HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.202111011
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
November 1, 2021
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
130 S Galena Street, Aspen
WEBEX
www.webex.com
Enter Meeting Number: 2556 037 8003
Password: 81611
Click “Join Meeting”
OR
Join by phone
Call: 1-408-418-9388
Meeting number (access code): 2556 037 8003
I.WORK SESSION
I.A.2022 Budget Recap
I.B.Lumberyard Affordable Housing Design Alternatives
1
2022 BUDGET DEVELOPMENTBudget Wrap UpPete Strecker & Andrew Kramer NOVEMBER 1, 202112
New RequestsInflationary PressuresRestorationBase Budget2Operating: $82MSupplementals: $2.7M•Staffing: $1.6M (8.0 FTE + Seasonal Incr.)•Additional HHS Grants: $340K•Rate Studies: $310K•Purchased Power: $300KPrice Escalation: $4.1M•Up to 4% Merit: $1.2M•Comp. & Class Implementation: $1.2M•2% on Contracts & Materials: $980K•On‐Going Spring Supps: $340KRestoration Actions: $1M•2020 Wage Freeze Restoration: $1.2M•2020 GOMs: $800K•2020 One‐Time Items: ($891K)Base Budget: $74M3
3Capital: $53MHOUSINGBurlingame Phase 3 (79 Units) Lumberyard Planning, Design, EntitlementsPlaceholder for Other OpportunitiesPUBLIC BENEFITArmory Repurposing / RenovationWheeler Production Equipment UpgradesHerron Park FacilitiesChildcare Expansion ‐DesignINFRASTRUCTUREAddress Aging Electrical & Water SystemsStreet Grading & Repaving (3 Year Cycle)Pedestrian Improvements / ADA 4
42022 Proposed BudgetKnown Adjustments•AMP, General Fund & Stormwater FundIncludeProperty Tax Collection Fees $166,270(oversite issue during development)•General FundIncrease Council Budget by $300,000 to Increase Arts Grants Funding ‐ReduceWheeler by $84K to $100K (RETT $’s)•Golf Course FundRevise Debt Service Down$82,000 to Factor In Increasefor Purchase of New Carts $399,540 (Outright Purchase vs Lease Purchase)•Housing Development FundIncreaseTransfer by $83,500 to APCHA Admin Fund for EE Housing Benefit & Clean‐UpOriginally ProposedKnown AdjustmentsRevenues$157,139,243 $123,750Base Funding$79,365,237 Supplemental Requests$2,751,730 Total Operating$82,116,967 +$465,770Capital Outlay$52,708,715 +$399,540Debt Service$6,646,870 ‐$82,000Net Appropriations$141,472,552 +$783,310Transfers$26,096,840 Total Appropriations$167,569,391 +$783,310Ending Fund Balance$179,925,762 ‐$659,5605
5Additional Funding Considerations•General FundWest End Route Alternatives Study$60K to Fund Study for Up to 3 Alternatives to Routes•Obtain Vehicle Data for Late Afternoon Traffic Through West End •Assess Implementing Improvements for Safety & Impacts to Main Street•Transportation FundEntrance to Aspen Up to $150K for Consulting Services for Education & Outreach Around Record of Decision•Website Creation & Document Library•Print Campaign•Survey / Polling•Public Open Houses•Grassroots Videos6
6American Rescue Plan Funding•City’s Allocation ‐$1.86mCity Is A Non‐entitlement Unit (NEU) < 50,000 Population 1st Tranche (50%) Awarded July 2021; 2ndTranche (50%) Due May 2022•Spending Timeline Funds Must Be Obligated By December 31, 2024Funds Must Be Spent By December 31, 2026Adequate Time To Plan & Integrate Funds Into CIPMaximize Local Impact By Coordinating The Use Of ARP Funds With Anticipated Funding Through The Infrastructure Bill Currently Under Discussion In Congress 7
7American Rescue Plan FundingPossible OptionsChildcareStormwater or Water Broadband ProjectsSpecific Uses of FundingSupport Public Health ExpendituresAddress Negative Economic Impacts Caused by Public Health EmergencyReplace Lost Public Sector RevenueProvide Premium Pay for Essential WorkersInvest in Water, Sewer, Stormwater* & Broadband Infrastructure*** N.E.P.A. Review Required If Leveraged With Other Federal Funds** Regional Requirement Possible Recommendation:50% for Childcare –Expansion Design & Entitlements50% for Stormwater –Existing Infrastructure Replacement8
8Questions / Tasks for Staff•Asset ManagementMajor Projects Timeline –Layer With List of Potential Uses for Armory Building•Environmental HealthExplore Requirement for Haul Out or Charge Fee for Companies that Deliver with CardboardPartnership with Local Business (e.g. Kroger) on Plastic Waste Hauling Already Occurring•Parks, Utilities & Environmental HealthWildfire Mitigation Update•Short Term Rentals (work session scheduled Nov 16)Assess Impacts to the CommunityLooking Beyond 30‐Day Rental PeriodExplore Residential Vacancy TaxAssess Regulatory Responses•Information Technology (work session item)Further Assessment of Establishing Community Broadband as Utility9
9Questions / Tasks for Staff•Parking FundReview Hotels Use of Underground Garage Spaces ‐Aligned with Existing Zoning?Provide Data Around Unpaid Parking TicketsProvide Assessment of Adding Additional Parking Spaces in Rio Grande Garage•Recreation & Parks•E‐bike Education, Liability & Etiquette; Dog Waste Enforcement (Wagner Park & Beyond)•Explore Funding Opportunity for Maroon Creek Trail –CDOT Safe Ways to Schools•Ensure Financial Assistance Available for Increase on Junior Golf Pass •Include Pickleball / Tennis Court Bubble in 0.5% Sales Tax Renewal Question•Tourism PromotionAssess Preservation of Existing Tourists’ Experience vs. Increasing TourismShould Production Costs Associated with Events that Drive Tourism be Funded from the Tourism Promotion Fund?10
Addition of Employee Housing BenefitsIncrease City & County Subsidy Contribution to Fund Benefit & 12.5% Reserve RequirementSmall Operating Increase in Development Fund$6,200 for Rental Unit APCHA AdministrationAPCHA DevelopmentAPCHA SmugglerKnown AdjustmentsRevenues$2,436,390 $10,000 $80,600 $177,000 Base Funding$2,202,230 $6,200 $66,670 $129,950 Supplemental Requests$119,870 $0 $190 $0 Total Operating$2,322,100 $6,200 $66,860 $129,950 Capital Outlay$500,000 $0 $18,100 $0 Debt Service$0 $0 $0 $0 Net Appropriations$2,822,100 $6,200 $84,960 $129,950 Transfers$0 $0 $0 Total Appropriations$2,822,100 $6,200 $84,960 $129,950 Ending Fund Balance$324,974 $3,800 $420,369 $47,050 11
11Other City Component UnitsTruscott Phase II Property Aspen Country Inn Property Aspen Mini StorageRevenues$1,199,750 $386,350 $634,400 Base Funding$579,660 $227,880 $634,400 Supplemental Requests$0 $0 $0 Total Operating$579,660 $227,880 $634,400 Capital Outlay$15,000 $0 $0 Debt Service$396,940 $138,270 $0 Net Appropriations$991,600 $366,150 $634,400 Transfers$0 $0 $0 Total Appropriations$991,600 $366,150 $634,400 Ending Fund Balance$651,727 $133,130 $0 12
122022 Proposed Budget Wrap-Up13
Page 1 of 8
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Chris Everson, Affordable Housing Project Manager
THROUGH: Rob Schober, Capital Asset Director
MEMO DATE: October 29, 2021
MEETING DATE: November 1, 2021
RE: Lumberyard Affordable Housing Design Process Update
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting feedback from Council about overall project
vision and alternate parking plans recommended for upcoming community engagement.
BACKGROUND: Attached Exhibit A – Lumberyard Project Background provides a history of
work to date on the Lumberyard affordable housing design effort. The detailed background
information provides important context for where the current effort is picking up after the effort
left off in late 2020.
