Loading...
09-04-01 Town Council Packet J � `� � � - y � ol 1) RA w� 2 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 CALL TO ORDER AT 1:00 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL REGULAR AGENDA Item No. 2: RESOLUTION NO. 37 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONCURRENT REVIEW OF THE SNOWMASS CENTER EXPANSION SKETCH AND SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II PRELIMINARY PLANS PURSUANT TO OF SECTION 5-300 (13)(3) OF CHAPTER 16A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. -- Chris Conrad. . . . . . . . . . .Page 1 (Tab A) DISCUSSION AGENDA Item No. 3: 1:30 — 2:30 SITE VISIT - SNOWMASS CENTER REDEVELOPMENT No Packet Information Item No. 4: 2:30 — 3:00 TOSV SIGN CODE (EXEMPT SIGNAGE) -- Chris Conrad/Robert Voigt. . . Page 4 (Tab B) Item No. 5: 3:00 - 3:15 RECREATION FACILITIES REGULATIONS -- Art Smythe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 9 (Tab C) Item No. 6: 3:15 —4:50 SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II PUD -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 12 (Tab D) BREAK 4:50 — 5:00 REGULAR AGENDA CONTINUED — 5:00 P.M. Item No. 7: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS (5-Minute Time Limit) Item No. 8: PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION NO. 34, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION PUD SKETCH PLAN AUTHORIZING PROCEEDING TO A PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMISSION TO REDEVELOP AND EXPAND THE SNOWMASS CENTER; PROVIDING OFFICE SPACE, INCREASING THE SIZE OF THE COMMERCIAL AREA AND PARKING FACILITIES, AND ADDING RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE CENTER, BEHIND THE CENTER, AND TO THE NORTHEAST OF THE CENTER ONTO THE FARAWAY RANCH NORTH PARCELS B, F, H and H-1 -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 77 (Tab E) 09-04-01 tc Page 2 Item No. 9: APPROVAL OF 07-23-01. 08-06-01 and 08-13-01 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 82 (Tab F) Item No. 10: MANAGER'S REPORT -- Gary Suiter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .Page 100 (Tab G) Item No. 11: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 105 (Tab H) Item No. 12: CALENDARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 107 (Tab 1) Item No. 13: EXECUTIVE SESSION Colorado revised Statues 24-6-402 (4) (b) Snowmass Village Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article III, Section 2-45 (c) (2) Executive Sessions. AT THIS TIME IT IS THE INTENT OF THE TOWN COUNCIL TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC MEETING CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS AND CONVENE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, WHICH WILL BE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC. THE TOPIC DISCUSSED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE: CONFERENCE WITH THE TOWN ATTORNEY OR SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE TOWN FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING LEGAL ADVICE ON SPECIFIC LEGAL QUESTIONS REGARDING RODEO PROPERTY ACQUISITION NEGOTIATIONS. HOWEVER, NO ADOPTION OF ANY PROPOSED POLICY, POSITION, RESOLUTION, RULE, REGULATION OR FORMAL ACTION SHALL OCCUR AT ANY EXECUTIVE SESSION. Item No. 14: ADJOURNMENT NOTE: ALL ITEMS AND TIMES ARE TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. PLEASE CALL THE OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK AT 923-3777 ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING FOR ANY AGENDA CHANGES. TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: September 4, 2001 Agenda Item: Discussion and Action: Resolution No. 37, Series of 2001, a resolution authorizing concurrent review of the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch and Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary plans pursuant to of Section 5-300 (b)(3) of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code. Presented By: Chris Conrad, Planning Director Core Issues: Section 5-300(b)(3) of the Municipal Code permits that only one (1) major PUD may be under review at one time by the Planning Commission or Town Council unless authorized by the Town Council in the form of a resolution. Adoption of the enclosed resolution will enable the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan site visit and discussion as well as commencement of the Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary Plan review to occur during the September 4 meeting. Unless approved, the Snowmass Center site visit and discussions will need to be postponed. General Info: Discussion involving the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan that occurred during the August 20 Town Council meeting prompted the scheduling of a site visit and continued discussion of the proposed single family residences and driveway crossing. thirty percent (30%) slopes at the September 4 meeting. The Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary Plan application concluded its review by the Planning Commission on August 22. The Municipal Code specifies that, as a preliminary plan, it receive Town Council scheduling priority over the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan. The Snowmass Center site visit and issues scheduled for discussion are of great importance and fundamentally affect whether that project goes forward in the review process. Staff believes it would be beneficial to provide direction to the applicant at this time. Further review of their application will then be tentatively scheduled to begin again in October. Council Options: Approve the enclosed resolution or deny the resolution and staff will proceed without concurrent review at this time. Staff Staff recommends approval of the enclosed resolution. Recommendation: P:\user\cconrad\MS Word Docs\TC 01-37 Concurrent Review TC Comments 01.doc TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 37 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONCURRENT REVIEW OF THE SNOWMASS CENTER EXPANSION SKETCH AND SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II PRELIMINARY PLANS PURSUANT TO OF SECTION 5-300 (13)(3) OF CHAPTER 16A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, Section 5-230 (b)(3) of Chapter 16A of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the"Municipal Code")precludes the review of more than one major PUD application by the Town Council or the Planning Commission at any time, unless expressly authorized by the Town Council by resolution; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department(the"CDD")had received three (3)major development applications being the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan ("Snowmass Center Plan"), Snowmass Chapel Sketch Plan (Snowmass Chapel Plan") and Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary PUD ("Snowmass Club Plan"), in that order; and WHEREAS,Town Council Resolution No. 29, Series of 2001, had established that the Snowmass Club Plan would be first priority, Snowmass Center Plan second priority and the Snowmass Chapel Plan would be given third priority, as being the order in which they would be reviewed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission began reviewing the Snowmass Center Plan on June 20, 2001; and WHEREAS,the Snowmass Center Plan completed Planning Commission review on July 25, 2001 and commenced Town Council review on August 13, 2001; and WHEREAS,during the Snowmass Center Plan discussions at the August 20,2001 Town Council meeting, issues regarding the proposed single family residences and driveway crossing thirty percent(30%)slopes prompted the scheduling of a site visit and follow-up discussion for the September 4, 2001 Town Council meeting; and WHEREAS,the Snowmass Club Plan completed Planning Commission review on August 22, 2001 and is now, as the first priority application, scheduled to begin Town Council review on September 4, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that it would be appropriate to permit concurrent review of the Snowmass Center Plan and Snowmass Club Plan during the September 4, 2001 as necessary and appropriate to provide for their expeditious review; and WHEREAS,following that meeting,the Snowmass Center Plan will be on-hold until the Snowmass Club Plan review has been completed by the Town Council; and Town of Snowmass Village Town Council Resolution No.37,Series of 2001 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Resolution is necessary to preserve the public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, as follows: 1. Approval of Concurrent Maior PUD Review. The Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan and Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary PUD major PUD applications are hereby authorized to occur simultaneously within the meaning of Section 16A-5-230 (b)(3) of the Municipal Code during the September 4, 2001 Town Council meeting. 2. Scheduling. Following the September 4, 2001 Town Council meeting and until such time as the Town Council review of the Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary PUD is completed, the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan application will not be scheduled for further review except in accordance with Section 16A-5-230 (b)(3)of the Municipal Code or as further authorized by the Town Council. Following completion of the Snowmass Club Plan review, the Snowmass Center Expansion Sketch Plan will become the 1st priority application and the Snowmass Chapel Expansion Sketch Plan will be 2nd priority. 3. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or application hereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid,the invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable. READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on September 4, 2001 upon a motion by Council Member the second of Council Member , and upon a vote of in favor and _against. Council member was absent. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk _3 - TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: September 04, 2001 Agenda Item: Sign Code Discussion : confirm a date for a site visit to the Mall, regarding Sign Code amendments; as well as, continue the discussion regarding a revised Sign Code, to identify specific policy direction regarding exempt si na e. Presented By: Chris Conrad, Planning Director and Robert Voigt, Senior Planner Core Issues: • In the allocated 30 minutes for this meeting Council and staff will discuss: 1. Development Leasing/Rental signs; 2. Construction Signs (including Signs on Trailers Vehicles and Equipment) and, 3. Garage Sale or Special Event signs. Site Visit: • In the last meeting Council gave direction to Staff to arrange for a site visit to the Mall; to examine the existing condition and potential implications for Mall businesses of changes in the Sign Code and the Mall Comprehensive Sign Plans. Due to the short time left in the summer season, it is urgent that Staff and Council confirm a date for this site visit as soon as possible. General Info: • Staff met with Council in August to begin receiving policy direction on a Sign Code revision. • At the previous meeting staff and Council discussed the purpose of the Sign Code, Real Estate Signs, Open House Signs, and began discussion on Development Leasing/Rental signs. • The Sign Code purpose, as amended following that meeting, is being proposed to read: The purpose of the Sign Code is to create a Comprehensive system for signs in the community that: 1. Promotes the reasonable and creative display of signs that are compatible with their surroundings; 2. Creates an open and uncluttered environment that is orderly, balanced and easily understood while maintaining the ability of businesses to effectively communicate their messages in unique ways within that framework. • Staff anticipates that Council will be able to conclude the Exempt Signs portion of the Sign Code revision process with one more meeting. Council Options: • Provide direction to staff on specific policy direction regarding Exempt Signage (Development Leasing/Rental Signs, Construction Signs, Garage Sale or Special Event Signs). • Confirm date/s for a Council site visit to the Mall regarding Sign Code amendment issues. Staff Recommendation: Provide staff with policy direction and schedule Mall site visit date. aw q sm P:\user\rvoigt\TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Sept 4,2001 revised GS.docLast printed 8/30/019:24 AM Policy Discussion: Snowmass Village Signage Regulations Purpos The purpose of this meeting will be to identify specific policy direction regarding Exempt Signs. At the previous meeting staff and Council discussed the purpose of the Sign Code, Real Estate Signs, Open House Signs, and began discussion on Development Leasing/Rental signs. In the allocated 30 minutes for this meeting Council and staff will discuss: 1. Development Leasing/Rental signs; 2. Construction Signs(including Signs on Trailers Vehicles and Equipment) and, 3. Garage Sale or Special Event signs. At the conclusion of the Exempt Sign discussions, staff will report to Council to verify the policy direction received on this portion of the Sign Code revision. Subsequent meetings will be held to conclude the Exempt Sign discussion and to review other aspects of the Sign Code related to the revision process. 1. Development Leasina/Rental Sians • Freestanding signs that provide leasing or sales information during Definition and Purpose a new construction phase of a property. • Provides advertising for new developments prior to completion. • Limited to one sign on the street front no larger than 20 sq.ft. for Existing Regulation the duration of construction and all sales or leases have completed. • During the previous discussion on Real Estate Signs, Town Council Core Issue/s decided that"Rental'signs should not be permitted. • The length of time which these signs can be displayed has no easily enforceable duration (linked to sales and lease activity). • As more development begins in Snowmass Village, the visual impact will also be greatly Increased. • With larger projects It is difficult to enforce display time limits because units may be re-listed over time, or the development may be linked to others as a phase. • The size of these signs Is seen as excessive. Planning Commission Recommendation/s and Council Options following page 004S 41M P:\user UvoigtTrojects\signage�Signage Package Council Sept 4.doc Last printed 8/29/01 4:14 PM Continued... 1. Development Leasing/Rental Signs Planning Commistcategory Reduce area to 16 sq. ft. RecommendatioLimit duration to a given date after Certificate of Occupancy. Reduction of sign area can reduce visual Impact. Council OptionEliminating these signs for both sales and rental projects would remove the ability of new developments to advertise their product on site prior to completion. Remove leasing or rental signs from being Exempt to the Prohibited and retain this Cod e section for sales projects only. 2. Construction Signs and Signs placed on or affixed to vehicles, equipment or trailers • Names the contractors,subcontractors,architects and all other related Definition and Purpose enterprises engaged in a given construction site. • Does not apply to signs on vehicles and equipment parked or stored In an appropriate area which are being operated In the normal course of business(such as delivery). Any signage located on vehicles, equipment or trailers parked primarily for the purpose of providing a stationary display for advertising are now to be regulated under this proposed revision. • Construction signage serves a much needed purpose for large construction projects.Identification signage for contractors and subcontractors is needed for deliveries and inspections. Any signage located continuously on site will now be regulated under this proposed revision. • Construction signs restricted to one sign no larger than a sheet of Existing Regulation plywood(32 sq.ft.)for the duration of a construction project • Signs on vehicles,equipment or trailers are not regulated in the existing Sign Code. P:\user\rvoigt\Projects\signage\Signage Package Council Sept 4.doc Last printed 8/29/01 4:14 PM • The current Code does not deal with signs on vehicles,equipment or Core Issue/s trailers(as are being used at construction sites throughout Town). • The size limitations have consistently been exceeded by contractors. • The locations,size,and number of signs used has developed Into an advertising mechanism for contractors resulting in sign proliferation throughout the community. • The allowed sign area is excessive for residential areas. • These signs may become more predominant In TOSV as larger development projects are undertaken. • The amount of signage allowed should be reduced in residential areas Planning Commission (16 sq.ft.). Recommendation/s • Increase the number allowed provided that the total area doers not exceed the total allotment including all signs and signs on vehicles, equipment and trailers. • Prohibit signs erected in truck beds or on trailers. • Prohibit help wanted signs. • Limited sign height to the height of the equipment. • Prohibit vehicle signs from being on site and visible from public roadways for more than seven consecutive days. • If the regulations remain the same,as the larger developments foreseen in Snowmass Village begin,there will be a long term negative visual Council Options impact for our residents and guests. • If these signs are prohibited,the legitimate purpose they serve will have to be addressed in another way for contractors of larger developments. • If vehicle signs are prohibited, businesses with equipment that contains this form of signage may be negatively Impacted. P:\user\rvoigt\Projects\signage\Signage Package Co ncil Sept 4.doc Last printed 8/29/014:14 PM 3. Garage sale or special event signs • Signs which advertise garage or rummage sales or other special Definition and Purpose events. • Limited to six sq. ft. in area and displayed for the duration of the Existing Regulation event, no more than four times a year for a given property. MM Core Issue/s • The size allowed for these signs is seen as excessive. • Reduce the sign area to 4 sq. ft. to reduce negative visual impact. Planning Commission • Set the display limits at 72 hours per event. Recommendation/s • Reduce the size and display limits to reduce the visual Impact these Council Options signs have. • Possibly limit the number of garage sale"events" per calendar year. • Prohibit these signs, which would Involve significant issues with enforcement. S I P:\user\rvoigt\Projects\signage\Signage Package Council Sept 4.doc Last printed 8/29/014:14 PM TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: September 4,2001 Agenda Item: Discussion—Offenses Relating to Ski Areas and Recreational Facilities Presented By: Art Smythe/Brian Olson Core Issues: Offenses relating to the use of skiing and other recreational facilities in the Town have increased dramatically over the last few years. The current practice of utilizing only state statutes to address these violations is cumbersome and is not always sufficiently applicable. General Info: The purpose of today's work session is to introduce a draft of municipal regulations designed to specifically address offenses that occur at out ski area and other recreational facilities. Currently, we utilize state laws such as Theft, Trespass and the Ski Safety Act to address misuse of a lift ticket, sneaking into a concert or skiing in a closed area. The process of charging and adjudicating these cases through County Court and the District Attorney's Office can be time consuming and somewhat complex. In addition,the language in the Theft statute can be difficult to apply in some of the cases relating to the deceptive use of skiing facilities. We feel that by adopting these local ordinances, which include an established penalty assessment schedule,these incidents will be dealt with more efficiently, and we will be better able to serve everyone involved. We also feel that these are matters of local concern, and it is appropriate to deal with them locally. Council Options: 1. Recommend that we move on to first reading of an ordinance amending the Municipal Code to include the regulations as proposed. 