 (e) state the conditions by which a GHP exemption for the purpose of constructing essential public facilities shall be considered. This proposal appears to be eligible for consideration of such an exemption. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Each of the four schemes show building envelopes for a Ski Club building of 1200 to 1400 square feet and a ski museum building of 3,000 to 4,000 square feet. Two story structures could then be designed to accommodate 2000-2800 square feet and 6000-8000 square feet respectively. An off-street parking area for 21 to 23 vehicles would be located off of Dean Street. A brief description of major features of each scheme follows: Scheme l: The Ski Museum and Ski Club are aligned on Aspen Street in front of the Ski Lift Bull H'heel structure. A pull -in parking area for 23 vehicles is located off of Dean Street. Scheme 2: The Ski Club is located on the corner of Aspen and Dean Streets and the Museum is in the center of the northern portion of the site, encroaching on the present site of the volleyball courts. Scheme 3: The Ski Museum is on the corner and the Ski Club is in the center, juxtaposed from Scheme 2. Scheme 4: The Ski Club is in the center and the Ski Museum is located on the volleyball courts, either attached or separated by 15 f eet . PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The following concerns generally apply to each of the Schemes and should be considered in reviewing this application for SPA Conceptual approval. 1. Appropriateness of Use: At this stage we are mainly concerned with the location of the Ski Club in Willoughby Park and secon- darily with the Ski Museum. In addition, it should be noted that the Aspen Central Reservation use presently in place is non- conforming in the Park Zone District. The Ski Club appears to be a recreation use closely associated with Aspen Mountain. We feel that this use is appropriate on the subject site due to the proximity and accessibility to Lift 1. A museum should probably not be considered a "recreation build- ing", which is a conditional use in the Park zone. In the Public zone museum are permitted; therefore, it would be appro- priate to rezone the site to Public if siting a museum here is to be further pursued. 2. Suitability of the Structure on the Site: The entire park is approximately 36,800 square feet. Contained or the gently sloping site is the historically designated ski lift bull wheel structure and tower, the ACR building, volleyball courts and several groves of trees. There is also an unofficial parking lot along Dean Street which local skiers have customarily used. It has been the initial reaction of City Council that with proper siting and sizing of buildings it is possible to accommodate a. structure or structures without disrupting the park atmos- phere or necessarily removing the volleyball courts. We concur with this position. Several open space areas of significant size and the north -south open corridor can be maintained even if the site is developed as proposed. 3. Landscaping and Hillside Disturbance: It is important that the site location and development techniques disturb the hillside as little as possible and that a landscaping plan is developed to retain or increase the trees on the site. Any new berm or retaining walls should be designed with the objective of main- taining the existing natural character of the park as much as possible. Drainage does not: appear to be a problem on the site, although it should be studied at the precise plan stage. 4. Parking and Width of Dean Street: All the schemes show an off- street double row of straicht-in-parking, with either 2.1 or 23 spaces. The ACR presently has approximately 9 spaces in its lot. It is projected that the Ski Club will generate the need for 6 parking spaces and the museum 8 spaces. The City Engineer reviewed the projected parking needs with the Planning Office on December 12, 1985. Our opinion is that on ordinary days, the parking demand from the Club and Museum will not be greater than projected. Excellent pedestrian access from the lodge district and commercial core, and skier access off Aspen Mountain will reduce the need for vehicular access. However, when there are special Club trips or special Museum activities, a greater demand is likely. If the ACR were removed, then 9 more spaces would be available. However, if ACR remains, then a larger parking area should be provided. In either case, at precise plan stage parking genera- tion should be more fully addressed. The "compact car" spaces in the row next to the hill are substan- dard. [we recommend that the full 17 foot length be provided, probably necessitating pushing deeper into the hillside and providing a retaining wall. Dean Street would be made 25 feet wide in this proposal. At the present time the Dean Street pavement varies in width and spreads to over 65 feet in places. This situation has allowed the area to be used as a "free-for-all" area in which local skiers park. While we do not f eel that it is necessary to use the park to accommodate day skiers, we do recommend that the Dean Street road width be set at 30 feet. This would accommodate 2 lanes of traffic and curbside parallel parking. 