DISCUSSION:
Council is being asked to provide the following direction during the today’s session:
1. Do the project vision and guiding principles meet Council’s expectation?
2. Feedback on additional explorations or metrics that will assist in evaluating success
moving forward?
3. Are the range of parking alternatives presented today reasonable to take to the
community for public input?
Project Vision and Guiding Principles
Since being brought together, the current project team, including Cushing Terrell and DHM
Design, have been integrating their knowledge of the project work to date, and have been working
primarily on Council’s concerns about the 2020 Lumberyard 310-unit conceptual master plan.
The project team has also been further studying the technical elements of the project site and
engaging a series of “staff advisory” conferences with key City department representatives to make
sure that the project team is hearing important project input from the City’s many referral
departments such as Environmental Health & Climate Action, Parks & Open Space, Parking,
Transportation, Communications, Community Development, Building, Engineering, APCHA, and
Utilities.
14
Page 2 of 8
While becoming familiar with the project background and the City’s values, the project team has
developed a vision statement for the Lumberyard affordable housing development.
Lumberyard Affordable Housing Project Vision Statement:
A stable, thriving affordable neighborhood. Pedestrian friendly, environmentally sustainable,
connected, and welcoming. Looks, lives and feels authentically Aspen!
Cushing Terrell have also engaged key City and CORE personnel in a sustainability workshop as
well as additional follow-up from that workshop, including collecting goals and recommendations
for potential certification programs for energy efficiency and environmental sustainability. This
work is ongoing, and the project team will be bringing forward a sustainability recommendation
in upcoming meetings.
Parking Alternatives Analysis
Council’s concern about 100% underground parking is a fundamental site master planning issue
which must be managed prior to continuing with the schematic design process. The Cushing
Terrell team has engaged most of their design effort to this point developing alternate parking
plans.
Underground parking removes conflicts between pedestrians and cars and leaves space on the
surface for site amenities which increase the livability of the facilities. But underground parking
is costly in many ways including initial cost, ongoing maintenance cost, disposition of excavated
material, environmental impacts, access convenience and more.
Cushing Terrell’s first design task has been to perform a parking alternatives analysis to study
impacts of varying levels of above-ground parking in place of 100% underground parking. The
goal of this effort is to come up with feasible alternatives to 100% underground parking with 310
units on site and with buildings no taller than 4 stories.
The four parking alternatives which the Cushing Terrell team is presenting all include the same
number of units (310) and parking spaces (432) as are contained in the 2020 Lumberyard 310-unit
conceptual master plan. The plans all include the same amount of space and parking for a childcare
facility. But the plans have varying amounts of usable open site area, with some site area more
consolidated into larger yard-like spaces and some more distributed. The useable open site area
notes shown below are a sum of consolidated yard-like green spaces of over 6,000 sq. ft.
Latch Parking Plan: Latch distributes 310 units in twenty structures and maintains generous
usable open site area. With more parking underground, latch provides connected public-facing
open space on the site. These 4-story structures are conceptual only and contain space needed for
310 two-level units accessed by external stairs and access decks. Latch has 351 underground
parking spaces (81%), 44 carport-covered surface parking spaces (10%) and 37 uncovered surface
parking spaces (9%). Latch provides about 1.4 acres of yard-like green spaces of over 6,000 sq. ft.
with two large, primary public-facing green spaces.
15
Page 3 of 8
Pivot Parking Plan: Pivot spreads livable area provides two story units that aren’t back-to-back.
This gives daylight, views and cross-ventilation to each unit. These 4-story structures are
conceptual only and contain space needed for 310 two-level units accessed by a covered
breezeway. Pivot has 311 underground parking spaces (72%), 49 carport-covered surface parking
spaces (11%) and 72 uncovered surface parking spaces (17%). Pivot provides about 0.8 acres of
yard-like green spaces of over 6,000 sq. ft. and breezeways with front stoops and balconies.
Hinge Parking Plan: Hinge maximizes consolidated open site areas into large, protected
courtyards and consolidates 310 units into three very large, efficient structures. These 4-story
structures are conceptual only and contain space needed for 310 single-level units accessed by an
internal corridor. Hinge has 261 underground parking spaces (60%), 78 carport-covered surface
parking spaces (18%) and 91 uncovered surface parking spaces (21%). Hinge provides about 1.8
acres of yard-like green spaces of over 6,000 sq. ft. with three large, protected courtyard areas.
Flange Parking Plan: Flange has no underground parking and balances pedestrian, vehicle, and
other modes of connection on the surface. Flange consolidates 310 units into nine moderately
large, efficient structures and has a lower initial carbon footprint with no underground garage.
These 4-story structures are conceptual only and contain space needed for 310 single-level units
accessed by a covered breezeway. Flange has 0 underground parking spaces (0%), 201 carport-
covered surface parking spaces (47%) and 231 uncovered surface parking spaces (53%). Flange
provides about 0.2 acres of yard-like green spaces of over 6,000 sq. ft.
16
Page 4 of 8
Rough Order Cost and Excavation Estimates
Below is a table of conceptual rough order of magnitude estimates of initial cost and annual
maintenance cost for parking for each parking plan. The estimates are based on 2021 dollars, not
future dollars, and include only parking, not the entire development. These estimates are intended
to be used only for rough order of magnitude comparison among the parking plans and are not
based on construction bids and should therefore not be relied upon as an indication of actual
construction cost in 2021 or in the future. This also does not include the 15 to 16 childcare surface
parking shown in all the plans.
The table also includes a rough order estimate of excavated material for underground parking
which has been reduced to dump truck loads to make the comparisons as simple as possible. This
does not include estimates of excavated material for crawl spaces which are likely under buildings
where there will be no underground parking. This also does not include estimates of excavated
material for carport-covered or uncovered surface parking spaces which is also likely needed. The
“Dump Truck Loads Excavated” estimates shown here are for excavation due to underground
parking which is in excess of excavation for crawl spaces and carport-covered or uncovered surface
parking. The “Dump Truck Loads Excavated” shown is not attempting to be an accurate measure
of dump truck trips on Highway 82 since a significant amount of fill would be used to balance the
site grading and to create berms for noise mitigation and other landscape features.
17
Page 5 of 8
Housing Needs Study Update (Information Only – Not Part of Today’s Decision-Making)
The project team has commissioned an updated housing needs analysis with Economic & Planning
Systems, Inc. (EPS). EPS is in the final stages of data analysis and are beginning to format a draft
final report. In the report, data related to household incomes covers the Roaring Fork Valley from
Glenwood Springs to Aspen. And because the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority housing
regulations require employment in Pitkin County, data related to jobs i n the report will focus on
jobs in Pitkin County. Data from 2020 was not included due to accuracy concerns around COVID-
19 impacts.
More detailed information will be reported shortly, and the preliminary information shown below
is the primary area of concern:
From 2010 to 2019, the following trends have occurred with households from GWS to Aspen:
• A decline in rental and ownership households under 85% AMI (APCHA Categories 1 & 2)
• A small increase in rental and ownership households 85-120% AMI (APCHA Category 3)
• Some increase in rental households >120% AMI (APCHA Categories 4+)
• Larger increase in ownership households >120% AMI (APCHA Categories 4+)
From 2010 to 2019, the following trends have occurred with jobs in Pitkin County:
• Some growth in jobs for household incomes under 85% AMI (APCHA Categories 1 & 2)
• About twice as much job growth for household incomes 85-120% AMI (APCHA Category 3)
• Some growth in jobs for household incomes >120% AMI (APCHA Categories 4+)
• Wages in Aspen and Snowmass tend to be higher than the rest of the RFV
This preliminary information appears to suggest:
• Household losses combined with some job growth at lower incomes suggests a heavy focus on
providing Category 1 & 2 units
• Small household increases combined with higher job growth at 85-120% AMI suggests an
equally heavy focus on Category 3 units
• Household increases combined with some job growth at >120% AMI suggests a lesser focus on
Category 4+ units
What might this mean for income levels in upcoming affordable housing developments?
• The Lumberyard program has to this point considered a mix of approximately 50% Category 1
& 2, 30% Category 3 and 20% Category 4+. Some consideration could be given to increasing
Category 3 and decreasing Category 4+.