2. Suggest changes to the proposed language prior to first reading. 3. Direct staff not to bring this to first reading and continue to use state statutes to address these incidents. Staff Recommendation: We recommend moving on to first reading. The Town Attorney has reviewed the proposed language and the Municipal Court Judge supports the adoption of these regulations. aw ---- Article VII Offenses Relating to Ski Areas and Recreational Facilities Sec. I Definitions. As used in this Article,the following words shall be construed to have the meanings defined below: (1) Recreational facility means any recreational property for which the operator requires a user fee,including without limitation to,any golf course,or tennis court,or swimming pool,or athletic club. (2) . Skiing facility means any related property within the ski area for which the operator requires a user fee,including without limitation to, any halfpipe,or terrain park,or innertube park, or race course. (3) Skiing service means any service in connection with any ski area for which the operator requires a user fee,including without limitation to,any service or instruction offered or provided by any ski instructor or ski school. . (4) Event facility means any facility for which the operator requires a user fee, including without limitation to, any conference center facility or room,or any festival site,or hall,or any other structure or site not"open to the public". (5) Open to the public means premises which by their physical nature,function, custom,usage,notice or lack there of,or other circumstances at the time would cause a reasonable person to believe no permission to enter or remain is required. (6) Passenger tramway means a device used to transport passengers uphill on skis, or in cars on tracks,or suspended in the air by the use of steel cables,chains,or belts,or by ropes,and usually supported by trestles or towers with one or more spans.Passenger tramway includes but is not limited to additional devices as defined in section 25-5-702(4)C.R.S. Sec. 2 Skiing in a closed area prohibited. No skier shall ski on a aid slope or trail that has been posted as "Closed"pursuant to C.R.S. 33-44-107,as amended. Sec.3 Deceptive use of a facility. it is unlawful for any person to knowingly obtain or attempt to obtain the use,benefit or enjoyment of any skiing facility,or skiing service,or passenger tramway,or recreational facility, or event facility by any false pretense, trick, or deceptive means. 08/29/01 ./b _ Sec. 4 Using a false ticket. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess, offer,use,present, sell or give away, any false, simulated,bogus,spurious, sham,altered, forged,counterfeit,defaced,non-transferable or mutilated ticket,token,pass,badge,pin,or other device which then entitles the bearer to the use,benefit,or enjoyment of any skiing facility,or skiing service,or recreational facility,or event facility. Sec. 5 Making a false ticket. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly falsify,alter, forge,counterfeit, deface or mutilate any ticket,token,pass,badge,pin,or other device which then entitles the bearer to the use,benefit,or enjoyment of any skiing facility,or skiing service,or recreational facility,or event facility,or to make or manufacture any simulated,bogus,spurious,or sham ticket,token,pass, badge.pin, or other device purporting to entitle the bearer to the use,benefit,or enjoyment of any skiing facility,or skiing service, or recreational facility,or event facility. Sec. 6 Theft by resale of a lift ticket or coupon. It is unlawful for any person to, with the intent to profit therefrom,resell or offer to resell any ticket,token,pass,badge,pin,coupon,or other device which then entitles the bearer to the use,benefit,or enjoyment of any skiing facility or skiing service. Sec. 7 Penalty assessment. The following penalty assessments are declared to be mandatory and minimum: Skiing in a closed area prohibited(Sec. 10-123) First offense $150.00 Second offense Summons Deceptive use of a facility(Sec. 10-124) First offense $150.00 Second offense Summons Using a false ticket(Sec. 10-125) First offense $150.00 Second offense Summons Making a false ticket(Sec. 10-126) First offense Summons Theft by resale of a lift ticket or coupon(Sec. 10-127) First offense Summons owl I _ 08/29/01 TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: September 4, 2001 Agenda Item: Discussion Item: Snowmass Club Phase II -- Review of Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment Topics; • Softball Field/Events Area a) Adequacy of the size and orientation of area b) Conveyance method to Town • Zone District Limitations a) Height variance—requires Y approval b) Encroachment into 25-foot riparian setback—requires Y approval • Comprehensive Plan a) Consistency with buildoul limitations • Architectural Plans a) Condominium building design and impacts to adjacent areas b) Tennis Structure elevations, roof form and visual impact c) Tennis Center/Pro Shop—phased in later d) Clubhouse design Presented By: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner Core Issues: Following the Code questions that should be addressed with a review of a Preliminary Plan application, attached is an outline of the core issues broken out topically by meeting date. The critical ones, in staffs opinion, have been italicized and probably deserve further discussion and consideration by Town Council. General Info: Attached is the following information for Town Council review: • Planning Commission Resolution No. 24, Series of 2001, specifically documenting the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission following the Code questions for Preliminary Plan applications • Staff report of the analysis of the core issues, staff recommendations, summaries of Planning Commission recommendations, and referenced exhibits mainly of comments from review agencies. • See separate handout of initial application submittal and the supplemental package Council Options: . Identify the Planning Commission findings and conditions deemed acceptable; • Identify the core issues that need further discussion or which warrant further conditions. am 1 Staff Staff recommends that the Town Council follow the conduct of Recommendation: meetings per the Code as follows: 1) Summary presentation by staff of the application and the core issues; 2) Applicant's presentation of the proposal; 3) Questions to staff or applicant by Town Council members with subsequent response by applicant and/or staff specifically related to the core issues; 4) Accept comments or question from the public; 5) Provide direction to the applicant and staff in preparing a draft resolution— Note: Staff recommends that a vast majority of the Planning Commission findings and conditions be forwarded into the Town Council resolution, with the exception of the italicized core issues, which staff believes may warrant further discussion and consideration by Town Council; and 6) Schedule item for further discussion on September 10, 2001 with subsequent public hearing on September 17 as per the previous 30-day publication notice. • 13 • 2 PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF DISCUSSION TOPICS Following the Code questions that should be addressed with a review of a Preliminary Plan application, below is an outline of the remaining core issues broken out topically by meeting date. The critical ones, in staffs opinion, have been italicized and probably deserve further discussion and consideration by Town Council. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10. 2001: • Landscaping and open space a) Adequacy of buffer areas b) Landscape design between condominium buildings c) Parking lot landscaping-golf course parking lot d) Landscaping along Clubhouse Drive extension e) Adequacy of landscaping on existing berms f) Golf course area landscaping g) Lighting plans • Natural Hazard Areas a) Impacts on 30%slope areas b) Retaining wall locations and design c) CLOMR application through FEMA • Natural Resource Areas a) Adequacy of Brush Creek improvements b) Diversion/rerouting of creek through ponds c) Wildlife monitoring • Transportation Impacts a) Clubhouse Drive improvements b) Intersection improvements c) Other traffic impacts d) Contingency parking e) 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle 0 Crossing improvements g) Transit Impacts h) Pedestrian circulation, trails and Nordic issues MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17. 2001 (Public Hearing): • Grading and Drainage a) Golf Course grading and drainage improvements b) 404 Permit application—wetland/pond reconfigurations • Necessary Facilities a) Utilities, drainage, trash enclosures • Restricted Housing a) Requirements brought forward from Sketch Plan • Fiscal Impact a) Finance Departments comments addressed • Energy Conservation • Air Quality • Construction Management Plan • Community Welfare a) Acceptability of fees/rates, conditions and restrictions for users of the golf course b) Community benefits outlined in Sketch Plan brought forward • Consideration of Minor PUD Amendment Criteria a. lq_ 3 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION No. 24 SERIES OF 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 24, SERIES OF 2001, APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAN PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, INCLUDING THE CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF 21 MULTIFAMILY UNITS INTO 1/8 SHARE TIMESHARES VIA A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION. WHEREAS, Snowmass Club Associates and the Aspen Skiing Company submitted on June 22, 2001 a Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment application for Snowmass Club Phase II involving Parcels 3, 4 and 10 of the Snowmass Club Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, the submission also involves: 1) The construction of 21 1/8 fractional ownership condominiums averaging 2,400 square feet in size and consisting of four ,3-bedroom units, thirteen 4-bedroom units and four 5- bedrooms units; 2) A Subdivision Exemption and special review use for the condominiumization of the 21 units in Phase 11; 3) A completely new 18-hole championship golf course of being approximately 7,000 yards in length, including the re-routing and re-numbering of the fairways; 4) Relocation of the softball field and events area approximately 250 feet to the west; 5) Construction of a new 5,100 square foot golf clubhouse (reduced from 7,560 square feet at Sketch Plan) with golf cart storage beneath; 6) A new 150-space parking facility to serve the golf clubhouse and special events area; 7) Construction of a permanent indoor Tennis structure and a Tennis Pro-Shop facility; 8) Reconfiguration of Phase I parking provisions to accommodate the Phase 11 proposal; 9) Widening to 22-feet with street width variance and extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road at Horse Ranch Drive; 10) Improvements to intersection at Snowmass Club Circle and Clubhouse Drive; 11) Stream restoration of Brush Creek; and 12) Improved trail connections. WHEREAS; the Town of Snowmass Village Planning Director had previously determined that the proposed Project qualified for review as a Major Planned Unit Development ('PUD") application. in accordance with the procedures specified within Section 16A-5-300(b) of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"); and WHEREAS, Town Council Resolution No. 6, Series of 2001, was approved on January 20, 1999 following review of the Project Sketch Plan submission; and PC Reso 01.24 Page 2 of 19 WHEREAS, said procedure requires an initial Public Hearing and Preliminary PUD Plan review by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, posted, mailed, and published notice of public hearings to be held before the Planning Commission on August 8, 2001 were provided in accordance with the public notice requirements of Section 16A-5-60 of the Municipal Code and subsequent meetings were held on August 15 and 22, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Project at public hearings which commenced on August 8 with follow up meetings on August 15 and 22, 2001 for the purpose of receiving public comment; and WHEREAS, such posting of the public hearing for August 8, 2001 was published in the Snowmass Sun on July 4, 2001; and WHEREAS, public testimony has been accepted at every Planning Commission meeting that included discussion regarding the Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted their review of the Project August 8, 15 and 22, 2001 to consider all relevant materials and testimony in order to evaluate whether the Project application complies with Section 16A-5-300(c), General Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards of the Municipal Code and whether the Preliminary Plan submission by the Applicant has responded to the direction given by the Town as stated within Resolution 6, Series of 2001. Section One. General Findings and Conditions. 1) Response to other Sketch Plan issues and concerns not addressed by the Preliminary Plan Questions. a) Softball Field/Events Area. i) The plan for the redevelopment of the course delineates an independent land parcel for the softball field and the Jazz festival. Included with this application is a schematic plan options for the reorientation of the playing field to take best advantage of sun angles and event staging. This plan is offered as a recommendation to the Town as part of the plan proposal involves the deeding of this land to the Town. ii) It is acknowledged that a defined land area was presented to assure whether it is of sufficient size and orientation for recreational purposes, a softball field, and music festivals. A site plan is attached with this to.X OW PC Reso 01-24 Page 3 of 19 application which addresses softball play and special music events with the program for the Jazz Festival as its basis. This plan also depicts that land area that would be conveyed to the town. The site is of adequate size to host softball, the jazz festival and multi-use recreation including soccer or open play space. iii) It is understood that the applicant will dedicate the land to the Town following the regrading and improvements of the softball field to the substantially same condition as it exists now during this application review. 2) Zone district limitations. a) Height Limitations i) The Planning Commission and Applicant agree to compliance with height variance criteria and applying same rules as Phase I. b) Building Setbacks and Arrangement i) Planning Commission recommends a variance to encroach into 25-foot wetland and riparian setback areas as shown in the plans. ii) Planning Commission finds no unacceptable view impacts and finds the project is compatible with Villas North. 3) Comprehensive Plan. a) The proposed 21 condominium units with 1/8 share interests averaging 2,400 square feet is viewed as acceptable. 4) Architectural plans. The Planning Commission finds as follows: a) Condominium Buildings: i) The architectural designs of the condominium buildings are acceptable and viewed as an improved design to the Phase I architecture. ii) The split in the southern-most condominium building is being retained in the design as per the Sketch Plan condition in an effort to create additional open space area, a view corridor from Villas North, and 0 PC Reso 01.24 Page 4 of 19 architecturally pleasing results. It is acknowledged that the improved articulation in the condominium buildings will further reduce visual impact. iii) As per the Sketch Plan condition, the site plan shows that the buildings are staggered and are not geometrically aligned to respond to the parking below. The access point is on the eastern side and the buildings have some curvature, which allows the buildings to respond to both grade and the location of the Brush Creek drainage way as well as take advantage of views to Mount Daly. This modulation gives the buildings and the site plan a natural appearance and reflects a site design which has responded to natural determinants rather than construction dictates. iv) In lieu of Sketch Plan suggestion to possibly angle the northern-most residential building at the mid-point in order to lessen the linear appearance of the building and to create more open space between the units and the creek, the northern building has been staggered, by raising the grade approximately 10 feet for the west portion of the building, to create articulation and reduce the linearity and appearance of mass. This staggered design will allow the building to read as two separate buildings. This has the same or possibly a greater affect than what might be accomplished by changing the angles of the buildings at the mid point. v) As per the Sketch Plan recommendation of lowering the flat roof portion of the residential buildings, as a means to improve the separation and articulation of the roof forms, this option has been incorporated in the north condominium building design. The mid- section of the northern building has been lowered and the roofs of both buildings have been lowered at the ends to create a perception of lower buildings. The roofs have been stepped from the center of the building so that the highest point is not viewed from the ground plane. At the pedestrian level the buildings are designed to be read as two story buildings. vi) TOSV Land Use and Development Code Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards, references compliance with Article IV and Code Section 16A-4-340, Building Design Guidelines to Preserve Community Character. Particularly, views from neighboring developments were evaluated per subsection 5) during the review of the Preliminary Plan PUD application. See above findings for reasons. PC Reso 01-24 Page 5 of 19 b) Tennis Structure: i) The east and west elevations of the Tennis Structure are deserving additional architectural relief. Dormers are not recommended for the roof. However, the Planning Commission is concerned about the visual impact of the roof and recommends further review for further articulation of the roof plane. Breaking the roof plane with vertical and horizontal elements is recommended. ii) The north elevation of the Tennis Structure facing Clubhouse Drive is acceptable due the increase in fenestration and the clerestory roof feature. c) Tennis Center/Pro-Shop: i) The design of the Tennis Center/Pro Shop is acceptable. However, based upon the Planning Commission's desire to preserve options for contingency parking, the applicant has agreed not to construct this facility until a final determination has been made regarding the contingency parking. d) Clubhouse: i) The ranch design of the clubhouse including the reduction of square footage from 7,000 to 5,200 square feet is acceptable. The proposed lounge and outside seating could be utilized for expansion of the clubhouse in the future upon application to the Town for approval. ii) Planning Commission recommends securable day lockers for golfers. 