5. Wheeler Opera House Viewplane: It should be determined if the development proposed protrudes into the wheeler Opera House Viewplane, and thereby is subject to Special Review. 6. Historic Preservation Committee Review: Ordinance 37, Series of 1974, gave historic designation to the Lift 1 Bullwheel, First Tower and Third Tower. HPC review of this project should be undertaken concurrently with P&;Z's Precise Plan review. Following are more specific evaluations of each scheme: Scheme 1: Although Scheme 1 has the least amount of impact on existing conditions, we feel that it is not acceptable because it hides the historic lift structures and other views east from South Aspen Street. The building envelope is also so confined on the site that the building design as well as landscaping buffers would be limited. Scheme 2: In this scheme, the Ski Club dominates the corner, and blocks some views of the museum, which probably will be the more outstanding architectural statement. The Vuseum location also breaks up the open space, and makes north -south passage withir the park very difficult. Scheme 3: The Ski Museum is on the corner and serves as the main focus of the development. The museum building envelope probably should be moved some five feet north away from Dean Street. The structure will affect some views from the Southpoint apartment building. However, the main north -south view corridor would remain open. The Ski Club building has less impact on breaking, up the open space. Some aspen trees may need to be removed, however, new land- scaping can screen the building. The volleyball courts would remain, although the Club building may cast an afternoon shadow on the courts. Scheme 4: The main disadvantages in this scheme are that the volley- ball courts must be relocated (likely location is Koch Park) and the north -south view from Dean Street would be blocked. The Museum's site is certainly one of the most choice available. There would be abundant space for a variety of footprints. The area is level, and views to the north would be excellent. RECOMMENDATION: Alternatives 3 and 4 are the most desireable in our opinion. tie recommend the Planning Commission to recommend conceptual SPA approval of Scheme 3 and specifically the location of the Ski Club Building in the center of the site, subject to the following condi- tions: 1. Conditional Use approval shall be considered at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 2. A G11P exemption for essential public projects shall be considered at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 3. The property shall be rezoned to Public prior to consideration of the Conceptual or Precise SPA Plan for the Museum. 4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted as part of the Precise SPA Plar for the Ski Club. 5. The building envelope f or the museum shall be moved south by a ppro ximatl ey five (5) feet. 6. Any drainage problems should be addressed in detail at the Precise SPA Plan stage. 7. A new parking plan shall be developed showing all full size spaces. A more detailed parking demand study shall be submitted with the Club Precise SPA Plan. If ACR remains on the site and the museum is also be located here, at least nine more parking spaces shall be provided. 8. Dean Street shall have a pavement width of 30 feet in order to accommodate two lanes of traffic and parallel parking on both sides of the street. 9. It shall be determined if the development proposed protrudes into the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane. If the Ski Club Building does so protrude, Viewplane Special Review shall be considered at the time of Precise SPA Plan review. 10. Historic Preservation. Committee review of the Ski Club building shall be conducted prior to approval of the Precise SPA Plan. SB .32 TO: T H RU FROM: RE: DATE: Aspen City Council Hal Schilling, City ME MDRANDU M Managelo),, Alan Richman, Planning Office Ski Club/Willoughby Park Project November 29, 19855 Mayor Stirling has asked that I write you a brief report which summarizes the directions I heard from Council on November 25, and the way the City Manager and I propose to respond to your intentions. After talking with Hal and with Bill Poss, following is the approach to the project which I propose: 1. Bill Poss will, by letter, amend his contract to discontinue the remaining tasks and to substitute new work in their place. 2. The work to be done by the architect will involve principally identifying a minimum of 3 alternative locations on the Willoughby site for the Ski Club building. The alternatives should include an add -on to the ACR building, a site on the volleyball courts (preferred choice by Club) and at least one other option. A brief evaluation of the pros and cons of these alternatives will be provided. 