• For Burlingame Ranch Phase 3, consideration could be given to focusing unit sales more on
Categories 2 & 3 and less on Categories 4+.
Staff plans to continue to develop reports and recommendations for Council review and direction
as affordable housing development projects move forward.
18
Page 6 of 8
Land Use Actions in Process
The design for the Lumberyard affordable housing facilities needs to be determined before a
development application can be submitted. But there are two land use approval steps that must
occur prior to submittal of the affordable housing development application. These two steps are
necessary to assemble the project site. The project site currently consists of three parts as shown
below:
Annexation of Mini Storage: The 3-acre Mini Storage site is outside Aspen City limits and meets
the regulated requirements for annexation into the City of Aspen. Years ago, the City of Aspen
likewise annexed the 4.7-acre Lumberyard property into the City. Since the 3-acre Mini Storage
site was purchased by the City of Aspen in 2020, annexation of the Mini Storage property has not
yet occurred. An annexation application has been drafted and will be submitted shortly. The
annexation will follow the same process that the Lumberyard property followed years ago, and a
temporary re-zoning will be applied to the parcel once annexed – this will facilitate the continued
operation of the Mini Storage operation until the City phases that out as 2024 approaches. The
annexation process will follow the City of Aspen municipal code requirements and will require
public notice and public hearings per typical regulation by the City of Aspen Community
Development Department. Staff plans to proceed as described unless directed otherwise by
City Council.
Subdividing Undeveloped 2.8 Acres: The 2.8-acre undeveloped site was annexed into the City of
Aspen years ago as part of the Burlingame Lot 1A property which covers all of Deer Hill. Because
the 2.8-acre undeveloped area is still part of Burlingame Lot 1A, it must be subdivided from Lot
1A so that it can be joined with the balance of the Lumberyard property for the development of
affordable housing. The Deer Hill conservation easement and the Bar-X Pre-Annexation
Agreement are historical recorded documents which allow this area to be used for development of
affordable housing, and the process requires approval by Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT). Staff
plans to proceed as described unless directed otherwise by City Council.
19
Page 7 of 8
While these preliminary land use approval actions are in process, the Lumberyard project team
will continue to develop the designs for affordable housing with input from Council and as
informed by further community engagement. While the land use actions described above will
prepare the site for the affordable housing development application submittal, these actions have
no bearing on the ongoing design of the housing facilities and are being performed now due to
necessity and time efficiency.
Upcoming Community Engagement (Lumberyard Outreach #4)
After hearing from Council at the November 1 work session and incorporating Council’s input
into the alternative parking plans, the Lumberyard project team plans to perform further
community engagement around these topics. This will be the fourth round of community outreach
for the Lumberyard project (Outreach #4). The objective of Outreach #4 is to measure and
document community sentiment around the alternative parking plans presented to Council.
The schedule for the upcoming community outreach is shown below, and is subject to modification
as we move forward:
October 29 Re-launch Lumberyard on aspencommunityvoice.com
Email to City & Lumberyard mailing lists - Nov 1 City Council work session
Social media post - Nov 1 City Council work session
November 1 Aspen City Council Work Session – Present Parking Alternatives
November 4 Aspen Community Voice and City Website - ready for comments and input
November 8 Main Street Banner - request for community input
Store Front Flyers (Library, City/County Buildings, Info. Kiosk, etc.)
Email to City & Lumberyard mailing list - request for community input
Press release and media releases - request for community input
November 26 Email to City & Lumberyard mailing list – more input opportunities/events
Social media post – more input opportunities/events
Newspaper/Online Media Ads – more input opportunities/events
Nov 26 - Dec 20 Survey in process, topics based on Nov 1 work session
December 3 Newspaper, Online, Radio, social media – promote Dec 9 public meeting
December 8 Newspaper, Online, Radio, social media – promote Dec 9 public meeting
December 9 Newspaper, Online, Radio, social media – promote Dec 9 public meeting
December 9 TBD Public Meeting, on-line or in-person with controlled access or hybrid,
(Details TBD pending COVID direction and input from public health officials)
December 10-20 Continue data collection, close on Dec 20
Dec 21 - Jan 5 Compile and format data and reports, summary report ACV
January 7 Email to City & Lumberyard mailing lists – Jan 10 City Council work session
Social media post – Jan 10 City Council work session
January 10 Aspen City Council Work Session - Present Outreach Results
Staff plans to proceed as described unless directed otherwise by City Council.
The project information is now available at aspencommunityvoice.com/lumberyard.
20
Page 8 of 8
Ongoing Project Schedule:
2022 Complete Schematic Design
Development Application Approval & Submittal
RFQ PPP Development Opportunities
Land Use Approval Process
Detailed Design
Record PD & Development Agreement
2023 Construction Documents
Contracting & Procurement
Building Permit Applications
2024 Tentative Construction Start
Access & Infrastructure
Phasing plan TBD
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2022 budget was reviewed in a work session with City Council
on October 25, 2021. Ongoing financial impacts related to project design decisions are TBD.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that Council consider the project vision and
alternative parking plans presented and provide direction as requested. Staff additionally
recommends that Council maintain staff plans to continue with land use actions and community
engagement as described.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Lumberyard Project Background
Exhibit B – Presentation Slides including Appendix with Parking Analysis
21
Page 1 of 7
EXHIBIT A – LUMBERYARD PROJECT BACKGROUND
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Chris Everson, Affordable Housing Project Manager
THROUGH: Rob Schober, Capital Asset Director
MEMO DATE: October 29, 2021
MEETING DATE: November 1, 2021
RE: Exhibit A - Lumberyard Project Background
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: N/A – Information Only
BACKGROUND: Staff does not intend to review this background material in detail during
the work session.
The following background provides a history of work to date on the Lumberyard housing design
effort. This detailed background information is included for anyone who may not be up to date on
work leading up to the November 1, 2021 work session.
June 11, 2019: Council directed staff to move forward with community outreach and conceptual
design for the Lumberyard affordable housing development project.
June 24, 2019: Council approved a contract for community outreach and conceptual design with
DHM Design.
August 20, 2019: Staff provided an update to Council including a schedule of outreach activities
to be held in the fall of 2019 (outreach #1), and at Council’s request added additional public-facing
activities.
September 24, 2019: Staff reported to Council that the fall 2019 outreach #1 effort had reached
approximately 800 community members through over 50 total outreach events, meetings and
interviews. Below is a summary of what was heard during this early outreach process:
• Provide a variety of unit types, serving a mix of demographics
• Site is appropriate for larger buildings/higher density than may be appropriate elsewhere
• Parking is challenging at the AABC, don’t make is worse by under-parking Lumberyard
• Childcare is needed in the community and may be appropriate at this site
• The response about the need for the building supply operation varied broadly
October 8, 2019: City Council approved a contract to purchase the 3-acre Aspen Mini Storage
property for a purchase price of $11 million. This brings the total site area to 10.5 acres. The Aspen
22
Page 2 of 7
Mini Storage property is in Pitkin County and meets the requirements to be annexed into the City
of Aspen as was done years ago with the Lumberyard property.
November 18, 2019: The project team presented Council with themes that were heard during the
fall 2019 outreach #1 and “density heat maps”. Council directed the team to present design
alternatives at additional community gatherings, particularly near the AABC, in early 2020. An
example of one of the density “heat map” concepts is illustrated below:
January 2020: Site development diagrams and character images were shared with the public in
three open house meetings (outreach #2) in January 2020, one of which was at the AABC. The
team also issued a survey targeting commuting workers which received about 50 responses. Over
half said they commute at least four days a week to work in Aspen, and nearly 75% of respondents
said they would choose to live in Aspen if quality affordable housing were available.