5) Landscaping and open space. The Planning Commission finds as follows: a) Landscape Design: i) Density of landscaping between condo buildings and Clubhouse Drive is acceptable ii) Alpine Garden design with trail connection is acceptable to the extent allowed by the Army Corps 404 Permit iii) The Planning Commission recommends increased year round screening of the Tennis Structure within the planting area between the structure and the parking lot. 11_ PC Reso 01-24 Page 6 of 18 iv) The orchard concept and density of landscaping in and around the clubhouse parking area is acceptable as indicated on the plans. v) The detached walkway and natural grass buffer between Clubhouse Drive and the walkway is acceptable. vi) It is acknowledged by commitment noted by the application that upon final completion of both phases I and II of the project, the site will generate a total of approximately 42,000 square feet of building footprint site coverage and approximately 181,000 or 4.1 acres of paving for roadways and parking. The percentage of open space must be calculated for the PUD parcels in this application. As part of the overall project and in cooperation with the neighbors and residents of the Snowmass Club PUD, additional areas were identified for deed restrictions and permanent commitment to open space. Given these considerations, all nominal and typical open space and site coverage design standards are exceeded in this application. vii) It is acknowledged and committed to by the applicant that the golf course redevelopment plan calls for extensive improvement of the ponds, which will serve as both golf course water hazards and environmental features. Grading details for the ponds will be designed to allow vegetative growth and habitat improvement. The design process will integrate the Audubon design guidelines with the objective of reaching certification. The golf course design will create high quality wetlands as well as protection and enhancement of existing environmentally important areas. viii)The stream environment of Brush Creek adjacent to the new Phase II residential buildings will be enhanced to trim back and create a clear view of the stream and incorporate the natural stream environment as the principal site amenity to the extent allowed by the permitting authorities. b) Lighting: i) A revised detailed lighting plan was provided with the Preliminary Plan PUD review. Due to concerns about too much lighting in the area, plans were revised to reduce the number of light fixtures and shows that a majority of the lighting will be limited to low-profile lighting, such as the use of bollard lighting, and that other lighting for parking lots will be shielded and downcast with use of low-wattage light sources. A site lighting detail shall be provided with the Final Plan review. Further, lighting for the new 150-space clubhouse parking lot shall be turned off at night after closing the facilities. The applicant has committed to fi::�O i PC Reso 01.24 Page 7 of 18 installing a timer for outdoor lighting associated with the golf course parking lot. 6) Natural hazard areas. a) The impact upon the 30% slope areas at the Golf Clubhouse and the Condominium Buildings are all in previously disturbed, manmade areas and the contemplated improvements will enhance these areas. b) The Applicant has filed a FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revision ("CLOMR") application to change the 100-year floodplain boundary. The Applicant agrees to FEMA compliance prior to issuance of building permits for the Condominium Buildings. c) The retaining wall locations, height and design are acceptable. 7) Natural resource areas. a) A Brush Creek Impact Report was submitted with the application. The report adequately addressed both the stream improvement and rerouting to the original drainage way through golf course as well as the channel improvements posed for the stream as it flows between the proposed new buildings in Phase II adjacent to the club. The improvements include vortex weirs, embankment stabilization, and removal of old concrete structures. These improvements are acceptable. b) The Applicant committed to provide a three-year bird-monitoring program for the four identified species and to provide habitat improvement for those species. c) The Town and applicant will agree upon the specifications for the design features of the diversion structures. d) It is acknowledged by commitment from the applicant that work will continue with the TOSV design team to explore this possibility diverting Brush Creek and exposing the creek at the entry to the Village located near the northeast corner of the site. Final design for this element of the stream will await the final design of the new golf course and the design of the Highline Road and Brush Creek Road intersection. The design as proposed, places a new number 1 green in the vicinity of the area previously identified for this stream exposure. The applicant will continue to work through the golf course design process and bring back a detailed resolution of this plan objective after resolution of the roundabout PC Reso 01-24 Page 8 of 19 intersection design. It is the intention of the applicant to provide this prior to the final review of final plat. 8) Grading and drainage. a) Golf Course Improvements. i) A quality golf course design was defined by the James Engh Design Group which showed a complete reconstruction of the golf course, including routing, hole locations, tees, greens, cart paths, irrigation, grading and turf development. A new routing and illustrative plan for the new course in the application was explained. Some of the design elements included resculpting of the golf course to create improved visual interest from all angles and to separate play from existing residents in the area. The redesign and reconstruction of the golf course is considered a community benefit. ii) The golf course redesign of the fairways and re-routing as described by the James Engh Design Group is acceptable provided that the final drainage and grading plans, including erosion control and revegetation plans are approved by the Town's Engineer. iii) The golf cart/pedestrian crossing at Snowmass Club Circle shall be improved to incorporate the following minimum improvements: (1) Construction of landscape islands on both sides of the crossing entries located on both sides of Snowmass Club Circle to improve sight distance and safety of golfers and pedestrians; (2) Provide a decorative crossing surface, such as masonry pavers, colored concrete or similar surface material to aesthetically improvement and clearly define the crossing; (3) Utilize painting as necessary to alert motorists of the approaching crossing. (4) Retain the existing 28 parking spaces b) 404 Permit Application i) The golf course redesign, including the deletion and replacement of wetlands and the deletion and reconfiguration of ponds, are acceptable provided the applicant provides the Town written consent and approval from the Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of grading permits and Condominium Building and Golf Clubhouse building permits. i Q PC Reso 01-24 Page 9 of 19 s) Transportation impacts. The Planning Commission finds as follows: a) Vehicular Access and Circulation: i) Clubhouse Drive Improvements. (1) The variance request to reduce the road width for Clubhouse Drive is acceptable. It is understood that the road will vary in width from Snowmass Club Circle to Brush Creek Road with a minimum road width of 22 feet on the southern end, including shoulders and paved drainage pans, to 24 feet on the northern end, including shoulders. (2) The Clubhouse Road extension to Brush Creek Road to create a four-way intersection with Horse Ranch Road is viewed as a community benefit which shall be kept open year round. (3) There shall be no control point or gate in the middle of Clubhouse Drive in order to facilitate improved connectivity through the site and to potentially be allowed for use as a transit route in the future. (4) The applicant shall provide a revised access easement for the new Clubhouse Drive alignment. (5)Applicant shall work with the TOSV to provide an easement for a trail-crossing underpass if deemed warranted by the Nordic Council and the TOSV in the future. (6) The applicant shall install a permanent street sign for Clubhouse Drive meeting Town standards at the affected intersections of Snowmass Club Circle/Clubhouse Drive and at Brush Creek Road/Clubhouse Drive once the street and intersection improvements have been completed. ii) Traffic Impacts. (1) The extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road is viewed favorably and will divert golf and special events traffic away from the Snowmass Club core area. Traffic volumes will be reduced in the Country Club homes and Villas area in the summer time. It was found that the Clubhouse Drive extension and connection to the Horse Ranch Drive/Brush Creek Road intersection should also be open year round to serve the community. •ja WP PC Reso 01-24 Page 10 of 19 (2) A transportation and parking analysis was submitted with this application. This study includes an analysis of peak conditions and includes all components of the club program. The relocation of the driving range and Golf Clubhouse makes it possible to convert the existing golf parking to parking available for the Fairway Center and, if desired, Snowmass Club purposes. This combined with expanded subsurface parking and the creation of a new 150-space golf parking area with alleviate the chronic parking shortage which the club has faced in recent years, subject to observing the operations over a period of time to determine if the contingency parking area mentioned above is warranted. (3) The redesign of the intersection of Clubhouse Drive and Snowmass Club Circle, in compliance with the TOSV Land Use and Development Code criteria, shall be redesigned for improved sight distance and reaction time for turning movements. Such reconfiguration shall include a westbound right-turn slip lane with a center landscape island, or some variation of this design, and will be installed prior to the completion and issuance of a CO for the Phase II units. iii) Fire Access. (1) It is acknowledged that the site plan balances the need to respect the setback from the stream and the desire to provide a fire lane and road access on the southern side of the south building. The buildings are located as close to the wetlands and riparian zone of the creek as possible as requested per the Sketch Plan review. The fire access and easement shall be provided in compliance with the request from the Fire District. Therefore, the 25-foot wetland setback encroachment is viewed acceptably in order to create the fire lane access and to maintain adequate separation from the Villas North complex. In addition, the area for the 25-foot setback is already disturbed by the existing parking areas. b) Parking Facilities: i) A transportation and parking analysis was prepared with the Preliminary Plan application. Due to the relocation of the driving range in this Preliminary Plan submission, the existing 28 spaces of parking now dedicated to golf operations will be made available, year round for use by the Fairway Center and the Club operations, which reduces the concern about parking for this facility which was raised during the Sketch Plan review process. The 28-space parking area will require PC Reso 01-24 Page 11 of 19 coordination of an irrevocable license through the Town's Public Works Department. ii) Due to the fact that the off-street parking provision proposed is fewer than required by the TOSV Land Use and Development Code (468 required versus 426 provided, including the 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle), the plans shall continue to show a location for a future 39-space contingency parking lot to be constructed if the Town of Snowmass Village determines that additional parking is needed for the site after one year following completion and operation of the facilities of the Phase II improvements. If it is determined that the contingency parking is not needed at that time, then the applicant may install the Tennis Center Pro-Shop building and the 14-space adjoining parking area as depicted on the plan. Such improvements (the contingency parking or the building with adjoining parking area) shall be completed within twelve months after determination is made whether or not the contingency parking is needed. Such determination shall be made by December 31, 2004. c) Transit Issues: i) The Transportation Analysis presented both existing conditions and the plan for transportation improvements. Four bus stops are affected and included in the Phase II program; 1). Club Townhomes, 2) two for Snowmass Club, 3) Villas North on route number 3. These will be continued. In addition, as noted below, the RFTA bus shelter on Brush Creek road will be improved as part of this development program. A detail of the shelter will be provided in the Final PUD Plan. ii) The applicant represented a commitment to provide a bus shelter for the RFTA bus stop generally in the vicinity of where Clubhouse Drive extension meets Brush Creek Road. A detail of the shelter will be provided in the Final PUD Plan. This shelter will be installed within 180 days after the signing of the final plat for phase II or sooner. iii) It is acknowledged that the main entrance to the Club off of Snowmass Club Circle will remain in its current location instead of relocated per the Sketch Plan proposal. The existing pedestrian bridge will also remain and allow access to the bus stop and will provide a pedestrian connection to guests in the new southern condominium building complex. iOOS am PC Reso 01-24 Page 12 of 18 d) Pedestrian Circulation. Trails. and Nordic issues: i) In lieu of the trail connections described in the Sketch Plan resolution, a new pedestrian trail is will be included in or beside the Clubhouse Drive access road right-of-way, as described below, and will not only provide public pedestrian access to the clubhouse but will also provide a direct connection and conflict-free access for residents of Club Commons to the rodeo grounds and the Brush Creek bus stop. It is acknowledged that the new golf course routing plan, which is viewed favorably, will require the removal of the existing pedestrian trail which connects Club Commons to the Brush Creek RFTA stop. The new trail along the Clubhouse Drive extension will replace the existing trail. ii) A minimum four-foot wide attached walkway will be constructed by the applicant along Clubhouse Drive from the Phase II condominium buildings to the clubhouse parking lot in lieu of a detached walkway due to existing improvements, site constraints, and a drainage swale. From there a detached walkway with a landscaped parkway will be provided to Brush Creek Road. It is acknowledged that there will be little if no landscaping at the southeast corner of the tennis structure due to existing site constraints. iii) The applicant represented a commitment to construct an interconnecting trail along and between the northern-most condominium building and Brush Creek as shown on the plans, utilizing a meandering path and a decorative surface treatment, to connect Clubhouse Drive to Snowmass Club Circle and the existing trail located farther to the west across from the main entrance. iv) To improve the appearance of the culvert crossing for Brush Creek at Clubhouse Drive as per the Sketch Plan, the application proposal includes a three-sided or arched culvert to convey Brush Creek in this area. This design approach was recommended by the Corps of Engineers as a way to preserve the streambed. This bridge and drainage structure will be finished with a combination of color tinted concrete and stone veneer to match the materials in the Phase II units. Adequate room will be provided for pedestrian circulation on the road itself railings will be installed in conformance with the building code. This would also be in lieu of providing a second pedestrian bridge between the two proposed residential buildings. v) The existing pedestrian bridge is being retained in the plans and will service the new units in the southern condominium building as well as provide pedestrian access to the bus stop along Snowmass Club Circle. --------------------------------- PC Reso 01.24 Page 13 of 19 vi) The applicant has noted coordination efforts with the Town's Trails Committee including an agreement that has been reached concerning the location and alignment of all trail systems which go through the site, and staff shall coordinate a comprehensive trail plan for the project site as depicted on the plans. vii) The applicant and the Town shall continue joint efforts and coordination, including studies and proper trail alignments, to provide a nature/foot trail along Brush Creek from Clubhouse Drive, then along the south side of the Water and Sanitation District facilities, and thence northeasterly to a point near the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highline Road. Once agreement is reached with the Town and the Trails Committee, the applicant as committed will provide easements. viii)As represented in a commitment by the applicant, and in addition to the above condition, the applicant will provide an easement for a trail connection south of Snowmass Club Circle between Clubhouse Drive (by the Qwest facility) and Fairway Drive within the Country Club Estates development. ix) The applicant represented a commitment to grant easements for all existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle trails on the project site and represented in the Preliminary Plans prior to recordation of the Final Plat. x) A general and non-specific license is agreed to by the applicant for the continued operation of Nordic skiing on the property in its generally historic location. A site is also being provided for a low impact seasonal shelter with power for housing the trail-grooming vehicle. The shelter is planned to be inset into the existing berm north of the maintenance facility. The license will be provided to the TOSV. 10)Necessary facilities. a) The applicant has provided sufficient improvements to meet the needs for management of storm water runoff, maintenance of water quality and trash enclosures and shall be subject to review and approval by the Town engineer. 