3. An evaluation of footprint locations for the Ski Museum will be performed, including possible connections to the Ski Club building alternatives, and the feasibility of locating the ski museum at the Stallard House. 4. Using the architect's information, the Planning Office will carry forward a conceptual SPA application to develop the Ski Club building only. P&Z and Council review is anticipated in December -January. The outcome of this process will be an agreed upon preferred location on the Willoughby Park site for the Ski Club. 5. The Ski Club and John Roberts will work together to design an appropriate building to meet their needs and fiscal capabilities. When a design is ready, it will form the basis of a precise plan application to be reviewed by P&Z and Council in the spring of 1986. I will continue to conditions, unless Please let me know this time. CC: Hal Schilling Bill Poss Tony Scheer proceed forward with the project under the above I receive any further direction from Council. if we need to discuss this matter any further at A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council THRU : Hal Schilling, City Manager FROM: Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director TV - RE: Lift 1/Willoughby Park Project DATE: November 25, 1985 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends that Council choose from among the alternative site development programs identified herein. The preferred program of the Planning Office is No. 4. Various other associated actions are also recommended herein. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On October 15, Council approved a contract with Bill Poss and Associates for architectural services for a multi- purpose building at the Lift 1/Willoughby Park site. On November 18, at a progress report from the architect, concern was expressed that: 1. The size of the proposed building was excessive, and too many users were being accommodated on what is a constrained site. 2. A means should be provided to meet the need of the Aspen Ski Club to have confidence that a site for their building will be available, coincident with the time frame for progress on the Aspen Mountain PUD. Based on Council Is comments we have tried to develop a new program for a building 6 , 000-9 , 000 square feet and to address the needs of the Ski Club as a first and foremost concern. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The architectural program proposed for the Willoughby Park site includes the following uses: 1. Aspen Ski Club 2. Aspen Central Reservations/Aspen Resort Association 3. Nordic Council 4. Ski Museum Among these uses, the only one which must be located on the site is the Aspen Ski Club. For the Ski Club to give up its lease on the City lots, and therefore allow the completion of the Koch Land Trade, a site for the location of a 2000 square foot building must be identi- fied. Based on the preliminary work done by the architect, it is clear that the site can handle a building of this size. Alternative footprints for this use can be identified near the existing ACR building, at the volleyball courts or elsewhere on the site. The second use which most clearly is suited to the site is the ski museum. Our reasons for reaching this conclusion include: 1. The natural compatibility between a museum and the club. 2. The site's historical significance, as best described in the attached letter from Steve Knowlton. 3. The site's ideal location from the standpoint of ski -in access for visitors, and walk-in traffic from the lodge district, Rubey Park and Commercial Core. 4. The potential for use of a central reception area by the Aspen Skiing Company during Winternational. In our opinion, the creation of an Aspen Ski Museum would be a tremen- dous asset to the community, cataloguing Aspen's unique role in the evolution of the sport in the past, and helping to maintain our position as a leader in skiing for the future. Having seen the collection which is being made available to us, I feel that this is an opportunity not to be missed by the City. It is not necessary for the City to commit to building the museum at this time, but it is impor- tant that a site plan be developed identifying the footprint for a future building. This approach will insure that we do not forego the option of having a museum on the site, should money become available through donations and/or City funding. We further recommend that Council have identified a two stage footprint for the museum which would provide for a moderate size facility, with growth potential, as described in detail in the alternatives section below. The third use which can easily be accommodate on site is the adminis- tration of the nordic system. This use involves just a small office of some 200-400 s. f . We feel that this site is conducive to this use due to the proximity to the Aspen Mountain Trail. However, it is not absolutely necessary for this use to be on the site if a space can be provided in City Hall, the Golf Course/Parks Department facilities (adjacent to Golf Course/Marolt trails) or elsewhere. In an effort at keeping the Park site free