March 2, 2020: The design team presented “consensus items” and “opposing viewpoints” from the
January 2020 outreach #2, and Council provided the following direction:
• Density: Advance conceptual studies with unit counts ranging from 140 units up to 500+ units
• Transportation: Proceed with basic traffic impact analysis, include impacts at AABC roadways
• Parking: Use municipal code standards to set a parking maximum for each density scenario
• Childcare: Continue to advance discussions on community need and feasibility
• Mixed use: Develop information on neighborhood needs, discontinue large lumberyard option
• Air quality and noise: Perform planning-level data gathering and evaluation
23
Page 3 of 7
July 6, 2020: The project team introduced five massing studies based on two different layout
concepts, each with an upper and a lower density option, plus one shared living (or co-living)
option:
• Concept 1a – Concept 1 with “High Density” – 450 total units
• Concept 1b – Concept 1 with “Low Density” – 216 total units
• Concept 2a – Concept 2 with “High Density” – 450 total units
• Concept 2b – Concept 2 with “Low Density” – 217 total units
• Concept 2c – Concept 2 with “Shared Living Maximum Density” – 501 total units
Four of the five concept plans listed above are illustrated below:
Upon extensive review and discussion of the five alternatives, Council provided the design team
with direction for further plan refinements and with an overall unit count direction aiming toward
300+ units.
September 14, 2020: Council provided direction on the survey questions which were to be included
in outreach #3, which occurred October 1 through November 6, 2020.
October 26, 2020: Staff presented preliminary results of the of outreach #3 as well as a narrowed
set of conceptual site alternatives which included the following alternatives:
• Concept A: 250 Units, 40% UGP, 76% 3-Story, 67% Studios & 1-BRs, 2.9 Acres Open Area
24
Page 4 of 7
• Concept B: 300 Units, 100% UGP, 56% 3-Story, 67% Studios & 1-BRs, 3.0 Acres Open Area
• Concept C: 330 Units, 100% UGP, 24% 3-Story, 67% Studios & 1-BRs, 3.5 Acres Open Area
Below is a summary image depicting the three refined conceptual site alternatives, including
vital statistics for each plan:
After review and discussion, Council agreed directionally to pursue the following:
• Underground parking
• Some four-story massing in key areas
• Increasing the number of 1- and 2-bedroom units
• Increasing the amount of ownership units
• Childcare on site
• Prioritize energy efficiency and sustainability
• Allowing the ABC to provide commercial services
• Paring back the co-living option
• Maintain 300+ units on the site
November 23, 2020: The project team presented the final results of the fall 2020 outreach #3. The
project website registered over 1,900 unique visitors, and there were 773 survey responses with
the following results:
Unit Mix: For rental versus ownership, the mean of responses is 58% rental and 42%
ownership. The most common answer was 50/50. 39% of respondents agreed with the
proposed unit mix of 1/3 studio and 1-bedroom units and 1/3 multi-bedroom units. 38%
25
Page 5 of 7
suggested there should be more multi-bedroom units. The highest-ranking unit types in
both rental and ownership were 1- and 2-bedroom units.
Parking: 75% of respondents are supportive of underground parking, particularly when it
results in higher total density and higher quality of outdoor spaces around the buildings.
The need for on-site parking was nearly unanimous from those who indicated they see
themselves as potential residents of the Lumberyard. A majority also support providing
some additional ‘ancillary’ parking on the site for guests or other uses.
Transportation: A majority of respondents are supportive of evaluating a shuttle service, or
similar mechanism, to improve transit access to the Lumberyard.
Mixed-Use/Commercial: Over 75% of respondents believe that allowing the ABC to serve
the commercial needs of the neighborhood is appropriate.
Co-Living/Shared-Living: A slight majority of the overall survey respondents were
supportive of the concept of co-living, but nearly 75% of those who see themselves as
potential residents of the Lumberyard were not supportive and would prefer to have full-
size units instead.
Energy Efficiency and Environmental Sustainability: The public is strongly supportive of
raising the bar in energy efficiency and sustainability, and a majority are also supportive
of pursuing a sustainability certification, such as LEED or similar programs.
Childcare: A majority of survey respondents are supportive of providing childcare on the
site, although the individual comments and other feedback mechanisms used suggest this
to an even stronger degree.
Architectural Character/Style: The highest support by all respondents was given to
mountain contemporary style followed closely by mountain traditional architecture.
Site Amenities: The most-favored amenities were generous gear storage, private outdoor
spaces such as decks, porches and patios along with lawn and park space. People also
favored extra parking spaces.
The project team also presented the results of the preliminary technical studies, which are briefly
summarized below:
Civil / infrastructure: There are no fatal flaws and that capacity will be available to
adequately serve the project at the density level being pursued, albeit with some
improvements to on-site or immediately adjacent facilities possibly being needed.
Traffic: The preliminary results indicate that the impacts to the overall AABC area are not
significant, with an increase of 100 vehicle trips during peak morning and evening hours,
and an average peak time increase in travel time through the ABC segment of HWY 82 of
less than 10 seconds.
26
Page 6 of 7
Noise: Noise measurement results indicated that while noise levels are elevated, they are
within acceptable levels, based on HUD guidelines, although this should be further studied.
Geotechnical: A report from a neighboring facility indicates favorable building soils for
foundations and does not raise red flags, but there could be a lot of large boulders.
Existing Conditions Survey: No specific red flags were identified, although there are some
unusual drainage patterns to the northeast, and the CDOT ROW drainage will need to be
accounted for in the stormwater management program for the project.
Air Quality: Initial findings from Pitkin County’s study of air quality in the area indicate
that air quality levels in the ABC are within acceptable thresholds, although this should be
further studied.
Based on the direction provided by Council from the October 26, 2020 work session and as further
refined based on the community input from outreach #3, the project team presented the final 2020
Lumberyard conceptual master plan as illustrated below:
The final 2020 Lumberyard conceptual master plan includes the following:
• 310 Units, 68% rental, 32% ownership
• 212 Rentals, 48 Studios, 100 1-Bedrooms, 64 2-Bedrooms, 0 3-Bedrooms
• 98 Ownership, 0 Studios, 40 1-Bedrooms, 42 2-Bedrooms, 16 3-Bedrooms
• 100% Underground Parking, 432 parking spaces (based on code max parking requirement)
27
Page 7 of 7
• 24% 4-Story, 76% 3-Story Building Heights
• 448 total bedrooms, 592 FTE’s housed with 240,000 sq ft of livable area
• 3.5 acres of useable open site area and on-site childcare
Upon review and extensive discussion, Council expressed numerous concerns about the final 2020
conceptual master plan, which are briefly summarized below:
• Concerns over the use of 100% underground parking
• Tight spacing between buildings
• Some concern about building heights and orientation
• Relocating ownership units to south end of site
• Noise Mitigation
• Innovation
• Demographics of target user mix (i.e. “who is this housing for?”)
• Maintain a schedule for construction to begin in 2024
March 8, 2021: Council directed staff to issue an RFP for a full architecture and engineering (AE)
design team for the purpose of evaluating alternatives to 100% underground parking and to begin
the schematic design process. Council also directed staff to maintain DHM Design’s involvement
as land planner, to update the City’s housing needs study and to begin planning on an RFQ for
public/private partnership housing development and financing opportunities.
July 27, 2021: Council approved the current contract with Cushing Terrell as the City’s lead
architect for the ongoing Lumberyard design process.