11)Restricted housing. Section 4-410, Restricted Housing Requirements, of the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use and Development Code, provides the methodology for determining the amount of restricted housing, which must be provided by the ��� ME PC Reso 01-24 Page 14 of 19 applicant to sufficiently mitigate the employee housing impacted by the proposed development. The Town Council also previously considered the quantity and quality of the employee housing constructed as part of Phase I of this development. Following consideration of the facts, the Town still finds, as described with the Sketch Plan resolution, that: a) The revised employee housing calculations, following the ratios per Ordinance No. 07, Series of 2000, are accurate when comparing the original Club with the combined Phase I and II uses. b) The seven employee housing units previously provided for the original 76- unit Lodge was accepted as being equivalent to the employee housing requirement for the 30 condominium units approved and redeveloped in Phase I. The 61 employee housing units approved in Phase I was considered a community purpose benefit. The employee housing required for Phase II is a mitigation issue and not considered a Community Purpose issue. The Phase 11 employee housing requirement is 5,824 square feet following the revised employee housing ratios and calculations outlined in Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000 (i.e., the difference between the original club and the combination of Phase I & II utilizing the revised rates). c) Due to the applicant agreeing to deed restrict, for employee housing purposes, the one additional manager's unit of 1,700 square feet built in Phase I, it may be credited against the 5,824 square feet of employee housing required for Phase 11. d) Per the above stipulation, the 4,124 square feet remaining for employee housing required for Phase II shall be fulfilled with a future project proposed by the applicant, successors, and/or interests. e) In addition to the employee housing requirements for the Snowmass Club Phase 11 project, and pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994 (Under Findings, Section 'b" Employee Housing, pages 16 and 17), the applicant is required to provide employee housing as needed for the previous ski area expansion per subsections [i & ii], under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. f) In addition to the above requirement, 1,936 square feet of employee housing per subsection [iii] of the same ordinance and section, is required for previous facility expansions within the Snowmass Ski Area, under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. g) The applicant commits that the employee housing required, per conditions 4, 5 and 6 above, will be constructed by January 1, 2006. Consideration "rhA I PC Reso 01-24 Page 15 of 19 should be given to the possibility of identifying an appropriate employee- housing site within the Snowmass Club parcels. The applicant acknowledges the previous findings of the Town and agrees to the mitigation measures called for. 12)Fiscal impact. a) The Planning Commission believes that this project will have favorable Fiscal Impact. Revisions are now being reviewed by the Town's Finance Department and we recommend that the Town Council consider the findings of the Finance Department. 13)Energy conservation. a) The Applicant commits to have no exterior hot tubs associated with the individual units within Phase II and will use only gas fireplaces in the Condominium Building. b) The Tennis Bubble will be replaced with a new, more energy efficient permanent structure. 14)Air qualify. a) Extension and improvement of gravel-based Clubhouse Drive prior to building permits to reduce fugitive dust and provide entry for construction traffic shall be completed. The road will be paved prior to the Certificate of Occupancy for the golf clubhouse. b) Frequent watering of disturbed areas, especially during dry spells. 15)Construction management plan. a) The Planning Commission finds that the Construction Management Plan as revised is acceptable for a preliminary stage of review. 16)Community welfare. Pursuant to the Sketch Plan conditions, and pursuant to the new Code Changes and Community Purposes Criteria, the Town Council found that the previous Code revisions per Ordinance No. 07 and No. 15, Series of 2000, "bn am PC Reso 01.24 Page 16 of 19 apply to the Preliminary and Final PUD applications for this project, with the following exceptions and conditions: a) The new unit equivalency chart (per Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000), will not apply to this project. b) The new 65% threshold rule (per Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000), for applicability of community purpose criteria, will apply to the project. The following Community Purpose items offered by the applicant were found sufficient to allow buildout of 21 fractional ownership condominiums at approximately 2,400 square feet per unit: i) The applicant has acknowledged agreement to provide a license agreement to the Town or Nordic Council to assure the continued ability to set and use Nordic trails on Parcel 10 (e.g., the golf course area); ii) The applicant has committed to provide a site with electric service to the Town for use by the Nordic Council to allow a permanent structure for housing a vehicle for Nordic trail maintenance as previously described'in this resolution. Construction costs for the structure and recurring energy and operating costs would be borne by the Town or a third party; iii) Brush Creek improvements are proposed pursuant to the application, as previously described in this resolution, which will improve water quality and aesthetics of the creek; iv) A new trail easement will be provided to the Town from Clubhouse Drive to Snowmass Club Circle (e.g., between the proposed residential buildings along Brush Creek); v) Provision of additional trail easements by the applicant to the Town for trails shown on the Trail Map and in the Comprehensive Plan for which easements do not already exist;. vi) Full-time residents of the Town who are employed or are full-time students, and who are not members of the Club will be provided the opportunity to play golf on a space available basis. The fees/rates, conditions, and restrictions below are acceptable to the Planning Commission: • Full time residents of the town who are employed a minimum of 30 hours per week or full time students within Pitkin County and who are not members of the Club will be provided the opportunity to play golf on a space available basis at the same rate in effect at the ab 30 Oft PC Reso 01-24 Page 17 of 19 Aspen Municipal Golf Course, not including the cost of a cart, at the time of play. Use of the golf course shall be limited to five times per year/person on a space available basis and shall require the issuance of a golf pass at an administrative fee of $15 to qualify. Use of golf carts may be required if conditions warrant. Tee times may be made no earlier than 48 hours in advance of play and no tee times under this program will be available on Saturdays from June 15 through Labor Day weekend. vii)A new bus stop and shelter shall be constructed by the applicant for down valley access (i.e., on the south side of Brush Creek Road) near the intersection where Clubhouse Drive meets Brush Creek Road; viii)A land area of sufficient size and orientation for recreational purposes, a softball field, and music festival purposes is proposed to be conveyed to the Town. Per the Sketch Plan resolution and at the Town's option, the softball field shall be conveyed to the Town of Snowmass Village. The method of conveyance to the Town of this area shall be deferred until later and prior to completion of the Preliminary Plan PUD application review process, in order to maintain the option to potentially realign Brush Creek Road per provisions of the Ancillary Improvements Agreement dated January 20, 2000. ix) Notwithstanding the above, the applicant has acknowledged its commitment to grant the Town a reservation, which would allow a future improvement of the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highline Road, as long as it does not interfere with the redesigned golf course. During the redesign, consideration of future intersection improvements will be coordinated by the applicant with the Town; and x) The applicant commits to deed restrict the existing employee housing complex in Parcel 12 with the Final Plat. 17)Consideration of Minor PUD Amendments a) The Planning Commission finds that the plan: i) Is generally consistent with original PUD; ii) Has no substantial adverse impact; iii) Does not significantly change the character; and iv) Complies with the applicable review standards as specified in Section 16A-5-300(c), General Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards of the Municipal Code. -31 _ PC Reso 01-24 Page 18 of 19 f8)Miscellaneous a) The applicant understands and accepts that approval for any improvements not submitted as part of Preliminary Plan Application, are subject to requests for additional information, full and complete review, analysis, recommendations for change, approval or denial, and that any impacts resulting from future improvements must be fully mitigated by the developer at the developer's expense. now PC Reso 01.24 Page 19 of 19 Section Two: Recommendation. The Planning Commission recommends approval of The Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment submission, which includes: 1) The construction of 21 1/8 fractional ownership condominiums averaging 2,400 square feet in size and consisting of four 3-bedroom units, thirteen 4- bedroom units and four 5-bedrooms units; 2) A Subdivision Exemption and special review use for the condominiumization of the 21 units in Phase ll; 3) A completely new 18-hole championship golf course being approximately 7,000 yards in length, including the re-routing and re-numbering of the fairways; 4) Relocation of the softball field and events area approximately 250 feet to the west; 5) Construction of a new 5,100 square foot golf clubhouse (reduced from 7,560 square feet at Sketch Plan) with golf cart storage beneath; 6) A new 150- space parking facility to serve the golf clubhouse and special events area; 7) Construction of a permanent indoor Tennis structure and a Tennis Pro-Shop facility; 8) Reconfiguration of Phase I parking provisions to accommodate the Phase II proposal; 9) Widening to 22-feet with street width variance and extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road at Horse Ranch Drive; 10) Improvements to intersection at Snowmass Club Circle and Clubhouse Drive; 11) Stream restoration of Brush Creek; and 12) Improved trail connections, subject to the general findings and conditions in Section One of this resolution. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED, as amended, on this 22nd day of August, 2001 by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on a motion made by Commission member Gustafson, seconded by Commission member Benson, by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 against (Fridstein voting due to Faurer absence). TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION eor a P. H ggins, an ATTEST: Sherry McIntire, Planning Commission Secretary i� l Planning Division Staff Report Project Name: Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment Part 1: Summary of Application and Major Issues Applicant Information: Applicant: Aspen Skiing Company Owner: Snowmass Club Associates Contact: Don Schuster, Vice President of Real Estate, Aspen Skiing Co. Geri VanMoorsel, Project Architect, Aspen Skiing Company Project Summary: The Aspen Skiing Company (Owner: Snowmass Club Associates) resubmitted their Phase II Preliminary Plan application on June 22, 2001 to amend the Snowmass Club Planned Unit Development (PUD). The development proposal involves Parcels 3, 4 (Snowmass Club) and 10 (Golf Course) of the Snowmass Club PUD. The Phase II Preliminary Plan application proposes the following: 1) The construction of 21 (four 3-bedroom, 13 four-bedroom, and 4 5-bedroom), 1/8 fractional ownership condominiums (versus 1/7 interest per the Sketch Plan) averaging 2,400 square feet in size; 2) A completely new 18-hole championship golf course being 7,000 yards in length, including the re-routing and re-numbering of the fairways; 3) Relocation of the softball field and events area approximately 250 feet to the west occupying a new space of roughly 2.7 acres in size; 4) Construction of a new 5,100 square foot golf clubhouse (reduced from 7,560 square feet at Sketch Plan)with golf cart storage beneath; 5) A new 150-space parking facility to serve the golf clubhouse and special events area; 6) Construction of a permanent indoor Tennis structure and a phased-in Tennis Pro-Shop facility; 7) Reconfiguration of Phase I parking provisions to accommodate the Phase II proposal; 8) Widening to 22-feet, involving a street width variance, and extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road at Horse Ranch Drive; 9) Improvements to intersection at Snowmass Club Circle and Clubhouse Drive; 10)Stream restoration of Brush Creek; and 11)Improved trail connections. The northerly portion of Parcel 10 (Golf Course) is located within the Rodeo/ Entry Comprehensively Planned Area (CPA). Elements within this CPA that shall be accommodated within the affected area include: 1) Intensification of the recreational uses, including playing fields, pedestrian and bike trails, expanded golf course and a recreation center; 2) Intersection improvements; and 3) Clear circulation and access. This relates to the previous Option I proposal, which was accepted during the Sketch Plan application review, showing the proposed improvements utilizing the existing Brush Creek Road alignment. vow 3c,F .. t Applicant's Request: • Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment approval of the Snowmass Club Phase II proposal (Reference Code Sections 16A-5-300(b)(2)(a), 16A-5-300(c), and 16A-5-310 ) and to authorize proceeding to Final PUD application stage. The request also involves a subdivision exemption to allow condominiumization of the 21 units into 1/8 share timeshares. Community or Adjacent Owner Comments: • None received at this time. Core Issues following the Preliminary.Plan Review Intent and Issues In the Code: According to Code Section 16A-5-340(b), Preliminary Plan Review Intent and Issues, below are the italicized questions the Planning Commission and Town Council should consider in a detailed manner during review of the Preliminary Plan (depending upon the size and complexity of the proposal). Staffs analyses and Planning Commission recommendations follow in regular font and may reference other attachments, exhibits or supplemental plans, or the Planning Commission Resolution No. 24, Series 2001, for further details and information. (1) Response to Sketch Plan issues and concerns. Has the applicant provided detailed, sufficient and appropriate responses to each of the issues and concerns identified during the sketch plan review? Analysis: Staff finds that a majority of the issues noted in the Town Council Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001, for the Sketch Plan PUD were satisfactorily addressed, at least in written format, as indicated in the Preliminary Plan PUD application's project description and justification, with the exception of the items noted below. Note: Staffs overall observation is that written agreements, conditions and details need to be graphically illustrated and labeled on the plans. Otherwise, the project will not be constructed the way it was envisioned or agreed to as directed in the resolutions or ordinances. The people in charge of building the projects need to visualize the requirements from the plans. Since this request, many of the plans have been updated addressing staff comments and concerns. Page 7 of Applicant's Response Letter-- Preliminary Drainage Plan. • A preliminary drainage plan was not submitted with the initial application, but a preliminary contour map was submitted with the supplemental package included with this report. A more detailed grading and drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and revegetation plan, is proposed to be submitted with the Final Plan. The application does provide a map of the approximate areas of disturbance with the proposed redesign of the golf course (see the maps behind the Development Maps tab). The enlarged plans of the affected areas for development show proposed finished grades, but don't reflect the drain flow directions, labeled detention pond/catch basin VW3"r GOP 2 areas (although one might guess where they are located), drain inlets, sewer pipes, and outfall locations. • It is noted in the Army Corps of Engineer Permit Application (in the supplemental package)that"ponds A, B (actually C per the water rights map), D and E will be reconfigured to provide expanded wetland benches and boundaries." It should be noted that the 404 Permit to the Army Corps labeled the ponds differently from the water right map in the back of the application. The proposal also indicates that the west pond (Pond E per the water rights map) will not be altered. The application also states that"Pond C (actually Pond B per the water rights map) will be filled to accommodate a location for the new clubhouse." The pond filling is also proposed to accommodate an adequately engineered road access from Brush Creek Road into the site, which Staff and the Fire District finds favorable to the type of development being proposed. The road, an