of office type uses, we recommend that this use not be located on this site. The fourth use for the site is the ACR, currently housed on the site in the building along Aspen Street, and the ARA, currently housed along Main Street. Councilmembers have raised questions as to whether this use must remain on the site, or could be better accommodated in a commercial/office location. We feel that Council should direct staff to work with ARA to identify the proper site for their needs. In our opinion, we should make every effort to find an alternative which eventually removes the existing ACR building from the site, and 2 returns that area to open space. Our preferred option would place both ACR and ARA in a single location, for the efficient use of their space, but probably to not place either use on this site, so as to help to downsize the ultimate building. However, for at least the short-term the ACR function need not be moved, leaving the ARA and ACR in a "status quo" situation as to their functions until a better solution can be found. ALTERNATIVES: Based on the above comments, and utilizing the program- ming data generated by the architect, following are some development alternatives for you to evaluate: Alternative #1 Aspen Ski Club Building 2,400 s.f. Alternative #2 Aspen Ski Club Building 2,400 s.f. Ski Museum Phase I 3,500 s.f. TOTAL 5,900 s.f. Alternative #3 Aspen Ski Club Building 2,400 s.f. ACR Rebuild 2,000 s.f. Ski Museum Phase I 3,500 s.f. TOTAL 7,900 s.f. Alternative #4 Aspen Ski Club Building 2,400 s.f. Ski Museum Phase I 3,500 s.f. Ski Museum Phase II 2,500 s.f. TOTAL 8,400 s.f. Alternative #5 Aspen Ski Club Building 2,400 s.f. ACR/ARA Consolidated Use 5,200 s.f. Nordic Council 400 s.f. TOTAL 81000 s.f. Alternative #6 Aspen Ski Club Building 2,400 s.f. Ski Museum Phase I 3,500 s.f. Ski Museum Phase II 2,500 s.f. 3 ACR Rebuild TOTAL 2,000 s.f. 10,400 s.f. NOTE: All numbers are approximate and inclusive of areas to be shared among all users. Based on our evaluation, and the comments we heard at the Council work session, we recommend support for Alternative #4, which would develop the Ski Club Building, and provide site planning for a two phase museum project. In our opinion, the two office uses, ARA and Nordic Council, need not be housed on this site. By eliminating these two uses, we accomplish the following: 1. Downsize the building to about 8,400 square feet. 2. Provide for only publicly oriented, recreation uses in what has always been a park. 3. Allow for creative site planning to locate a smaller building on the site with minimum disruption to neighbors and possibly no required relocation of the volleyball courts. The City Manager, City Attorney and I presented this approach to representatives of the Ski Club at a meeting held on November 20. We told the Ski Club that because the site is zoned Park, even the construction of their building alone will require that an SPA plan be adopted to set the area and bulk requirements for the site. Based on this comment, the representatives asked us to make the following two requests of Council so that they would feel totally comfortable about the future availability of a building for the club. 1. That the City will take the lead as the applicant for the Ski Club building on the land owned by the City at Willoughby Park (the building would be designed and constructed by the club and John Roberts) . At the conceptual level, we would identify alternative locations on the site for the building, which are most consistent with the other uses at the park. No other development would be proposed for the site at this time, but site planning for the museum would be taken into account. 2. That at such time as John Roberts requires the Ski Club to vacate their present building, if a new building has not been construct- ed at Willoughby Park by Mr. Roberts, then the City will provide the Club with a lease on the building presently occupied by the ACR. The Planning Office supports the former request and has no comment on the latter item as it is not a matter of planning interest. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to direct the staff to accomplish the following: 4 1. Have the architect proceed with site planning to accommodate the Aspen Ski Club on the Willoughby Park site in 1986, and to provide a site plan for the future development of the ski museum on the site in two phases. ��<<,,�\ �Q,\� o SW1n,..SL "V x,4 2. Analyze alternative locations for housing a consolidated ARA/ACRaM function, with end goal being the removal of the existing building from the site, but with no action proposed for said g building until an acceptable alternative is found. 3. Analyze alternative locations for housing the Nordic system Stir a b office, to include existing City and County office buildings." AR.3 5 ME MORANDU M TO: Hal Schilling Paul Taddune Bill Poss FROM: Alan Richman, Planning Office NZ RE: Aspen Ski Club Building - Zoning Analysis DATE: October 24, 1985 INTRODUCT ION : The purposes of this memo area: 1. To establish the existing zoning constraints on the Willoughby Park site which will affect the f uture construction contemplated by the City: and 2. To propose a strategy to address these constraints. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The Willoughby Park site is presently zoned P-Park, with an historic overlay (lift tower). The area and bulk requirements (i.e., height, FAR, setbacks) for this zone district are "set by adopted plan for a specially planned area." In essence, this requirement means that a precise SPA plan must be adopted for the site which must be preceeded by the approval of a conceptual development plan ( see Section 24- 7.4(d) of Ordinance 20) . However, adoption of such a plan would not allow us to vary from the uses allowed in the Park zone, since the site is not zoned SPA, it is merely subject to adoption of an SPA plan. Uses allowed in the Park zone include few, if any of those contem- plated for the new multi -purpose buildina. Therefore, it is clear to me that the property must be rezoned to accommodate our proposal. The appropriate zone appears to be the Pub -Public zone which allows a museum; essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (ARA; Nordic Council); community recreation facility ( Ski Club) ; and public park. Please note that the Public zone also requires that an SPA plan be adopted to set the area and bulk requirements. Finally, a growth management quota system exemp- tion will also need to be obtained for the site as an "essential public facility (Section 24-11.2(e)) . PROPOSED STRATEGY: Based on the above constraints, I recommend that we follow this strategy: 1. We should schedule the P&Z review of the rezoning and conceptual development plan for the next available agenda, December 3. By that time we will have collected most of the data from the architect's study, and have enough of a feel from Council about their commitment to the project. By the time the conceptual plan reaches Council (December 23?) they will have heard the results of the architect's site analysis and design study. 2. Precise plan review, GMP exemptions and final rezoning should be initiated in the beginning of 1986, using the drawings f rom the architect I study, plus any design drawings which emerge from the follow-up contract. Ideally, this process should occur between February and April of 1986. 3. HPC review of the project should be concurrent with the P&7. reviews at the conceptual and precise plan stages. Please let me know if you see any problems with the strategy I propose. If not, I will schedule the process accordingly. cc: Steve Burstein AR.100 OCT ; isq5 !- Uc 13, 1985' j i goo o �� J Dear Carol, '1�5 - 0 vi c. k Thank you for your well thought out letter of September 14th. Where the expanded Ski Museum ends tap in Aspen will not be our decision - obviously. however, I am pleased that our idea was well received and, as you stated, the process is started. The ori,xinal motivation, as we said in our presentation to the City Council, was our disappointment in the ski section of the current museum - not the site. It was only this summer during our visits to Aspen and discussions with various people that the possibility of other sites became evident; at the same time, our ideas for a certain type of museum solidified. At the moment, the site at the base of old lift #1 seems to be ideal for the concept we have in mind. What we have in mind and are recommending is the following: The ski museum will not be a separate building but will be integrated into a building complex that will house the Aspen Ski Club, Aspen Reservation Service, and any other facility that would benefit the city of Aspen and the Aspen Skiing Company. It would serve as a community public relations/hospitality center. Ideally the complex would include a small auditorium used by the Ski Club for its various functions and to show ski movies old and new. Also World Cup Face and press headquarters should be incorporated as well as a library with historic books and articles for research. Consideration should be made in the desigu-so that it can be used by the Ski School to bring ski classes in after skiing for tea and a tour as well as a focal point for travel industry familiarization tours. In other words, it would not serve just as a museum but a util- itarian center that would benefit several entities. I belel-ve this would be a first in the ski industry. The artifacts and memorabilia would be on display throughout the complex not just in one room or one section. The design of the building if done in this concept will necessitate determining space and physical requirements of each entity. Perhaps by spreading the exhibits throughout the complex instead of one building the square footage requirements could be reduced. However, as you must have exper- ienced with the Stallard House, consideration for expansion due to additional artifacts or traveling exhibits should be included in any plans. As ,you can see, our concept as outlined would best suit the city owned site at old lift #1. That area is where Aspen