DISCUSSION: N/A – Information Only
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A – Information Only
RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A – Information Only
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: N/A – Information Only
28
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
29
3.1 COMMUNITY CONNECTION3.2 SUSTAINABILITY3.3PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY3.4 LIVING WELL3.5 AUTHENTICALLY ASPEN4.0 DESIGN4.1 NOV. 1, 2021 PARKING ALTERNATIVES5.0 WHERE WE ARE GOING3.0 VISION2.0 OUR PROCESS1.0 WHERE HAVE WE BEENTODAYS TOPICS30
ASPEN LUMBERYARD3CUSHING TERRELLWHERE HAVE WE BEEN?31
ASPEN LUMBERYARD4CUSHING TERRELLWHERE HAVE WE BEENSummary of Project Work to this Point• 2019 June - Council go-ahead for community outreach #1• 2019 November - Density “heat maps” presented to Council• 2020 January - Community Outreach #2• 2020 July - Conceptual site plan alternatives presented• 2020 September - Community outreach #3• 2020 October - Preliminary results and master plan adjustments• 2020 November - Final outreach results and 310 unit plan1.032
ASPEN LUMBERYARD5CUSHING TERRELLPrior Inclinations• Underground parking• Some four-story massing in key areas• Increasing the number of 1- and 2-bedroom units• Increasing the amount of ownership units• Childcare on site• Prioritize energy effi ciency and sustainability• Allowing the ABC to provide commercial services• Paring back the co-living option• Maintain 300+ units on the siteHOW TO MOVE FORWARD33
ASPEN LUMBERYARD6CUSHING TERRELLTASK AT HANDCurrent Aim• 310 Units• 432 Parking spaces• Space for Childcare center• A livable, energy effi cient community that refl ects the values of the Aspen and Pitkin County community34
ASPEN LUMBERYARD7CUSHING TERRELLHow we can solve your concerns• Concerns over the use of 100% underground parking• Tight spacing between buildings• Some concern about building heights and orientation• Relocating ownership units to south end of site• Noise MitigationOUR CHALLENGES• Innovation through modular design and sustainable building facades• Demographics of target user mix (i.e. “who is this housing for?”)• Maintain a schedule for construction to begin in 202435
ASPEN LUMBERYARD8CUSHING TERRELLWHERE ARE WE NOW?36
ASPEN LUMBERYARD9CUSHING TERRELLWhat will be covered Our ask of you:Address council’s concerns from the previous effortThe Team, The ProcessAn introduction to the Design Team and our process in helping the Aspen community discover the best solution for the Lumberyard!Laying the FoundationThe Design Team will outline our understanding of Aspen’s vision for a successful residential community.Sharing Some PossibilitiesThe Design Team will present several alternative parking schemes that marry parking, buildings and other key features to the site, while addressing Council’s previous concerns.Reach agreement on Vision and defi nitions of guiding principles.Provide feedback on additional explorations or metrics that will assist the council and community in evaluating success moving forward.Confi rm the range of parking alternatives presented today are reasonable for the council to allow the Design Team to present to the community for feedback.TODAY’S OBJECTIVES37
ASPEN LUMBERYARD10CUSHING TERRELLNear-term TimelineNovember 1, 2021City Council Work Session - Parking AlternativesDecember 9, 2021Public Outreach Meeting(s)January 10, 2021 (TBD)Present Public Outreach results to CouncilMid January - December 2022 Land Use Entitlement Process and Planned Development DocumentationMid February 2022 Present Progress Update on Schematic Design to CouncilMid March 2022 Present Final Schematic Design to CouncilLate March 2022 Post Final Schematic Design Package on Project WebsiteApril – September 2022 Design DevelopmentJanuary 2023 – October 2023 Construction DocumentsOctober 2023 – January 2024 BiddingFebruary 2024 Construction Start on First Phase38
ASPEN LUMBERYARD11CUSHING TERRELLCommunications Plan• December 9, 2021 On-line/Hybrid/In-Person Meeting(s) TBD• September 2 - November 1, 2021 Back of House Set Up - Social Media Plat forms, Website, and Local Newspapers• August 19 - October 22, 2021 Develop Parking Analysis• November 1, 2021 Work Session #1 w/ Council• October 15, 2021 Production of Graphics & Content Messaging for Outreach• October 15, - October 29, 2021 Create Transparency for Council Worksession• November 4 - December , 2021 Campaign Launch + Request for Feedback (30 days before Public Meeting)• December 9, 2021 On-Line/Hybrid/In-Person Meeting(s)• December 21 - December 30, 2021 Data Collection• January 10, 2022 TBD Present Outreach Results to CouncilPUBLIC ENGAGEMENT39
ASPEN LUMBERYARD12CUSHING TERRELLTakeaways from the Demographic StudyWHO IS THIS FOR?• There is a mismatch between housing supply and jobs• Household growth (Roaring Fork Valley) is in households above 120% of AMI, yet job growth (Pitkin County only) is concentrated among households below 120% of AMI• Looking at Valley-wide job growth shows more job growth below 80% of AMI• This indicates that many new jobholders are not living in the area• The consequence of this is a loss of lower income residents, creating additional in-commuting• Growing industries: Restaurants, hospitality, retail workers typically have household incomes below 80% of AMI• Household Composition• Approximately 42% of households live with unrelated roommates, while 44% live with family, and 14% live alone• Data suggests a focus on rental housing is appropriate for Lumber Yard site• Greatest need based on initial market and socioeconomic assessment• Market opportunity for 3-bedroom units: roommates share housing costs40
ASPEN LUMBERYARD13CUSHING TERRELLVISION41
ASPEN LUMBERYARD14CUSHING TERRELLWe believe that a strong and diverse year-round community and a viable and healthy local workforce are fundamental cornerstones for the sustainability of the Aspen Area community.We are committed to providing affordable housing because it supports:• A stable community that is invested in the present and future of the Aspen Area.• A reliable workforce, also resulting in greater economic sustainability.• Opportunities for people to live in close proximity to where they work.• A reduction in adverse transportation impacts.• Improved environmental sustainability.• A reduction in down valley growth pressures.• Increased citizen participation in civic affairs, non-profi t activities and recreation programs.• A better visitor experience, including an appreciation of our genuine, lights-on community.• A healthy mix of people, including singles, families and seniors.City of Aspen - 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan(Housing Section) VisionPhilosophy3.0VISION42
ASPENLUMBERYARD15CUSHING TERRELL3.0VISIONThe goal of APCHA is to provide affordable housing opportunities through rental and sale to persons who are or have been actively employed or self-employed within Aspen and Pitkin County, and that provide or have provided goods and services to individuals, businesses or institutional operations, within Aspen and Pitkin County (prior to retirement and/or any disability), and other qualifi ed persons as defi ned in these Regulations, and as they are amended from time to time.Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (2021 APCHA Housing Regulations) Mission Statement43
ASPEN LUMBERYARD16CUSHING TERRELLA stable, thriving affordable neighborhood. Pedestrian friendly, environmentally sustainable, connected, and welcoming. Looks, lives and feels authentically Aspen!VISION STATEMENT44
ASPEN LUMBERYARD17CUSHING TERRELL3.1COMMUNITY CONNECTIONDefining Community ConnectionSuccessful neighborhoods are integrated into the fabric of their communities. A big part of this connection is ensuring ease of access to the diversity of modes of transit that already exist in Aspen. Having the ability to select the appropriate mode of transit based on weather, destination, purpose, or whim allows residents of the Lumberyard to leave their cars parked for incidental travel. A connected community can greatly contribute to well-being and contentment in day-to-day life.What success might look like:• Adequate parking onsite so as not to negatively impact neighboring areas• Pedestrian walkways throughout and connecting to the ABC and existing trails• Maintain and improve the bike paths to the ABC and Annie Mitchell• Vehicular connections to the ABC and Highway 82 with appropriate stacking distances• Space for a possible transit stop• Space for multimodal transportation alternatives• Spaces allowing neighbors to engage with one another45
ASPEN LUMBERYARD18CUSHING TERRELLDefining SustainabilityIn working with the City of Aspen Environmental Health & Sustainability department and Community Offi ce for Resource Effi ciency (CORE), the design team has defi ned Sustainability through three pillars: Environment, Economic, and Social. All three are needed to create a strong and long lasting community.Environmental Sustainability - The ability to avoiddepletion and degradation of natural resourceswhile allowing for long term environmental quality. Economic Sustainability - The ability of an economy to support an appropriate level of economic capacity and activity to serve societal needs. Social Sustainability - The capacity to create healthy, accessible, livable places for all.What success might look like:Energy• Full Electrifi ed Buildings and Net Zero Energy Site-wide, including on-site storage• Forward-looking Electric Vehicle infrastructure• Leveraging passive solar strategies• Enhanced building commissioning and meteringWater• Advanced metering• Low usage building systems and fi xtures• Native plantings and xeriscapingWaste & Recycling• C&D waste management and planning• Construction activity pollution preventionWellness• Healthy and sustainable building materials• Dedicated and fi ltered fresh air• Increased daylighting and well controlled electric lighting3.2SUSTAINABILITY- City of Aspen Climate Plan.As history has shown, Aspen has a civic responsibility to act on behalf of its constituents, a moral imperative to take the steps necessary to meet the challenge of climate change, and the potential to be a catalyst for meaningful and eff ective action around the state, country and world.46