extension of Clubhouse Drive, lines up with Horse Ranch Drive and provides a natural, convenient connection into the site. • A total of about 2.6 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, mainly in isolated locations and around the existing ponds, will be impacted. Approximately 6.0 acres of shallow wetland benches and transitional areas in and around the existing and proposed ponds will be created with the proposal. Three additional water features along with reconfiguration of ponds are proposed for the golf course to help make up for the 5.81 acres of ponds proposed to be filled or partially filled. The deletions, reconfigurations and creation of wetlands are proposed to balance the amount of existing wetlands to be eliminated or reconfigured on the site and to enhance the redesign of the golf course. • The latest supplemental information dated August 3, 2001 provided to the Army Corps indicates that the surface area of the existing ponds is 9.456 acres and that there is proposed a decrease to 6.354 acres for the ponds within the proposed reconstruction of the new golf course. As a result, there is proposed to be a net reduction of 3.182 acres of open water. There are also different reconfiguration designs for Pond A (the one thought to be directly west of the new clubhouse location per the water rights map) represented in the drawings provided in the Army Corps application, the plans, and on the colored illustrative. The shape proposed for this pond is not entirely clear. • As noted, the applicant provided a preliminary contour map of the golf course redesign in the supplemental package of information with this report. This information has been referred to the Town Engineer for review. Most of the proposed grading changes appears to cut into the hillsides to level out the areas planned for the new fairways and creates slightly bermed or elevated spaces between the new fairway locations. • Staff Recommendation: 1) A more detailed grading and drainage plan should be submitted with the Final Plan along with an erosion control plan and a revegetation plan; 2) The Town should obtain written consent or approval from the Army Corps of Engineers and/or from FEMA for the proposed reconfiguration of the wetland boundary on the site and the floodplain boundary between the condominium buildings prior to construction. Please see further details concerning the requested Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)to change the floodplain boundary under section (6) Natural hazard areas of this staff report. • Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 7 and 8 of the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-24 for findings and conditions concerning natural hazard and natural resource areas. Page 8 of Applicant's Response Letter— Building Setbacks. • The applicant is now seeking a variance to permit construction of the condominium buildings within the 25-foot wetland setback area to accommodate the previous request to move the buildings as close as possible to the riparian corridor. • Staff Recommendation: It would be helpful for review if the plans identified the setback dimensions of the buildings from the new floodplain and wetland boundaries as well as the property lines. The Town Council may authorize by a super majority (4 out of 5) vote the condominium buildings within the 25- foot setback identifying the reasons why the development is unable to avoid the setback area. Please reference the cross-section of the area in the supplemental package for assistance in evaluating the requested variance. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends the variance to encroach into the 25-foot wetland and riparian setback areas shown on the plans. See page 3 of the resolution under 2) Zone district limitations. Consideration of the Four Criteria for Minor PUD Amendments. • The Sketch Plan resolution indicates that this criteria be considered when reviewing the Preliminary Plan. The criteria are generally summarized as follows: a. Consistent with original PUD; b. No substantial adverse impact; c. Not change the character; and d. Comply with other applicable standards. • Staff Recommendation: Staff offers the following comments for consideration: a. It is difficult to address consistency with the original PUD since the applicant is proposing a Major Amendment to the PUD. This criterion was only meant to be applied to a Minor PUD Amendment; b. The PUD Amendment will have impacts to the surrounding area (e.g., OWM �� 4 more traffic, visual impacts of the buildings, surface improvement impacts, etc.) but it is questionable whether the impacts from the improvements will be substantially adverse. Staff finds that some of the improvements (e.g., the road connection to Brush Creek Road, the Brush Creek enhancements, the new clubhouse, the trail connections, and the additional landscaping) will benefit the community; c. The PUD zoning on the property does not change, therefore there is no change in the character of the area. Per the Comprehensive Plan maps, multi-family was envisioned for the area proposed for the condominium buildings; and d. Review for compliance with other applicable standards are being addressed elsewhere in this report. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 17 of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 24, Series of 2001 for findings. Page 9 of Aoplicant's Response Letter-- Brush Creek Alignment. • The applicant states that they will continue to work with the Town regarding the proper alignment of the creek through or around the intersection design of Highline Road and Brush Creek Road and the new golf course once completed. • Staff Recommendation: Staff reviewed the Brush Creek Impact Report and is in favor of the improvements proposed (rock weirs, stabilization of the creek embankments, and the creek diversion into Ponds C and D, etc.). It should be noted that the diversion of the creek through the ponds exits back to the existing creek along the west side of Highline Road versus paralleling along the south side of Brush Creek Road (as per Sketch Plan). The revised creek diversion may pose a problem in designing the roundabout at Brush Creek Road and Highline Road. Staff also asks that the plans or the plat document existing and new public easements for the trails planned along the creek and elsewhere on the property. It should also be clarified which portions of the trails that will be installed and maintained by the applicant and those that will be installed and maintained by the Town. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission noted four findings concerning the Brush Creek enhancements on page 7 of its resolution under 5) Natural Resource Areas, which generally indicate acceptance of the proposed creek improvements with some recommendations. Trail improvements recommendations are noted on pages 12 and 13 of the resolution. Golf Course Improvements. The proposed golf course redesign is described in writing on page 9 of the description letter and in the colored illustrative drawing provided at the beginning of the Development Maps tab. W39 40 5 • Staff Recommendation: The golf cart/pedestrian crossing at Snowmass Club Circle could be improved with a decorative surface treatment at the road crossing and entry island improvements on both sides of the street (especially to improve sight distance) or with an underpass incorporating a decorative bridge crossing. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The golf improvement recommendations are outlined on page 8 of the resolution under 6) Grading and drainage. Pages 9 and 10 of Applicant's Response Letter-- Softball Field. • The application proposes to shift the softball field and the area for festivals to the west approximately 250 feel to accommodate an access road, which aligns with Horse Ranch Drive. Staff finds the road connection will be a long term benefit and convenience for the users of the golf course and will lessen the traffic impact where the multi-family units currently exists and are proposed near Snowmass Club Circle. See the optional layouts of the softball field and the event areas in the last four pages behind the Development Maps tab. • Staff Recommendation: 1) That the Town receive a consent letter from the users which will operate this facility prior to finalizing the Preliminary Plan (please see the letter from Jazz Aspen-Snowmass requesting size needs, perimeter road, and additional parking); 2)That the applicant improve the field before conveying the property for maintenance to the Town, if desired; and 3) For conveyance purposes, the property could be lotted or designated as a Tract on the subdivision plat. If a tract, then the plat should note the use restrictions (e.g., for use only as a recreational field, events area, festivals, or community purposes), ownership and the maintenance responsibilities of the tract on the plat itself. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Pages 2 and 3 of the resolution indicate the findings and conditions concerning the softball field/events area, including schematic plan options, adequacy of the size of such facility, improvements and conveyance to the Town. Pages 10 and 11 of Applicant's response letter— Parking Facilities. • Please see the full set of comments and concerns by staff regarding the Transportation Analysis under(9) Transportation impacts. The applicant's letter of description and justification notes that the 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle will be used year-round for use by the Fairway Center. However, it is being used in the Transportation Analysis as being part of the parking provided for the Snowmass Club site. W-31/ 6 • Staff Recommendation: 1) Clarify which use will be permitted to use the 28 spaces, if they are allowed to remain; 2) Have applicant apply for revocable license to use the parking within the public right-of-way, if it's to remain; 3) If the 28 spaces are to be removed, designate another parking area for the Fairway Conference Center and/or the old clubhouse facility; and 3) Retain the future contingency parking area (explained below) in the plans. Please see the memorandum dated July 31, 2001 from Public Works for comments concerning and recommendations concerning these spaces (Exhibit D). • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission felt that the 28 spaces should remain, that they may be used for the Fairway Center and Club operations, and that the 39-space contingency parking to remain in the plans for determination whether needed or not by December 31, 2004. Please reference the findings and conditions under Parking Facilities on pages 10 and 11 of the resolution. Page 11 of Applicant's response letter-- Contingency Parking. • The plans propose a 14-space (not 16-space) parking lot near the Tennis Center. • Staff Recommendation: Considering that the peak parking demand of 468 parking spaces, which was determined based upon lower projected assumption rates and the fact that 398 spaces are proposed (not including the 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle), a 25-space contingency parking area should be retained in the plan (in addition to the 14 Tennis Center parking spaces). As a result, the Tennis Center/Pro Shop structure should be relocated at this time to accommodate the future contingency parking, if needed in the future. Per the Sketch Plan, it was to be determined during the Preliminary Plan whether the contingency parking was needed, but staff recommends retaining it until operations on the site can be observed/documented, such as over a period of one year after all Phase II improvements are completed. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission agreed that the contingency parking should remain, and that determination whether it is needed or not should be made by December 31, 2004. At that time, the contingency parking or the tennis center with 14 parking spaces would need to be constructed within 12 months after the determination is made. See pages 10 and 11 of the resolution for specific information. Parking Generation. • The Transportation Analysis did not contemplate the re-use of the old clubhouse and the parking requirements for the maintenance facility, even though the 16-space parking area in the maintenance facility was counted as parking provided for the site. 40 go* 7 • Staff Recommendation: A 25-space contingency parking area, as stated above, should be shown and labeled on the plans at minimum. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Since the initial review of the application, a supplemental parking analysis was submitted. It stated that the old clubhouse would be used as offices for existing Club employees and for the Nordic trail operations. In any event, the Planning Commission agreed that the contingency parking should remain with the plan. See pages 10 and 11 of the resolution. Pages 12 and 13 of Applicant's response letter-- Intersection Redesign (Snowmass Club Circle & Clubhouse Drive). • The application states agreement to improve this intersection based upon selected design during the Sketch Plan (Exhibit A). • Staff Recommendation: The selected intersection design should be identified with this application and shown on the plans. The preferred design is the one with the right turn slip lane from westbound Snowmass Club Circle to northbound Clubhouse Drive (Exhibit A) versus the one showing a skewed road to create a perpendicular intersection design with Snowmass Club Circle. The attached memorandum dated July 31, 2001 from Public Works recommends improving the sight distance beyond 250 feet at the intersection (Exhibit D). • Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 9 under a)ii Traffic Impacts in the Planning Commission resolution for similar recommendation. Page 13 of Applicant's response letter-- Clubhouse Drive Improvements. • The initial application proposed widening of Clubhouse Drive to 22 feet and extension of the road to Brush Creek Road with a mid-point control gate. A variance is requested to reduce the road with from 20 feet with two-foot shoulder to 22 feet in width. Also, please reference the proposed design detail of the gate in the supplemental package. • Staff Recommendation: Staff is agreeable with the applicant's proposal to widen Clubhouse Drive, but to a 20 with two-foot shoulders to meet the standard for a local road. The road is private, but the same standards apply to private roads as to public roads per the Municipal Code. Staff is also agreeable to the extension of the road to Brush Creek Road, but is not in favor of the control gate. Also see the attached memorandum dated July 31, 2001 from Public Works stating a position that the control gate should be removed. The 22-foot width, with access through the control point, was viewed as acceptable to the Fire District since the road connects or loops ..#/ w 8 from Snowmass Club Circle to Brush Creek Road. Besides the road width variance, discussion should focus on the 1) whether the control point/gate is appropriate, 2) who is authorized to access the gate if it is allowed, and 3) whether or not the extension of Clubhouse Drive from this point to Brush Creek Road should be a seasonable operation. Please see the comments under (9) Transportation Impacts in this report for further related concerns. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends the variance to reduce the road width to 22 feet with varied cross-sections (as illustrated in the supplemental package), the extension to Brush Creek Road at Horse Ranch Drive for year round use, and the elimination of the mid-point control gate. See the specific conditions on pages 9 and 10 of the resolution, under Vehicular Access and Circulation. Crossings of Brush Creek. • The letter in the application references the drainage plan for crossing details, but there was no specific or detailed drainage plan submitted with the application. • Staff Recommendation: The applicant should provide details of all the road and pedestrian crossings of Brush Creek to review the appropriate exterior design and material cladding of the color tinted concrete, stone veneer and railing design applications for these facilities, not just the box culverts. • Planning Commission Recommendation: See the specific design recommendation description on page 12 of the resolution under subsection d)iv of Pedestrian Circulation. Trails. and Nordic issues. The detail is forthcoming in the supplemental package which staff hasn't seen as of the writing of this report. Pages 13 and 14 of Applicant's response letter— Placing South Condominium Building closer to Creek. • The application accommodates the previous request to locate the southern condominium building close to the creek to the greatest extent possible without encroaching into the proposed new wetland and floodpiain boundaries and to create a larger separation distance from Villas North. • Staff Recommendation: Compliance with the above noted request also triggers compliance with variance procedures to allow development to encroach within the 25-foot riparian setback area following the Code criteria. This requires super majority approval by the Town Council including identifying reasons why development is unable to avoid the setback area. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission recommended in favor of the encroachment into the 25-foot setback area per page 3 of the resolution under 2) Zone district limitations. Also see page 10 under iii) Fire Access for further reasons. sow 0 4M 9 Page 14 of Applicant's response letter— Roadway, Trail and Utility Easements. • The referenced preliminary plat was not included in the application for review. • Staff Recommendation: Staff believes it would be helpful to have a preliminary plat in hand to ensure that all necessary trail, roadway, and utility easements (existing and proposed) are adequately covered or documented for the site. It should also be clarified on the plans the portions of the trails which will be installed and maintained by the applicant and those which will be installed and maintained by the Town. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The resolution acknowledges the applicant's commitment to dedicating easement for all existing and proposed trails represented in the Preliminary Plan. See page 13 of the resolution. Bus Shelter on Brush Creek Road. • The application states agreement in providing a bus shelter on Brush Creek Road. • Staff Recommendation: The plans should show and label the location of the new bus shelter on Brush Creek Road and provide a design detail of the shelter for review. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The resolution acknowledges the applicant's commitment to provide a detail of the shelter during the Final PUD Plan. See subsection ii) under Transit Issues on page 11 of the resolution.. Page 15 of Applicant's response letter— Trail Locations and Relocations. • The application proposes modification of the trail alignments as a result of the redesign of the golf course. • Staff Recommendation: Staff does not object to the trail relocation from the west, as a result of the proposed golf course fairway realignments, however, we'd recommend written consent from the Town's Trails Committee. The proposed trail from the west seems to be in a better alignment than the one proposed during the Sketch Plan review. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received comments from the Trials Committee. However, conversation from a recent Trails Committee meeting on August 15, 2001 _ 1 ##% 10 indicated that the trail extension from the west should be moved to the south slightly and that a Nordic trail crossing should be installed on the Clubhouse Drive extension. Please reference the colored perspective illustrative in the supplemental package showing the relocate trail connections over a reconfigured Pond A in front of the new clubhouse. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The resolution references the coordination efforts by the applicant with the Trails Committee and that a license is agreed to by the applicant for the continued operation of the Nordic skiing on the property. See subsections vi) and x) on page 13 of the resolution under Pedestrian Circulation. Trails. and Nordic issues. Page 16 of Applicant's response letter— Trail Easements. • In accordance with the Brush Creek Impact Report, a trail is shown along the enhanced portions of the creek. • Staff Recommendation: In accordance with the Sketch Plan agreements, trail easements should be identified on a plan or a preliminary plat, including the connection between Clubhouse Drive (near the Qwest facility) and Fairway Drive within the Country Club Estates development. The Sketch Plan resolution states that the Preliminary Plan identify all existing and proposed trail easement locations. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The resolution is in general concurrence with staff's recommendations and notes this requirement in subsection viii) on page 13 of the resolution. Nordic Facility and Trails. • The application attempts to addresses the Nordic trails needs from per Sketch Plan resolution. • Staff Recommendation: The plans should identify the location for the Nordic seasonal shelter with the labeled provision for power to the site. Typical elevations should be provided as a design standard as shown in the Sketch Plan application. However, since this comment, the applicant is proposing the shelter inset within the berm area north of the maintenance facility. In addition, a license agreement for this shelter and the Nordic trails should be provided to the Town. Appropriate crossings of the extended Clubhouse Drive should also be discussed. See attached revised letter received August 27, 2001 from the Nordic Trails Coordinator(Exhibit B). • Planning Commission Recommendation: See subsection x) on page 13 of the resolution under Pedestrian Circulation. Trails, and Nordic issues for Nordic related items. GNP 11 Pages 16 and 17 of Applicant's response letter-- Walkway Connection along Clubhouse Drive. • In the initial application submittal, the applicant proposed that most of the walkway connection along Clubhouse Drive be attached to the curb due to site constraints such as the proposed Tennis Structure placement, existing drainage swales near the tennis courts, and other existing conditions or improvements on the west side of the road. • Staff Recommendation: Staff does not object to the attached walkway along the west side of Clubhouse Drive south of the employee housing area. However, staff recommends that the new walkway or trail connection along the Clubhouse Drive extension be detached from Brush Creek Road to the employee housing area. This walkway segment should also meander incorporating a landscaped parkway (between the curb and the walkway). Staff believes this will create a more attractive entryway statement into the area as well as create a more pleasant experience for the pedestrian. The applicant has since submitted a revised plan of the area in the supplemental package, as of August 1, 2001, showing a detached walkway from the clubhouse parking lot entrance to Brush Creek Road, but with no landscaping other than native grasses for the parkway area. Landscaping of the parkway may serve the purpose of creating an improved entryway statement. • Planning Commission Recommendation: See subsections i) and ii) on page 12 of the resolution under Pedestrian Circulation, Trails. and Nordic issues for specific recommendations. Page 17 of Applicant's response letter-- North Condominium Building Arrangement. • In lieu of angling the north condominium building, the applicant is proposing to stagger and step the building down the hillside. However, this is done by increasing the grade by about 10 feet for the west portion of the building. In addition, the mid-section of the roof for the northern condominium building has been lowered as requested in the Sketch Plan resolution. • Staff Recommendation: Please see sections (2) Zone district limitations and (4) Architectural plans below for comments related to grade changes around the condominium buildings and height limitations. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission was in favor of the applicant's proposal to step the building down the hillside versus angling the north condominium building. See subsection iv) on page 4 of the resolution. wjw� 12 Page 18 of Applicant's response letter-- Tennis Structure Building Elevations. • Since the last version of the Tennis Structure elevations, the Sketch Plan resolution indicated that "some variation or articulation in the design of the elevation facing Clubhouse Drive is needed." The north elevation appears to be the one facing Clubhouse Drive, which was modified to incorporate more fenestration, a pitched roof and a clerestory roof feature. However, the east and west elevations facing the parking lot and condominium buildings to the southeast and northwest show a fairly"blank"wall appearance. • Staff Recommendation: Further architectural relief on the east and west elevations should be provided and/or additional year-round tree screening should be planted nearby. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission felt that the affected elevations and roof design was deserving of additional architectural relief and the breaking of the roof plane with vertical and horizontal elements. See the recommendations on page 5 of the resolution under Tennis Structure in the Architectural Plans section. Planning Commission also recommended additional year round tree screening in the landscape island, between the service drive and the new parking lot. See page 5 of the resolution under 5) Landscaping and open space. Pages 18 and 19 of Applicant's response letter-- Landscape Plan Improvements. • There are supplemental landscape plans provided from the ones in the booklet that show the plant material sizes for new trees and shrubs. • Staff Recommendation: It is questionable whether a dense enough landscape buffer is provided between the condominium buildings and Clubhouse Drive as recommended by the Sketch Plan resolution. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The applicant supplied an updated landscape plan showing the plant material sizes and Planning Commission felt the buffer between the Phase II condominium buildings and the Water and Sanitation facility was adequate. See page 5 of the resolution under 5) Landscaping and open space. Landscaping around Golf Course Parking Lot. • Staff finds the orchard concept in around the golf course parking lot unique, although the 60-foot spacing between trees seems a little sparse. • Staff Recommendation: Staff believes the parking lot deserves more than one tree per landscape island. For a 150-space parking lot, the larger isles 4M%d 13 SEP-25-2001 08:50 310 475 2627 310 475 2627 P.01 nfo From: m) Sent: a U ay, eptember 22, 20018:28 A To: Info Subject: loan No.: 000652717027 New signing appointment. CALIFORNIA LOCAL 9-CALL LOAN TYPE: FIRST MORTGAGE APPT. DATEi 10/1/2001 APPT. DAY: Monday APPT. TIME: 5:00:00 PM ORDER DATE: 9/22/2001 8:16:57 AM TEAM N: Branch 13 LOAN NUMBER: 000652717 7 LOAN PROCESSOR: LOAN PROCESSOR PH BORROWER NAME MR. i Carmen Teresa Carter BORROWER NAME MRS. : BORROWER HOME PHONE: (970) 963-1691 BORROWER WORK PHONE: (970) 384-5829 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1531 Highway 133 PROPERTY CITY/STATE: Carbondale, CO. 61623 PROPERTY COUNTY: Garfield SIGNING LOCATION ADDRESS: 1531 Highway 133 SIGNING LOCATION CITY/STATEi Carbondale, CO. 81623 SIGNING LOCATION COUNTY: Garfield SIGNER EMPLOYEE: SIGNER COMPANY: PACIFIC DOCUMENT SIGNING NOTES: 912212001 8:16:49 AM apt set 10/105pm by agent-mg ( �UaS r S�ow.�.ss v ( l,J ` 1 " 6 K � rns RS 3 R,4 F( �� � t a i f i o INVOICE / STATUS REPORT '"yam PHONE (800) 884 7587 FAX (800) 732 4494 r 10801 National Blvd.Suite 510 Los Angeles, CA 90064 N r0 N N IOTARY NAME: DATE.- NOTES: 0 m .a M UULING ADDRESS FOR PAYMENT: SOCU+L SECURITY/FEDERAL TAX I.D. NUMBER f I FUS: SWAED LOAN ROCS: 550.00 TWO LOANS S75A0 HONE NUMBER: FAX NUMBER NO SHOWN S25-00 WOULD NOT SIGN: 575.00 II ANY VARIATIONS FROM THIS FEE SCHEDULE MUST BE APPROVED BY PACIFIC DOCUNFAT SWwVW,INC. YOU MUST FAX IN THIS INVOICE. THE NOTICE OF RIGHT TO CANCEL AND THE LAST PAGE OF THE DEED OF TRUST OR MORTGAGE FOR PAYMENT ON YOUR INVOICE TO BE PROCESSED!!! N ORROWER DATE CITY AND STATE LENDER LOAN NUMBER(Sk FEE •TRACIONG NUMBER jPLEASEE RCLE N.ST NAME: SIGN ED: (SEE BELOWI c SIGN G► IT IS MANDATORY THAT YOU RECEIVE A PHONE CALL APPROVING YOUR NOTICE OF RIGHT TO CANCEL AND i9 DEED OF TRUST OR MORTGAGE BEFORE SENDING DOCUMENTS INTO THE LENDER!!! THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULEM IF YOU SIGN OVER THE WEEKEND WAIT FOR OUR CALL ON MONDAY. N THE LOAN DOCUMENTS MUST ARRIVE TO THE LENDER WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE SIGNING, SO IF FOR ANY NtEASON YOU DO NOT RECEIVE OUR PHONE CALL, PLEASE SE PRO-ACT AND LET US KNOW YOU ARE STILL w 10LDING THESE LOAN DOCUMENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION - IT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED!! U) SEP-25-2001 06:50 310 475 2627 310 475 2627 P.03 Pacltic L70CUment �. ...r • p0 . Notarized Doctimgni Check List L fook ----• .* COMFLCM AND FAX IACK WITH INVOICE LOAN k MANDATORY DOCUMENTS I • MORTGAGE OR ^ n DEED OF TRUST • ERROR AND OMISSIONS Y • SIGNATURE NAME AFFIDAVITT • CORRECTION AGREEMENT LIMITED POWER OF ATTORNEY ❑ ACKNOWLEDGMENT(FOR DEED OF TRUST) u INDEMNITY AND AFFIDAVITS OF DEBTS, LIENS & POSSESIONS (Borrower must sign 2" page. This document must be notarized.) ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS (depending on the type of loan). ❑ GRANT DEED ❑ QUIT CLAIM DEED u TRUSTEE LOAN PACKAGE REMINDER!!! USE BLACK INK ONLY/MAKE SURE YOUR SEAL IS READABLE!DOUBLE CHECK YOUR PAPER WORK READ AND FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS LOCATED AT THE BOTTOM OF OUR INVOICE FORM. IN THE NOTARIAL,SECTION OF THE DOCUMENT,THE BORROWER'S NAME MUST BE WRITTEN IN AFTER THE WORDING "PERSONALLY APPEARED". EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS PRINTED ON THE DOCUMENT.(EXCEPTION: WHEN 711E NAME IS MISSPELLED.) TRANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION TOTRL P.03 should incorporate four trees and the smaller isles two trees to provide adequate shade for the parking area and to soften the appearance of the lot paving. Landscape islands are also recommended at the west ends of the parking lot. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission felt the orchard concept was acceptable. See page 5 of the resolution under 5) Landscaping and open space. Page 19 of Applicant's response letter— Creatlon of Wetland Areas within the Golf Course. • Please see the previous comments under the Preliminary Drainage Plan. Alpine Garden near Brush Creek. • The plans don't show the extent of detail necessary to review the appropriate design of this garden. • Staff Recommendation: An enlarged plan of the area should be provided, showing the design detailing along with the trail connection, perhaps during the Final Plan review. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission felt that the Alpine Garden concept utilizing more of the natural plant material existing in the riparian corridor along with added trees was acceptable. See page 5 of the resolution under 5) Landscaping and open space. Buffering around Employee Housing area. • The applicant would rather wait until the landscaping on the berms mature to determine whether it's acceptable or not. • Staff Recommendation: Staff believes that more evergreen trees could be introduced on these berms, especially the north and east sides facing the golf course and near the top of the berms. The berms seem high, so some softening techniques by use of low-profile plant material would be appropriate. Also, as a result of the high berms, stabilization efforts need to be provided to maintain plant and/or grass growth along the steep slopes of the berms. The use low-profile plant material may assist these efforts as well. • Planning Commission Recommendation: There was no recommendation in the resolution concerning this buffering issue. The applicant requested that the existing plant material be given time to mature before the Town addresses this matter. GOP A174WO 14 Pages 19 and 20 of Applicant's response letter— Lighting. • The lighting proposed with the revised supplemental drawings/package seems unobtrusive. • Staff Recommendation: Staff would prefer a larger detail of the site lighting to determine the maximum wattage proposed and the overall height, which we understand to be no higher than 12 feet. The bulk of the lighting Proposed is bollard lighting at four feet in height and infrequently placed, which appears to be unobtrusive. The revised lighting plans in the supplemental package show a reduction of lighting fixtures for the site as compared to what was provided with the initial application submittal. • Planning Commission Recommendation: Please reference page 6 of the resolution under Lighting for specific recommendations. Page 20 of Applicant's response letter— Views from Neighboring Developments. • The views from Villas North were to be evaluated per the Sketch Plan resolution. Computer simulations are included in the supplemental package showing the visual impacts of the proposed condominium buildings. According to Code Section 16A-4-340(D(5) it states, "Buildings should be oriented to take advantage of views and view corridors, and to frame views and enclose open space, but should also preserve important sight lines, overlooks and landmarks as viewed from public roadways and other public spaces, and as viewed from neighboring developments." • Staff Recommendation: Staff finds that the buildings have been oriented to take advantage of mountain views to the south as well as oriented to frame the open space and the Brush Creek riparian corridor between the buildings. The computer simulations show some impact of views from the Villas North. Benefits of the proposal include, 1) the fact that the proposed south condominium buildings are pushed against the riparian corridor to the greatest extent possible, as previously requested, which moves it the farthest distance away from the Villas North property, and 2)the fact that the site sits lower than the Villas North buildings. .Please see the cross-section of this area and the photo simulations in the supplemental package. These items should also be taken under consideration when evaluating any height variance request. The height variance requires'/, approval by the Town Council. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission agrees with the applicant that compliance with the height criteria and applying the same rules as Phase I. The height variance criteria states that 50% of the building structure shall conform to the height restriction of 44 feet. The Phase I rule applied was 44 feet, but not to exceed 48 feet for 10% of the roof I IK ♦ 15 structure. See page 3 of the resolution under 2)Zone district limitations and 4) Architectural plans for the condominium buildings. Page 21 of Applicant's response letter— Users of the Golf Course. • The applicant outlined a proposal for fees/rates, conditions and restrictions that would apply to users of the golf course by full-time residents or employees. Please see page 21 of the applicant's response to the Sketch Plan conditions for details of the proposal. • Staff Recommendation: It may be appropriate to define the conditions which warrant use of the golf carts. Otherwise, staff has no comment on the proposed user agreement at this time. • Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends the applicant's proposed language. See subsection vi) on pages 16 and 17 under the Community welfare section. Page 22 of Applicant's response letter— Brush Creek and Highline Road Traffic Circle Right-of-Way needs. • The applicant has agreed to provide a reservation for the Brush Creek/Highline Road roundabout improvements subject to presentation of a specific drawing by the Town, which has yet to be finalized. • Staff Recommendation: Once the roundabout drawing is finalized, a right- of-way dedication should be provided with the Final Plan PUD and the plat, or dedicated by separate document, unless it is determined that a reservation is adequate. If a reservation, it should also be shown and labeled on the plans and plat. • Planning Commission Recommendation: See subsection ix) on page 17 of the resolution, which indicates that same condition from the Sketch Plan, concerning the reservation versus a dedication. Employee Housing Restriction. • The applicant has agreed to deed restrict the employee housing with the final plat. • Staff Recommendation: The following stipulations in the Sketch Plan should also be brought forward into the resolution for the Preliminary Plan: 1) The revised employee housing calculations, following the ratios per Ordinance No. 07, Series of 2000, are accurate when comparing the original Club with the combined Phase I and II uses. ON-W low 16 2) The seven employee housing units previously provided for the original 76- unit Lodge was accepted as being equivalent to the employee housing requirement for the 30 condominium units approved and redeveloped in Phase I. The 61 employee housing units approved in Phase I was considered a community purpose benefit. The employee housing required for Phase II is a mitigation issue and not considered a Community Purpose issue. The Phase II employee housing requirement is 5,824 square feet following the revised employee housing ratios and calculations outlined in Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000 (i.e., the difference between the original club and the combination of Phase I & II utilizing the revised rates). 