ski history all started: Roche Run, the boat tow, 1941 Nationals, loth Mountain races and jumping, first Roche Cnp, the first Downhill Derby - bet you never heard of that one- the first ever dual slalom, birth place of Pro Ski Racing (IPSRA), and the present day World Cup Races. The day following our presentation to the City Council we met with Hal Schilling which the Council had recommended and with Jerry Blann who had been appraised of our ideas during a previous Aspen visit. In summary, we would like to point out that many cities have several museums that compliment and cooperate with each other. We suggest that with propersigns and displays each museum could publicize the other and the site we propose would be more accesible in winter to those interested in ski history: the skiers themselves. We certainly appreciate the opportunity to respond to your ideas andto be able to express ours. We look forward to helping to create a museum that skiers before and after us will be proud of. cc: Bill Dunaway Bill Stirling Jerry Blann Fritz Benedict Cordially, Charlie Grover Hal Schilling Aspen Planing Dept:✓ CITY OF ASPEN 130 south galena street aspen, colorado 81611`��``�:' 303-925-2020 September 18, 1985 Aspen Ski Club P.O. Box 49 Aspen. Colorado 81612 Re: Aspen Ski Club Building Gentlemen: This will confirm the City's agreement as approved by the City Council in regular session July 22, 1985, to specifically desig- nate, on or before January 1, 1986, a building footprint for building a facility for the Aspen Ski Club on Citv-owned property, specifically described as Lots 13 and 14, Block 7, Eames Addition, commonly known as 600 South Aspen Street, City of Aspen. The City acknowledges that in reliance on this agreement, the Ski Club will enter into an agreement with the Aspen Mountain Joint Venture that provides for the termination under certain circum- stances of the Ski Club's lease with the City of Aspen pertaining to Lots 14 and 15, Capitol Hill Addition, It is understood that the Ski Club is cooperating with the City and Aspen Mountain Joint Venture to facilitate replacement of a Ski Club facility pursuant to Paragraph H.8, of the As Mountain PUD Subdivision Agreement. In this regard, it is anticipated that the City and SKi Club will work toward resolving the -following concerns prior to January 1, 1986, to the mutual .satisfaction of the City and the Ski Club: 1. The Ski Club will have exclusive use of any future Ski Club quarters; both parties desire and agree to explore the feasibility of constructing a multi -use facility which would include the Ski Club and other compatible users, provided the use by the Ski Club would not be unduly interfered, prejudiced or otherwise compro- mised. 2. In the event zoning and development concerns for a multi -use facility on Lots 13 and 14, Block 7, Eames Addition cannot be adequately addressed by the City, then the parties will designate an alternate site for the Ski Club building facility, preferably on Lots 13 and 14, Lot 7, Eames Addition, or if that is not feas- ible, then at another location at the base of Aspen Mountain. Letter to Aspen Ski Club September 13, 1985 Page Two 3. The new facility will need to have adequate parking. 4. If the Ski Club is to build its own building on land leased to it by the City, the Ski Club and the City shall enter into a long-term land lease having a lease term, rental, and other terms identical or very similar to, in all material ways, the Ski Club's existing land lease for Lots 14 and 15, Capitol Hill Addition. In the event the Ski Club will be occupying a buildinq owned by the City or space in a building owned by the City, the Ski Club and the City shall enter into a long-term lease for the building or space for a term of not less than 50 years, for a nominal rental not to exceed the cost of the land lease, and which lease will allow the Ski Club the right to use the facility or space and alter or modify it as if they had fee simple ownership of it. As has been discussed at several public meetings held in connec- tion with the Aspen Mountain hotel project, the City reiterates its concern that the Ski Club be suitably and expeditiously relocated. To accomplish this, the City agrees that by January 1, 1986, it will have designated a building site for a multi -use facility that includes space and facilities for the Ski Club, of not less than 2,000 square feet, or it will have designated a site on Lots 13 and 14, BLock 7, Eames 'addition, or such other site at the base of Aspen Mountain acceptable to the Ski Club, at which the Ski Club can build its own building of not less then 2,000 square feet for its Ski Club facility. Very truly ��_ William L. Mayor RLS/mc 5C yours, Off. Stirling cc: City Manager Planning Director City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council THRU: Hal Schilling, City Manag FROM: Alan Richman, Planning and ?vclopment Director kK RE: Relocation of Aspen Ski Club DATE: July 22, 1985 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The staff recommends that Council authorize selection of an architect to develop plans to remodel and expand the building now housing Aspen Central Reservations. The new building would provide space for the consolidated functions of the Aspen Resort Association, Aspen Central Reservations, Aspen Ski Club and the Nordic Council. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: At a work session on July 1, Council determined that the best location for relocation of the Aspen Ski Club was the present site of the building now housing Aspen Central Reservations. Staff was directed to meet with representatives of the Aspen Resort Association to determine their space needs and to develop a plan for the preferred use of this property. BACKGROUND: One action taken during the approval of the Aspen Mountain Lodge involved the trade of the City -owned lots in the Capitol Hill Addition on which the Aspen Ski Club building now sits in return for a portion of the Koch Lumber Company parcel. To complete this transaction, the applicant agreed to construct a new Club building of 2000 s.f. on a site to be found by the Club. The City has been working with the Club for the past several months and has determined that the preferred site is adjacent to the old Lift 1/boat tow at the corner of Aspen and Dean Streets. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: Since your work session, the City Manager and I met with Spence Videon, Director of the Aspen Resort Association, to identify their space needs. In our discussions and a subsequent visit to the site, we made the following findings: 1. The Aspen Central Reservations building contains about 1500- 2000 total square feet on two levels and houses the tele- phone service and equipment vital to the workings of this resort. 2. The other offices of the ARA are located in a victorian on Main Street, encompassing about 1200 s.f. 3. There are several administrative inefficiencies about the present ARA operation due to the two buildings including: a. Duplication of personnel and equipment. b. Poor use of space due to unadapted building design. 4. There is a substantial investment in telephone wiring in the ACR building which will be lost if this function is totally relocated. Furthermore, the central locatioA for this function is highly important because of the service ACR provides in booking guests into lodges. Essentially, the ACR telephone has some 60 plus land line connections to member lodges which receive calls through referral by ACR. The cost of phone service to connected lodge increases for each 1/10 of a mile from the central location to each connected lodge. Based on these findings, we concluded that significant advantages would accrue from combining the two ARA functions in a single build- ing. We also identified efficiencies in combining these two functions with the Aspen Ski Club building in terms of joint use of basic support services, utilities, building systems and facilities. Finally, we concluded that the outright relocation of the ACR function could be quite costly to the member lodges and could result in a severe temporary service disruption which could drastically affect our resort, not to mention the fact that the City has no alternative site to house Aspen Central Reservations functions. ALTERNATIVES: There are a variety of alternatives which can be formulated for the redevelopment of this site. We believe that the most desirable alternative is one which incorporates the Aspen Ski Club, Aspen Resort Association and Nordic Council into a single building of about 4000-4500 s.f. To accomplish this end, the property would need to be rezoned from Park to Public, since ARA and Nordic Council uses do not fit the permitted use list in the Park zone. Either the Park or Public zone requires adoption of a Precise SPA Plan to set area and bulk requirements (FAR, height, open space) for the site. From our visits to the site, we believe that a building of the size contemplated herein can be compatibly accommodated on the site, including the present building site and area behind the build- ing, and yet provide setbacks compatible with neighboring buildings and be terraced to be below the lift and not affect mountain views from the South point Condominiums. Staff feels that the appropriate method to make choices about the site's configuration is to select an architect to analyze the space needs of the three entities and to propose an appropriate design for the building. We have already moved forward to have a survey done for the property so that accurate property lines and existing features will be identified for site design work. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to authorize staff to request proposals for architectural services to analyze the space and locational needs for a remodeled/expanded building at the corner of Aspen and Dean Streets, and to design said building consistent with the identified needs." 