ASPEN LUMBERYARD19CUSHING TERRELL3.2SUSTAINABILITYOur Process to Achieve SuccessCity of Aspen Commitments:• 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050 from 2004 baseline.• This requires a 26% reduction in the residential sectorThe Six Categories of the Climate Action Plan:• Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions• Promotes Equity• Fosters Economic Sustainability• Improves Local Environmental Quality• Enhances Public Health and Safety• Builds ResilienceEnergy & EnvironmentTo move on from current practices to design buildings that benefi t people without sacrifi cing the ecosystem or needs of future generations.A design that takes current UN SDG (Sustainable Development Goals) goals into consideration. A design that not only reduces operational impact, but also impact during the construction process.Identify Th e BaselineThe Design Team will continue to engage key stakeholders along with the commu-nity to identify issues and measures of success. Using this information the Design Team will refi ne the Guiding Principles below initially developed in conjunction with City of Aspen Environmental Health & Sustainability department and Community Offi ce for Resource Effi ciency (CORE).Develop Guiding PrincilplesThrough the lens of the Guiding Principles the Design Team will identify potential hazards, vulnerabilities and their impacts. We will look at the practicality of the hardship incurred with specifi cs targets. After analyzing the opportunities and challenges, the Design Team and stakeholders aim to develop recommendations for adoption in the following areas:• Performance Targets• Programs or Methodologies for imple-mentation within design and construction• Metrics for evaluation both now and on-goingCreate a Path for ImplementationEquityTo create a development that enables all people to participate, prosper, and reach their full potential. Create a positive impact for people who have been disadvantaged or excluded.ResilienceThe ability to adapt to changing conditions and maintain functionality when faced with know environmental and infrastructural vulnerabilities. Resilient design to deal with warming climate, wildfi res and drought.47
ASPEN LUMBERYARD20CUSHING TERRELLDefining Pedestrian Friendly3.3PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLYThe goal of this development is to emphasize people over cars. We know there will be a lot of vehicles housed at the lumberyard along with residents. Strategies that calm traffi c and reduce physical confl icts between cars and people will be utilized. Providing landscaping or parallel parking along walkways bordering streets helps provide physical separation.Pedestrian friendly means thoughtfully designed sidewalks. Walkways should be connected and well lit. They should be wide enough to allow people to pass comfortably, especially when pushing strollers, walking dogs, or carrying that particularly heavy bag of groceries. A walkway lined with trees providing dappled shade in the summer makes them inviting places to be. What success might look like:• Separated sidewalks• Connected circulation paths throughout the site• Tree-lined walkways• Appropriate lighting strategies• Sidewalks with winter solar access• Snow storage plans and snow shed safety48
ASPEN LUMBERYARD21CUSHING TERRELLDefining Living WellAt the root of all housing projects, but particularly acute when discussing affordable communities, is the sentiment that everyone deserves a good place to live. What does this mean and how do we get there?Living Well means providing for community members basic needs, but also allowing them the opportunity to thrive and enjoy all the same benefi ts afforded to all members of the community.At a basic level, Living Well means providing a safe and secure environment. It also means creating an environment that allows for positive physical and mental health. For the sake of this effort the Design Team has categorized items such as indoor air quality, noise and hazard materials under the ‘sustainability’ tag, but it is important to note the interconnectedness.Specifi c to the way the community members of Aspen at large live, Living Well might mean creating a community that does not preclude or challenge one’s ability to enjoy the natural resources found in abundance in and around the area.3.4LIVING WELLWhat success might look like:• Day-lit indoor spaces with access to views• Adequate storage space for outdoor lifestyle equipment as well as maintenance and repair facilities• Easy access to parking or public transportation when running errands• Quality design & fi nishes to promote a sense of ownership- Easy access to outdoor spaces• Comfortable spaces to allow for gathering of friends and family• Quiet, effi cient and reliable fi xtures and equipment• Increased accessibility both on site and within dwellingsASPEN TIMESSKI MAGAZINE49
ASPENLUMBERYARD22CUSHING TERRELLDefining Authentically AspenA practical rugged quality that refl ects the alpine lifestyle of this historic mining town turned ski destination.SURVEY RESULTS:3.5AUTHENTICALLY ASPEN“I think keeping it mountain contemporary in style fi ts best with the ABC area, the aspen ideal, and the appeal to a broader range of inhabitants”.“...Needs to have mountain appeal due to entrance to Aspen and how many people see this every day”.“Effi ciency, effi ciency, effi ciency. The design should be effi cient! Aspen has a long history of building very ineffi cient and aff ordable housing units with excess emphasis on ‘custom’ design, ‘no 2 units alike’. Housing resources are limited and outstrip demand.”“Keep the mountain aesthetic50
ASPEN LUMBERYARD23CUSHING TERRELLCOMMENTS & QUESTIONS51
ASPEN LUMBERYARD24CUSHING TERRELLDESIGN52
ASPEN LUMBERYARD25CUSHING TERRELL4.0DESIGNThe Design section of this document will focus on the exploration of how to solve the challeng-es of the Lumberyard project. Design explo-rations, such as drawings, are a critical tool in which the team synthesizes information into a relatable format to spur discussion and further exploration, but also to drive consensus.The type and scale of these explorations will be particular to the moment in time within the design process, but will always be specifi c to conversations and studies necessary to move the project forward. This section will serve a chronol-ogy of solutions or possibilities presented to various stakeholder groups.Parking strategies are married on site with a variety of building typologies. These studies incorporate many key factors to the success of the community such as initial impacts on energy performance, the quality and quantity of green space and the connectivity to the community.TimelineNOV. 1, 2021 COUNCIL WORK SESSION: PARKING ALTERNATIVESHow to Use This Section53
ASPEN LUMBERYARD26CUSHING TERRELL• 10.5 Acre Site • Neighborhood context: Airport, Hwy 82, Deer Hill, ABC, Mountain Rescue, and Annie Mitchell• Program of 310 Affordable Housing Units• High Density 30+ Units per acre• Onsite resident parking for 432 cars• Combination of Rental and For Sale Units• Phased approach to construction over 10+ years• First phase construction to start by 2024• Sustainable and Resilient Design• Space for Childcare Center on Site CURRENT PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS54
ASPENLUMBERYARD27CUSHING TERRELL4.1DOUBLE LOADED COOIDOR WITH COMMON AREAS ON EACH FLOOR4STORYBLDGBLDG CONSOLIDATED TO PROVIDE LARGE COMMUNITY GREEN SPACE1 UNITBelow Grade Parking GreenspaceConnectivityDirect Sun HoursWinter0 50’ 100’ 200’With the Hinge scheme the name of the game is with the building typology is efficiency. A double loaded corridor to access the units limits exterior snow maintenance on sidewalks. With walls and floors adjoining the exterior envelope exposed to the elements is also greatly reduced versus other options. The result is a much smaller footprint on site, but a much bulkier buildingUnit layouts in this scenario would work best as single level. With corridors and elevators to access upper floors meeting and exceeding accessibility standards becomes less of a concern.The smaller footprint overall on site allows for the potential of more variation in roof line which is critical in combating the perceived bulk of a building this size.DWELLINGS:0.49 ACRES0.24 ACRES0.46 ACRES0.65 ACRES78 SPACES72 SPACES113 SPACESWHY HINGE? NEIGHBORHOOD STREETSCAPES!Hinge understands how we live. Our friends come to visit. We run quick errands. And sometimes that happens in a car. Hinge provides parking on the street to accommodate our daily lives. It also provides parking underground for those less frequent trips. Hinge is a walkable neighborhood with architecture defining streetscapes on the public side and cloistered courtyards on the private side. PARKING COUNT:DWELLING COUNT:HINGE SITE CONCEPT55