3) Due to the applicant agreeing to deed restrict, for employee housing purposes, the one additional manager's unit of 1,700 square feet built in Phase I, it may be credited against the 5,824 square feet of employee housing required for Phase II. 4) Per the above stipulation, the 4,124 square feet remaining for employee housing required for Phase II shall be fulfilled with a future project proposed by the applicant, successors, and/or interests. 5) In addition to the employee housing requirements for the Snowmass Club Phase II project, and pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994 (Under Findings, Section "o" Employee Housing, pages 16 and 17), the applicant is required to provide employee housing as needed for the previous ski area expansion per subsections [i & ii], under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. 6) In addition to the above requirement, 1,936 square feet of employee housing per subsection [iii] of the same ordinance and section, is required for previous facility expansions within the Snowmass Ski Area, under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. 7) The applicant commits that the employee housing required, per conditions 4, 5 and 6 above, will be constructed by January 1, 2006. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission forwarded the employee housing requirements from the Sketch Plan into the Preliminary Plan resolution with the stipulation that consideration should be given to the possibility of identifying an appropriate employee-housing site within the Snowmass Club parcels. See pages 13 through 15 of the resolution. (2) Zone district limitations. Does the proposed development comply with all of the limitations of the underlying zone district? if the applicant proposes to vary any of the property's dimensional limitations, then does the application comply with all of the applicable standards for granting of the variation? Analysis: The 21 multi-family units proposed were previously accepted with the Sketch Plan application with a height limitation standard of 44 feet. However, aww'!S "No 17 part of the roofing exceeds the 44-foot height limit. Please reference the photo simulations in the supplemental package for assistance in evaluating the proposal. The applicant is providing cross-sections of the proposal in the supplemental package showing the buildings in relation to the Villas North development. Staff Recommendation: Per Code, the applicant should demonstrate that 50% of the roofing still falls within the 44-foot height limit, and the height variance would trigger the Community Purpose section. However, the applicant wishes to apply the same ruling for Phase I, which allowed a maximum 44-foot height limit in Parcel 4, but noted that 10% of the roof may exceed the height limit up to a maximum of 48 feet. The most significant change is that the grading for the west portion of the north condominium building in Phase II will be raised about 10 feet to create a staggered or stepped appearance of the building. The affected elevations of the building show the relationship between existing and proposed grades, including a reference line for the 44-foot height limit. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission agrees with the applicant that compliance with the height criteria and applying the same rules as Phase 1. The height variance criteria states that 50% of the building structure shall conform to the height restriction of 44 feet. The Phase I rule applied was 44 feet, but not to exceed 48 feet for 10% of the roof structure. See page 3 of the resolution under 2) Zone district limitations and 4) Architectural plans for the condominium buildings. (3) Comprehensive Plan. Is the proposed development consistent with all relevant policies and recommendations of the Town's Comprehensive Plan? if the applicant proposes a buildout in excess of sixty-five percent(65%) of that identified in the Comprehensive Plan, then will the community purposes that are most appropriate to be accomplished by the proposed development be achieved? Analysis: A total of 30 units were allocated for this area, but when applying the 65% rule, 21 units were permitted without triggering the Community Purpose criteria. It was determined during the Sketch Plan review that the new Unit Equivalency ratios would not apply to this project since the Sketch Plan application was submitted in June 2001, before the effective date of the ordinance involving the Unit Equivalency ratios. Staff Recommendation: No comment. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission found in favor of the 21 fractional ownership units and the condom!niumization of the units into 1/8 timeshares via a Subdivision Exemption. (4) Architectural plans. Are the proposed mass, scale, height, density, volume, materials, colors and detailed design elements of the buildings compatible with, appropriate for or an enhancement of the character of the community and with surrounding buildings? `�' • 18 Analysis: The proposed condominium buildings will be above the 44-foot height limit for the area as prescribed with the Sketch Plan resolution. The buildings are designed similar to the Phase I buildings which are a maximum of 48 feet in height near portions of the rooftops. The applicant requests that the same rules in Phase I apply to Phase II when considering the heights of the buildings. Phase 1 permitted 10% of the roofing to exceed the 44-foot height limit to a maximum of 48 feet. With the underground parking proposed, the condominium buildings will be slightly depressed to limit building heights to around 44 feet for the most part. However, the most significant change is that the grading for the west portion of the north condominium building will be raised about 10 feet to create a staggered or stepped appearance of the building. The affected elevations of the building show the relationship between existing and proposed grades, including a reference line for the 44-foot height limit. Please see the previous comments concerning the "blank"wall appearance on the east and west elevations of the Tennis Structure. However, the elevation facing Clubhouse Drive was improved to incorporate fenestration, a pitched roof and a clerestory roof feature. The Tennis Center or Pro Shop is designed similar to what was presented during the Sketch Plan review. It was viewed as acceptable at that time. The Tennis Structure is proposed at 40 feet in height and the Tennis Pro Shop is shown about 17 feet in height. The Clubhouse is utilizing a design and exterior finishes similar to that presented on the rest of the Club property. The applicant references the new Clubhouse as a "community icon." The new clubhouse is proposed at 33 feet in height. Staff Recommendation: Staff finds that the architecture for the Phase II condominium buildings, tennis structures and clubhouse could incorporate a higher percentage of stone veneer. It would diversify the architectural character of the project (versus having all the buildings on the site look exactly alike), would offer some balance in the use of exterior finishes on the building, and It would possibly protect the residential structure from snow build up and from the possible flooding of Brush Creek. In addition, since the clubhouse is to be a "community icon," a stone base would provide a sense of permanence for the structure. Staff recommends that 25-30% of the vertical wall areas (including the window and door areas in the calculation) be clad in stone, which would roughly equate to a varied wainscot treatment of stone cladding around the buildings. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission was generally favorable to the building designs, but offered recommendations concerning the design of the Tennis Structure. See pages 3 through 5 under 4) Architectural Plans. �� � 19 (5) Landscaping and open space. Is the type, amount, size, species and location of proposed landscaping adequate and suitable for the development? Has adequate landscaping been provided as a buffer between uses and around the perimeter of the development? Has the applicant demonstrated that existing vegetation and trees on the site that should be protected will be so protected? Which specific areas of the site will be designated as open space; what is the proposed size, use and landscaping of each area? What are the preliminary plans for the homeowner's association or condominium association to maintain said open space? Analysis: The initial plans that were submitted showed the sizes of the trees to be transplanted but didn't indicate the sizes of the new plant material. The plans in the supplemental package with this report now show the sizes for the new plant material. Staff Recommendation: As previously mentioned, staff offers the following suggestions to improve the appearance of the site's landscape plan/design once installed: 1) Increase the density of the landscape buffer between the Phase II condominium buildings and Clubhouse Drive; 2) Provide an enlarged plan of the Alpine Garden envisioned for the trail and creek area between the two condominium building during the Final PUD Plan review; 3) Provide year round screening of the Tennis Structure, especially if the west and east elevation aren't modified to provide additional architectural relief; 4) Provide additional year round plant material along the north and east sides of the berms next to Club Commons and near the tops of the berms. Also, improvements to stabilize the berm embankments should be done to promote plant growth and prevent erosion; 5) Increase the number and density of trees within the "orchard" concept in and around the 150-space golf course parking lot; 6) Landscape the parkway area located between the detached walkway/trail and the Clubhouse Drive extension from Club Commons to Brush Creek Road; 7) Tree mitigation for the golf course area planned to be disturbed. Planning Commission Recommendation: See the Planning Commission findings and conditions on pages 5 and 6 of the resolution under Landscaping and open space. (6) Natural hazard areas. What is the site specific location and characteristics of any geologic hazards, steep slopes, flood plains and similar hazards on the property? Will any of these natural areas pose a potential threat to life or property? If so, what specific measures will be employed to avoid, minimize or mitigate these dangers? Analysis: There doesn't appear to be any significant geological hazards on the site. The floodplain and wetland boundaries are proposed to be changed on the site and in the area between the proposed condominium buildings. The applicant submitted an Army Corps 404 permit application and is in the process of preparing a formal application for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The applicant s S3 4. 20 submitted a draft of the request for the Town Engineer's review, and once accepted as complete, the Town will need to formally submit the application to FEMA for review and approval. There also seems to be some impact on 30% slopes in the area. There is a 30% slope area west of the proposed clubhouse, one on the north side of Villas North, and in various areas around the proposed condominium buildings. A rock retaining wall is proposed on the down hill side of the site next to Villas North. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Planning Commission and Town Council decide whether the floodplain and wetlands revisions are appropriate. If so, staff recommends that the Town receive written consent or approval letters from the Army Corps of Engineers and FEMA prior to building permits being issued. Staff also recommends that details of the retaining walls along Villas North, as well as all other areas on the site (especially the one on the east side of the widened Clubhouse Drive and north of Snowmass Club Circle), be provided to determine the significance of the cut being proposed and the design of the retaining wall. Most of these encroachments appear to be within manmade slope area. Code Section 16A-4-50(d)(3) permits development within manmade 30% slope area. Please see the 30% slope analysis of the condominium building area provided in the supplemental package with this report. Planning Commission Recommendation: See the Planning Commission findings and conditions on page 7 of the resolution under Natural hazard areas. (7) Natural resource areas. What is the site specific location and characteristics of any wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, wetlands and other valued natural features on the property? What are the anticipated impacts of the proposed development on these features? Has the proposed development been designed so it will comply with the standards of this Development Code that apply to these natural resource areas? Analysis 1: Staff finds that the Brush Creek Impact Report and the improvements proposed are acceptable. The following restoration and mitigation is proposed for Main Brush Creek: • Construction of wetland benches in and around the golf course ponds; • Realignment of Brush Creek to flow through Ponds C and D located on the east side of the course; • Construction of 6-7 vortex weirs above the relocated section of Brush Creek, including the area of the creek between the proposed condominium buildings; • Removal of an old drainage structure in front of the Snowmass Club; • Stabilization of eroding banks with rock and riparian vegetation; • Removal of the bridge abutments on Main Brush Creek near the East Fork and stabilization with rock and riparian vegetation; • Stabilization of the "toe" of the fill slope located on the west side of Highline Road and Main Brush Creek between the diversion to Pond C and the East Fork; • Erosion and drainage control around replacement crossings of Brush Creek wwvsq 21 at the entrance to the Snowmass Club and Clubhouse Drive. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant submit drawings showing the design of the new crossings over Brush Creek and an easement for the areas noted for trails, including the construction and maintenance responsibilities. Analysls 2: The applicant also prepared a Terrestrial Wildlife Report to determine impacts upon wildlife habitat in the area. The study was referred to the Town's Wildlife Specialist for review. The study revealed that there is no sensitive wildlife habitat in the project area. The study states that, "There are also no State endangered, threatened or wildlife species of concern on the property. However, a number of wildlife species use the property and riparian habitat throughout the year, notably deer, elk, and birds." The report indicates that restoration efforts on Brush Creek could help reverse the trend locally of declining bird species and provide breeding and nesting places for these species that doesn't exist today. Staff Recommendation: The report outlines the following objectives and recommendations in dealing with wildlife management and enhancement measures on the property of which staff is in general agreement: Reduce the attractiveness of the property for Elk and Mule Deer by: • Maintaining opening in the existing 3-rail fence along Brush Creek Road; • Removing any slash piles of trees or shrubs from landscape pruning; • Utilizing plants that don't attract elk and deer during landscaping; and • Limiting any perimeter or landscape fencing to a maximum 2 rails or 48" in height. Reduce the attractiveness of the property for Black Bears by: • Utilizing bear-proof trash containers; and • Choosing plants during the landscaping phase that are not attractive to bears, such as plants that produce nuts, berries and fruits. Protect and restore habitat for birds bv: • Seeking full certification from the Audubon Society for the golf course; • Encouraging residents to keep cats inside; • Providing additional nesting boxes; • Increasing foliage height diversity by planting a variety of trees and shrubs; • Minimizing clearing of vegetation along Brush Creek while still improving the fishery and aesthetic values; and • Maintaining snags (dead, standing large trees)for cavity nesting birds Manaae weeds bv: • Implementing the Pitkin County Weed Management in cooperation with the Town; and • Developing and implementing a written Revegetation Plan for all disturbed areas prior to commencement of grading or redevelopment activities; Create Environmental Education Opportunities bv: -55' 60 22 • Providing a brochure or written information to new residents explaining the wildlife on the property and efforts to protect It; and • Installing interpretive signs along the walking trails near the areas restored along Brush Creek. Implement and Monitor by: • Developing a partnership between the Colorado Division of Wildlife, the Town and private landowners to monitor and evaluate wildlife use on the property; • Initiating collection of baseline data of the seasonal wildlife usage of the property; • Monitoring construction activities in relation to wildlife use; • Collecting data on elk, deer, bear and bird activities after development; • Collecting data on recreational activities in relation to wildlife use; • Recording and monitoring effects of revegetation and landscape improvements; • Providing annual written reports to the Town on the implementation and effectiveness of the Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Program. Planning Commission Recommendation: See the Planning Commission findings and conditions on page 7 of the resolution under Natural resource areas. (8) Grading and drainage. What is the extent of soil and vegetation disturbance planned for the site? How will disturbed areas be stabilized both during construction and following completion of the project? Where will excavated materials be stockpiled? Will any retaining structures be employed and, if so, what will be their design specifications and materials? How will storm water be handled both during construction and following completion of the project? Analysis and Staff Recommendation: Please see the previous comments under subsection (1) concerning the Preliminary Drainage Plan needs. (9) Transportation impacts. How many vehicle trips will be generated, and what is the anticipated public transportation ridership from the proposed development? What is the capacity of the intersections that the proposed development will impact? What will be the impacts of the proposed development on the Town's public transportation system, road capacities and parking facilities and how will these impacts be mitigated? What measures will the project employ to ensure that following development roadways within the Town will continue to function at the adopted level of service standard? Have roads on- and off-site been designed in a safe and efficient manner, to connect the site to other activity areas and destination points? Analysis: Staff analyzed the transportation analysis for the Phase 11 project and offers the following comments and recommendations for consideration: • Following the application's supplemental Transportation Analysis, below is a summary of the parking requirements and parking provisions proposed on the site: 23 Uses r " ' ' �Siz faM y ' klb Iy iG9e`a.