2 B. At your last meetinc we had an in-depth discuss' of the possible location of a new buil, g for the Aspen Ski Cl As you know, the Applicants have committed to building the Club 1,500 sq.ft. of finished space and 500 sq.ft. of unfinished space at a location to be identified by the Club. Based on your comments, we are revising the PUD Agreement to indicate that an equivalent cash contribution could be made by the applicants, possibly toward the construction of a multi -purpose building housing ARA and the Nordic Council, or for some other type of building. The Council asked staff to take a look at the site to determine in broad terms the limitations upon building there. Issues which you wanted addressed included the following: 1.. Building size and uses permissable in this location. 2-. Limitations due to prior actions such as street vacation and historic designation. 3. Alternative property uses such as transit or parking. The Planning Office is undertaking this review and will report to you on these items at your meeting. However, following are some of the findings we have made to date. The site was obtained as a gift from the Aspen Skiing Company in 1971 during the time at which the new lift lA was to be constructed. The City Clerk and City Engineer checked the records pertaining to this exchange and found that there was no vacation of Juan Street as it passes through this property. The street vacation which did occur via Ordinance 13 of 1971 vacated an alley in the Eames Addition where the new lift was to be constructed. Also obtained at this time was a smaller parcel near the Holland House. Both sites are shown on the attached vicinity map. This site is presently zoned P-Park, with a Historic Overlay, and is about 1 acre is size if we include the land within Juan Street. Uses on the property include the building housing Aspen Central Reservations (shown on Lots In and 15 of the attached map) and the Willoughby Park Volleyball Courts. Checking the Use Tables, I find that the Park zone designates "recreation building" as a conditional use. The office use by ACR is presently non -conforming, as might be that by the Nordic Council in the future. Therefore, to develop the type of multi -purpose building proposed would probably require a rezoning, possibly to Pub -Public, which would require the adoption of an SPA plan for the site to conform with that zone's provisions. The lift structure and the boat tow are presently designated with an historic overlay. Any development of the site would have to respect the historic character of this area, although it is only a small portion of the overall site that is designated "H". It was mentioned at the prior meeting that this site was the one addressed in the Aspen [Mountain Ski Area Master Plan for the retention of existing parking. Actually, the Skiing Company site containing the parking is across Aspen Street, diagonally across from the Skier's Chalet. However, since this site is so close to the present lift and has historically been used for parking when owned by the Skiing Company, there is logic to the suggestion. The Planning Office staff has initiated a site-bv-site review of the potential for the construction of a small parking structure or some alternative transportation use on this and other sites. We may find, however, what these alternatives are not compatible with the surrounding historic structures or may raise objections from neighbors. nonetheless, Council should keep these options in mind when considering the use of this property for a new multi -purpose building. 3 MEMORANDUM 191-85 TO: Alan Richman, Acting Planning Director FROM: Hal Schilling, City Manage RE: Alternative Multi -purpose Building - Ski Club Relo- cation DATE: Mav 7, 1985 During the course of discussion at the meeting May 6, 1985, the Mavor mentioned an alternative approach to a straight recon- struction of a ski club building. I had been informed in advance of the meeting of this possibly being suggested and had accordingly discussed this same with Jay and he provided me with a map showing the lots immediately adjacent to Lift 1 and surrounding areas. I would like to have you look at the question as regards the city's current ownerships at Lift 1 and any related vacatable rights -of -way that might be included in a construction project. What we should do is look at such property in light of retaining important amenities such as the volleyball facility if possible and certainly adequate parking for future multi -purpose type structure and determine whether or not the site - which is doubtless a collection of individual lots - could accommodate a 4,000 foot building either on one floor or two. As we look at this consider the availability as mentioned of any city rights - of -way in the immediate area; any rights -of -way that might be abandoned and accommodate this building in the area but off the Lift 1 site; any zoning limitations vis-a-vis a multi -purpose building at this location; potential desireable future uses of this land; any implied differential and environmental impacts that might be occasioned by a multi -purpose building versus the present uses. If you have any questions, let's talk. k I m