ASPENLUMBERYARD28CUSHING TERRELL4.1Below Grade Parking Greenspace0.6 ACRES0.75 ACRES95 SPACES256 SPACESConnectivityUNIT ACCESS WITH PORCHESPEDESTRIAN STREETS TO CREATE COMMUNITY4STORYBLDGTWO-STORYSINGLE UNITDirect Sun HoursWinter22 SPACES0 50’ 100’ 200’Units in Latch scheme are imagined primarily as two-story structures stacked upon one another with single-story accessible units located on grade. The units would be accessed via exterior stairs in front of the buildingsThe units are located back-to-back and side-to-side to reduce the exposure of the building envelope to the elements. The exterior stairs in front of the buildings provide opportunities to break up the massing and scale of the building while as providing shade and dedicated exterior patio space to each unitThe potential for double-height interior spaces with the two-story units provides an opportunity for a dynamic space while also limiting the height necessary for stairs to access the units.DWELLINGS:WHY LATCH? BIGGER GREEN SPACES!Latch strives to provide connected public-facing open spaces on the site. Imagine children playing in the central green space or walking your dog along the landscaped pedestrian allées. Latch buys bigger green spaces by putting more parking underground. A vehicular loop skirts the perimeter of the site providing functional access while still providing a pedestrian friendly environment.PARKING COUNT:DWELLING COUNT:LATCH SITE CONCEPT56
ASPENLUMBERYARD29CUSHING TERRELL4.14STORYBLDGTWO-STORYSINGLE UNITPEDESTRIAN STREETS TO CREATE COMMUNITYWALK-UP BREEZEWAY ACCESS TO EACH UNITPIVOT SITE CONCEPTBelow Grade Parking GreenspaceConnectivityDirect Sun HoursWinter22 SPACES0 50’ 100’ 200’Units in Pivot scheme are imagined primarily as two-story structures stacked upon one another with single-story accessible units located on grade. The units would be accessed via exterior stairs located within a covered breezewayWith no units back to back the idea was to provide all units with access to southern sun light as well as the ability to have windows on at least two sides.The potential for double-height interior spaces with the two-story units provides an opportunity for a dynamic space while also limiting the height necessary for stairs to access the units.DWELLINGS:0.6 ACRES0.12 ACRES0.11 ACRESWHY PIVOT? A DIFFERENT TAKE ON APARTMENT LIVING!Pivot began inside out and explores two story units that aren’t back-to-back. This approach provides more access to daylight and views as well as opportunities for cross ventilation. Breaking the buildings apart in this manner creates a series of pedestrian streetscapes occupied by front stoops and balconies providing the opportunity for smaller communities to flourish within the Lumberyard.PARKING COUNT:DWELLING COUNT:65 SPACES113 SPACES75 SPACES58 SPACES57
ASPENLUMBERYARD30CUSHING TERRELL4.1Units in Flange scheme are imagined as single-story structures stacked upon one another with accessible units located on grade. The units would be accessed via exterior stairs located within a covered breezeway.The units are located back-to-back and in most locations side-to-side to reduce the exposure of the building envelope to the elements.Similar to the double-loaded corridor typology this creates an efficient footprint across the site. The smaller footprint overall on site in this case allows for more surface parking, but with an alternative parking strategy it would also create opportunity for more variation in roof line.DWELLINGS:WHY FLANGE? LET’S BE GOOD STEWARDS! Flange explores providing all parking through a variety of street spaces, lots and carports maximizing the challenging site boundaries. With Flange the initial carbon footprint has a smaller offset by not constructing an underground garage. The resultant neighborhood is a walkable balance between our vehicles and other modes of connection.FLANGE SITE CONCEPT1 UNITWALK-UP BREEZEWAY ACCESS TO EACH UNITPEDESTRIAN STREETS TO CREATE COMMUNITYSurface Parking GreenspaceConnectivityPARKING COUNT:DWELLING COUNT:Direct Sun HoursWinter0 50’ 100’ 200’0.19 ACRES58
ASPEN LUMBERYARD31CUSHING TERRELLCOMMENTS & QUESTIONS59
ASPEN LUMBERYARD32CUSHING TERRELLWHERE ARE WE GOING60
ASPEN LUMBERYARD33CUSHING TERRELLWHERE ARE WE GOINGOur Ask of You Today Moving ForwardReach agreement on Vision and defi nitions of guiding principles. Provide feedback on additional explorations or metrics that will assist the council and community in evaluating success moving forward. Confi rm the range of parking alternatives presented today are reasonable for the council to allow the Design Team to present to the community for feedback.December Public Engagement Prior to the public engagement meetings in December, the Design Team will incorporate the feedback from today’s work session to further advance and refi ne parking alternatives, and their corresponding site and building responses. During this time the Design Team will also continue to develop and refi ne and supporting documentation necessary to properly convey the intent and benefi ts of these alternatives.The goal in this engagement effort will be to provide council public sentiment on the parking alternatives and provide the Design Team additional direction in refi ning alternatives.January Council Work Session By this session the Design Team will further refi ne parking alternatives based on public engagement efforts and provide more detailed information on the impacts of site devel-opment, building design, environmental concerns, etc. with the ultimate goal of the Janu-ary work session being to narrow down the parking alternatives and begin to rally around, and further develop, one or two schemes only.The level of development and continued stakeholder engagement should allow the Design Team to begin to make goal setting recommendations for the further development of the Lumberyard community For example, in areas such as Sustainability, the Design Team may recommend performance targets or customized sustainability programs for offi cial adoption by the Council.61
ASPEN LUMBERYARD34CUSHING TERRELLWHERE ARE WE GOINGLong-term TimelineRESEARCH EXPLORE DISCOVER EVOLVE DETAIL IMPLEMENT EXPERIENCE RESEARCHPUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & CONCEPTSENHANCED SCHEMATICDD / CDCONSTRUCTIONOCCUPANCYWE ARE HERE20192020 2021 202220242025/6 and beyond62
thank you.thank you.
303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 105
Denver, CO 80203
720.359.1416
cushingterrell.com
63
ASPEN LUMBERYARD36CUSHING TERRELLAPPENDIX64
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
T h e E c o n o m i c s o f L a n d U s e
730 17th Street, Suite 630 n Denver, CO 80202
303.623.3557 n www.epsys.com
LUMBERYARD
MARKET ASSESSMENT
65
Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation |1
TAKEAWAYS
▪Continued mismatch of housing supply and jobs
–Housing growth is driven by high-income households, yet job growth is concentrated
in lower wages
–Indicates that new jobholders are not living in the Market Area (Aspen to Glenwood)
–Likely loss of lower income residents, additional in-commuting
▪Growing industries
–Restaurants, hospitality, retail, construction, education
–Household incomes below 80% of AMI
▪Data suggests a focus on rental housing is appropriate for Lumber Yard site
–Greatest need based on initial market and socioeconomic assessment
–Site context compatible with higher densities
–Market opportunity for 3-bedroom units: roommates share housing costs
66
Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation |2
EMPLOYMENT CHANGE PITKIN COUNTY, 2010-2019
▪Driven by
Accommodations
(hotels + other) plus
Food Services, Arts and
Recreation, Public
Admin, and Retail (75%
of total growth)
▪Tourism-driven sectors
accounted for about
60% of total job growth
between 2010 and
2019
▪These sectors drive
demand for workforce
housing
437
433
332
205
172
150
108
100
97
55
50
47
27
14
2
-47
-53
-85
-240
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Acc. and Food Services
Arts and Recreation
Public Admin.
Real Estate
Retail Trade
Health Care
Transport and Warehousing
Professional and Tech Srvcs
Other Services
Ag & Forestry
Educational Services
Management of Companies
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Utilities
Finance
Information
Construction
Admin and Waste Services
67
Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation |3
PITKIN COUNTY JOB GROWTH BY AMI
▪2010-2019
▪Converted wages to
household income
using APCHA AMI
guidelines
▪1.6 earners per hh
▪Over 80%of job
growth under 120%
AMI
▪26% of job growth
under 85% AMI
▪Some Category 4
▪But not Category 1 68
Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation |4
RENTAL HOUSEHOLD GROWTH GLENWOOD TO ASPEN
▪2010-2019
▪Household growth
overwhelmingly above 85%
AMI
▪Loss of renter HHs below 85%
▪Employment growth is among
lower-incomes, yet household
growth is among higher
incomes
–Disparity
–Workers being pushed to
other areas
–Housing units are not being
occupied by new job holders
69
Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation |5
OWNER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH GLENWOOD TO ASPEN
▪2010-2019
▪Ownership household
growth overwhelmingly
above 85% AMI
▪Declines under 85% AMI
▪DECLINES IN RENTAL
AND OWNER
HOUSEHOLDS BELOW
85% AMI IS THE BIG
STORY HERE!
70
Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation |6
JOB PROFILES
▪Employees in
most major
sectors earn
wages below
100% of AMI
▪Service industry,
contracting,
education jobs are
commonly below
80% of AMI
Description Wage, 2020 HH Income [1]AMI Level Category
Aspen
Hotels and Motels $62,421 $99,874 106%100%-120% AMI
Skiing Facilities $68,838 $110,141 117%100%-120% AMI
Full-Service Restaurants $45,517 $72,826 78%60%-80% AMI
Basalt
Full-Service Restaurants $31,129 $49,807 53%60%-80% AMI
Supermarkets and Grocery $38,179 $61,086 65%60%-80% AMI
Roofing Contractors $56,176 $89,882 96%80%-100% AMI
Carbondale
Full-Service Restaurants $26,671 $42,674 45%30%-50% AMI
Plumbing, Electrical Contractors $58,009 $92,815 99%80%-100% AMI
Elementary and Secondary Schools $41,225 $65,960 70%60%-80% AMI
Glenwood Springs
Hospitals $84,253 $134,805 143%Over 120%
Elementary and Secondary Schools $36,881 $59,010 63%60%-80% AMI
Hotels and Motels $30,975 $49,560 53%30%-60% AMI
Snowmass Village
Skiing Facilities 49,151 78,641 84%80%-100% AMI
Hotels and Motels 42,948 68,717 73%60%-80% AMI
Full-Service Restaurants 72,727 116,363 124%Over 120% AMI
[1] Assumes 1.6 Earners per Household
Source: Economic & Planning Systems 71
7900 E UNION AVE, #925, DENVER, CO 80237 www.DESMAN.com PHONE 303.740.1700 FAX 303.740.1703
BOSTON CHICAGO CLEVELAND DENVER FT. LAUDERDALE HARTFORD NEW YORK PITTSBURGH WASHINGTON D.C.
ARCHITECTS
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
PLANNERS
PARKING CONSULTANTS
RESTORATION ENGINEERS
GREEN PARKING CONSULTING
August 23, 2021
Mr. Randy Rhoads
Director of Affordable Housing
Cushing Terrell
randyrhoads@cusingterrell.com
(406) 500‐3504
RE: Lumberyard Affordable Housing Parking Study
Aspen, CO
Introduction and Required Parking
This letter report summarizes the results of a parking study conducted by DESMAN for the Lumberyard
Affordable Housing development in Aspen, CO. The current Conceptual Master Plan developed by Cushing
Terrell for the affordable housing development indicates 48 studio, 140 one‐bedroom, 106 two‐bedroom
and 16 three‐bedroom units. Of the 310 total units, 214 will be rental units and 96 will be ownership units.
As presented below in Table 1, the City of Aspen Land Use Code requires 432 parking spaces for the 310‐
unit housing development based on the requirement for one space per unit for the studio and one‐
bedroom units and two spaces per unit for the two‐ and three‐bedroom units. This equates to a parking
requirement of 1.39 spaces per unit for the 310‐unit housing development.
The city’s parking requirement compares favorably to the requirement by the Urban Land Institute (ULI)
in the latest edition of Shared Parking as indicated below in Table 2.
Table 1. Number of Spaces Required by Land Use Code
Type of Number Required Spaces
Unit of Units Parking Requirement Parking per Unit
Studio 48 1.00 space per unit 48
1‐bedroom 140 1.00 space per unit 140
2‐bedrooms 106 2.00 spaces per unit 212
3‐bedrooms 16 2.00 spaces per unit 32
Total 310 432 1.39
Table 2. Number of Spaces Required by ULI Standards
Type of Number Required Spaces
Unit of Units Parking Requirement Parking per Unit
Studio 48 1.00 space per unit 48
1‐bedroom 140 1.05 space per unit 147
2‐bedrooms 106 1.80 spaces per unit 191
3‐bedrooms 16 2.65 spaces per unit 42
Total 310 428 1.38
72
Page 2 of 3 (DRAFT)
Required are 428 parking spaces based on the ULI standards, which equates to 1.38 spaces per unit for
the 310‐unit housing development.
Affordable Housing Parking Requirements
Many cities have recognized that affordable housing generates less parking demand than middle‐ and
high‐income rental units. This has also been recognized by the Transportation Research Board, American
Planning Association, and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), all of which
recommend lower parking ratios for affordable housing.
Until recently there was little published information on parking requirements for affordable housing. The
5th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE’s) Parking Generation was published in
January 2020 and includes parking ratios for affordable housing. Affordable housing includes all multi‐
family housing that is rented at below market rates to households that include at least one employed
member. The average parking demand rate is 0.99 space per unit in a general urban/suburban setting,
which results in the need for 307 parking spaces at the Lumberyard development in Aspen.
Modal Split
Commute to work statistics for the City of Aspen from the 2019 US Census support a reduction in parking
for the proposed housing development. As indicated in Table 3 below, a high percentage of Aspen workers
commute to work by alternative modes of transportation (51.8%) compared to the national average
(18.4%). The use of public transportation, walking and bicycling as means of transportation to work are
significantly higher in Aspen than in the United States as a whole.
Vehicle Availability
However, the high use of alternative means of transportation is not due to the unavailability of vehicles
in Aspen, as indicate in Table 4 on the following page. A Higher percentage of Aspen residents (76.5%)
have access to one or two vehicles than the national average (60.1%).
Table 3. Means of Transportation to Work Comparison
United States City of Aspen
Alternative Alternative
Means of Transportation Percent Means (B‐F) Percent Means (B‐F)
A. Drove Alone 75.9% 37.6%
B. Carpooled 8.9% 4.5%
C. Public Transportation 5.0% 22.8%
D. Walked 2.6% 13.3%
E. Bicycled 0.5% 8.4%
F. Other Means 1.4% 2.8%
G. Worked from Home 5.7% 10.6%
Total: 100.0% 18.4% 100.00% 51.8%
Source: 2019 US Census
73
Page 3 of 3 (DRAFT)
The average number of vehicles available in Aspen of 1.68 is lower than the national average of 2.07
primarily because there are far less residents with access to three or more vehicles in Aspen (14.9%)
compared to the national average (35.6%). Aspen residents utilize alternative modes of transportation to
and from work not because they do not have access to vehicles but rather because of the general
unavailability of parking, the high cost of parking, free and convenient bus service in the Aspen area, and
an excellent environment to walk and bicycle to work.
Conclusion
The contents in this letter report do not support a reduction in parking for the Lumberyard Affordable
Housing development in Aspen unless a majority of residents are considered to be very low‐ or low‐
income households as defined by HUD (30% to 60% of the Area Medium Income (AMI). It does support,
if allowed by local code, the use of tandem parking spaces for vehicle storage, which will maximize the
parking supply and reduce the cost of parking particularly in a parking garage.
DESMAN appreciates the opportunity to assist you on this project, and please do not hesitate to contact
us if you have questions regarding the contents in this letter report.
Respectfully Submitted,
DESMAN, Inc.
Stephen J. Rebora, RA Scot D. Martin
President Senior Parking Planner
Table 4. Number of Household Vehicles Available Comparison
United States City of Aspen
(A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Number Available Percent Number (A*B) Percent Number (A*B)
No vehicles available 4.3% 0 0.00 8.6% 0 0.00
1 vehicle available 20.1% 1 0.20 29.8% 1 0.30
2 vehicles available 40.0% 2 0.80 46.7% 2 0.93
3+ vehicles available 35.6% 3 1.07 14.9% 3 0.45
Total: 100.0% 2.07 100.0% 1.68
Source: 2019 US Census
74