`Y sJ ;:tit ' l)np North Club Uses Employee Housing 154 1 Bedrooms 0.65 1 100 64 Golf Course 18 Holes 4.20 1 76 150 Employees 15 Persons on Site 0.50 1 8 Total North Club Uses 184 214 South Club Uses Athletic Club 18.6 1 1,000 s .ft. 2.40 45 north 40 Restaurant/Bar 109 Seats 0.25 28 east 58 Tennis Courts 13 Courts 1.50 20 14 Condominiums(Phase I) 76 Bedrooms 0.60 46 30 Condominiums Phase II 84 Bedrooms 0.60 51 42 Employees 135 Persons on Site 0.50 43 -- Total South Club Uses 233 184 Grand Total 417 1 398 Parking Generation Rates based upon various assumptions outlined in the table on page 13 of the supplemental revised Transportation Analysis dated August 8,2001 Note:The 398 spaces provided does not include the 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle. Staff Recommendations: (Also see attached memorandums from the Transportation Division [Exhibit C] and the Public Works Department [Exhibit D]). Regarding the Parking needs staff has the following comments and concerns: 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle were proposed in the study as being part of the parking provided for the site, but elsewhere in the application it states that these spaces would be used year round for the Fairway Conference Center. Staff also recommends that a revocable license agreement be completed with the Town for the use of these spaces within the public right-of-way, if they are to remain. Public Works recommends that these spaces be removed as they are a hazard with vehicles backing out onto a public right-of-way and because they are too far removed from the Fairway Conference Center(Exhibit D). However, a determination should be made whether or not these spaces may be useful for any reuse of the old clubhouse or for the Fairway Conference Center or whether a new parking lot should be placed off the street within the site. There was no parking demand or requirement noted for the reuse of the old clubhouse and the Fairway Conference Center with the initial application, although the conference center is located off the applicant's property and they technically do not have a responsibility to provide parking for the center. Although, it was directed by the Sketch Plan resolution that it be addressed with the Preliminary Plan application. The reuse of the old clubhouse and the parking required for this use and the Fairway Conference Center should be addressed. With the submittal of the applicant's revised transportation analysis, it indicated that the old clubhouse would be used for office space by existing employees at the Club and for use by Nordic trail operations. • The delineation of 16 parking spaces in the maintenance facility aren't represented on the plans, only the area for the spaces. The initial _Sl to 24 Transportation Analysis showed these spaces as parking provided but it was not accounted for the parking spaces required by the employees for the maintenance facility (i.e., the north club uses), unless the employees were included in the 135 count for the south club uses. In response, the supplemental transportation analysis breaks out the number of employees between the north and south portions of the Club. • The 64 parking spaces for the employee housing areas aren't shown,just the outline of the parking areas. • The 40 parking spaces north of the Phase I condominiums aren't shown on the plans,just the outline of the parking areas. • The 39-space future contingency parking area is not represented on the plans. This was the parking area to be constructed as deemed necessary by the Town per the Sketch Plan resolution. The applicant is showing a proposed 14-space parking lot for the Tennis Center. Therefore, the Tennis Center building should be relocated to accommodate the remaining 25 contingency spaces. The plans should also delineate, label and note that these space will be installed if deemed necessary by the Town In the future, such as one year after all the Phase II improvements are completed. • There may be a need to share some of the 150-space parking lot at the clubhouse for use by employee housing residents since the parking in the Club Commons area was referred by some of the referral agencies as being a bit tight. However, the previously proposed mid-point control gate created an access barrier from the south. Planning Commission recommended that the mid-point control gate be removed. • The proposed remote parking area located next to the softball field, referenced on page 24 of the Transportation Analysis, and the proposed use of this remote parking area for golf tournaments or special events, should be shown and labeled on the plans. The analysis also indicates that the 150- space clubhouse parking lot would be available for non-club events such as Jazz Aspen-Snowmass concerts. This understanding should be noted in the resolution for the Preliminary Plan application. Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends 1)that the 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle remain, and 2) that the 39- space future contingency parking remain on the plans and that a determination whether it is needed or not be made by December 31, 2004. See pages 10 and 11 of the resolution under Parking Facilities. Regarding the Traffic impacts staff has the following comments and concerns: • By relocating the main access to the golf course from Brush Creek Road and adding 21 condominium units, this will increase the vehicle trips per day on Brush Creek Road by 460 trips or about three to four percent(one to two percent elsewhere along Brush Creek Road) according to the Transportation Analysis. This will more than off-set the vehicle trips generated from the 21 OW A 400 25 proposed condominium units, which is estimated at 105. Multi-family units per the Land Use Code generate about five vehicle trips per day. Because these units offer fractional interests and assuming that 50 percent of the units will have vehicles during 100% occupancy in the summer time, this would drop the total traffic generation by one half the number of trips. However, the other 50% would either use the Town Shuttle (assumed at 20%) or the Club's shuttle (assumed at 30%), which would also increase traffic on the streets. This was not contemplated in the initial Transportation Analysis, but the revised Transportation Analysis attempted to address this on page 5 of the August 8, 2001 study. However, the additional 10-15 riders per hour, or 3-4 per shuttle run, assumes that only 25% of the units are occupied (e.g. 10 units of 21 x 4 occupants equals about 40 people). See the memorandum from the Town's Transportation Division for a detailed list of concerns (Exhibit C). • The study assumes that access to the proposed 21 condominium units would be onto Highline Road via Snowmass Club Circle due to the Initial proposal for a mid-point control gate. If this is or is not acceptable, then there should be clarification about who will be authorized to access the controlled access gate near the employee housing area, if desired. The Planning Commission recommended that the mid-point control gate on the road be removed to facilitate year round traffic circulation and connectivity on and through the site. If the control gate is desired, staffs view is that the Water and Sanitation District employees, Club employees, and the Club residents should be able to access this control point during the summer time at minimum to reduce the amount of traffic entering onto Snowmass Club Circle, thus improving the quality of life for the residents in the area at least in the summer time. Public Work's preference is that the control gate be removed entirely, since the private drive will need a dedicated fire lane and access easement (Exhibit D). As stated, the Planning Commission concurred with this recommendation. If the control gate were to be removed, the amount of vehicle trips on Brush Creek Road would increase slightly to almost 600 vehicle trips per day. The Transportation Analysis also indicates that as a result of the relocated access road to the new clubhouse, It would result in a two to four percent decrease in traffic along Highline Road and Owl Creek Road during the summer time. However, during the wintertime, the traffic would increase by 40 trips per day on Highline Road and 60 trips per day on Owl Creek Road, reflecting a one to two percent increase. Brush Creek Road traffic increases by about one percent during the wintertime as a result of the 21 condominium units. Overall, staffs view is that the new access road to Brush Creek Road and the proposed 21 condominium units will have an incremental effect on the roadway system. • The additional condominium units will increase the left turn traffic movements at Brush Creek Road and Owl Creek Road by two percent. However, the left turn movements at this intersection are already at LOS F. Please see the detailed list of concerns by the Transportation Division (Exhibit C). The Transportation Analysis recommends that the Town improve this intersection to accommodate a single-lane traffic circle or roundabout as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. s 0400 26 • It should be noted that the added traffic from the proposal to the background traffic will still be below the maximum LOS C for Brush Creek Road (925 vehicle per hour one-way) and on Highline Road and Owl Creek Road as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. • The access road to the new clubhouse facility and 150-space parking area could be a seasonal operation, which also seems to be the assumption in the Transportation Analysis. Staff recommends that the control gate be removed. However, it appears that the applicant wishes to use the road extension year round for use by Club residents and for Club Commons employees in accessing the overflow parking at the golf course lot. If the road was only used, for example between April 1 and October 31, the road extension wouldn't have to be plowed (with the exception of the trail/walkway), but this poses problems in accessing the overflow parking as a result of the control point gate location. There may be some benefit to having the road open year round, especially if the road Is desired for a Town Shuttle route in the future. Keeping the access road closed to through traffic in the winter would also permit uninterrupted use of the Nordic trails, unless some other acceptable crossing method is utilized for these trails to keep the road open year round. See the attached memorandum dated July 31, 2001 from Public Works for a list of concerns. • The intersection of Clubhouse Drive and Snowmass Club Circle should be improved as previously recommended to improve sight distance beyond 250 feet. The plans currently don't show and label the proposed Improvements as per Exhibit A following the Sketch Plan resolution directive. • Clubhouse Drive should be widened and improved to 20 feet with two-foot shoulders to accommodate a slight increase in traffic(see Exhibit D). The applicant is proposing a variance for a 22-foot wide paved drive for the private road, which the Fire District is in favor of due to the road connecting from Snowmass Club Circle to Brush Creek Road. • Staff also recommends that accurate and adequate access and fire lane easement dedications for Clubhouse Drive, from Snowmass Club Circle to Brush Creek Road, be provided for the private drive at the time of platting or by separate document. • It should be specified on the plans, in an agreement, and/or noted In the resolution, that Clubhouse Drive be privately owned and maintained. • Staff is in favor of the Clubhouse Drive connection creating a four-legged intersection with Brush Creek Road and Horse Ranch Drive. The Transportation Analysis indicates that the intersection will operate at acceptable levels, however, staff agrees with the Transportation Analysis recommending a center left turn lane along westbound Brush Creek Road entering Clubhouse Drive southbound. Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends 1)the variance for the varied road cross-section of 22 in width, 2) the connection dow 60 dw 27 or extension to Brush Creek at Horse Ranch Drive to reduce traffic for residents along Snowmass Club Circle during the summer time, and 3) removal of the mid- point control gate. Please see the specific recommendations on pages 9 and 10 of the resolution under Transportation impacts. Regarding the Traffic impacts, staff has the following comments and concerns: • The Transportation Analysis states that the Town's existing Route 3 transit service, which runs four times per hour, should adequately be able to accommodate the slight increase of passengers, which is estimated at three to four passengers per each run with the additional 21 condominiums. However, this assumes that only 25% of the units will be occupied (10 units x 4 occupants = about 40 people). The Transportation Division estimates an additional six people per trip, or 24 people per hour. However, the shuttle bus capacity is about 35 people and that is what Route 3 carries during peak time in the winter from the Mall to the Center. The reference in the Transportation Analysis that Route 3 operates with a maximum of 25 people with room to spare, which seems to be an underestimate of the peak hour demands. See the memorandum from the Transportation Division for a list of concerns (Exhibit C). Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission acknowledged that increase in ridership for the Town Shuttle Route#3, but also acknowledged the applicant's agreement to provide a new regional bus stop shelter near Clubhouse Drive and Brush Creek Road. See page 11 under c) Transit Issues for further comments. (10) Necessary facilities. Has the applicant provided detailed engineering plans and reports demonstrating the type, location and capacity of the water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, fire protection and other necessary facilities that will be constructed to serve the project? Will these facilities be available in a timely manner to serve the project? Analysis: The applicant has prepared a Utility Report as part of the application. In summary, the proposed clubhouse, tennis structure and the condominium buildings will be fire sprinklered. Four bathrooms per unit are proposed which increases the water use demand and the water line capacity for the condominium buildings. A written description of the storm drainage indicates that"storm runoff from the new impervious surfaces can be processed to enhance water quality through a variety of means prior to release." Staff Recommendations: Staff does not agree that the storm runoff from the clubhouse parking should outfall directly Into Brush Creek by pipe transport. Also, please see the memorandum from McLaughlin Water Engineers dated June 26, 2001 for the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District in the supplemental package for requirements concerning water and sewer service to the new buildings. own r 28 Enclosures for trash rooms were shown in the revised underground parking plans for the condominium buildings in the supplemental package. However, locations and details of trash enclosure should be provided for the other facilities on the site. Staff also recommends that the drainage plan identifies and labels all catch basins or detention ponds holding all storm runoff before release Into nearby creeks. The drainage plan should also provide an erosion control plan and a revegetation plan for review during the Final Plan review. The supplemental plan package with the preliminary contour map has been referred to the Town Engineer for review. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission felt that the application provided sufficient improvements to meet the needs for the management of storm water runoff and other technical items and subject to review of the Town Engineer. See page 13 of the resolution under Necessary facilities. (11) Restricted housing. What is the specific mix and configuration of housing that will be provided to meet the Town's restricted housing requirements? What guarantees has the applicant agreed to provide to ensure that such housing will be available at the time it has been required by the Town? Analysis: It was determined during the Sketch Plan review that additional employee housing did not need to be constructed on the site, even though 4,124 square feet is required with the Phase II proposal. However, the employee housing square footage requirements for Phase II, as well as past employee housing requirements, were noted as being applied to future Skico projects. Staff Recommendation: Please see the Sketch Plan stipulations related to employee housing requirements noted under (1) Response to Sketch Plan issues and concerns. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission resolutions forwarded the future employee housing requirements from the Town Council Sketch Plan resolution. Planning Commission added a recommendation stating that consideration should be given to the possibility of identifying an appropriate employee-housing site within the Snowmass Club parcels. (12) Fiscal Impact. Will the proposed development have a positive or negative fiscal impact upon the Town and other taxing districts that provide services to it? If the proposal is shown to have a negative fiscal impact, then what measures will the applicant employ to mitigate those costs? Analysis and Staff Recommendation: Attached is a memorandum dated July 22, 2001 from the Town's Finance Department(Exhibit E)addressing a series of questions regarding the initial submittal of the fiscal impact report. A summary of the concerns include: � dos 29 • Whether a 10% turnover of memberships in an industry standard. • The need for sale price for each unit type versus average unit prices. • The need for details regarding independent calculations • Identifying whether the methodology used is consistent with the Phase I report and verifying revenue and expenditure figures • Have other department verify the revenue and expenditure figures, especially Public Works • Addressing impact of TABOR Amendment on the property tax revenue (i.e., if assessed valuation increases the mill levy will probably decrease) • Revenue from Debt Service Fund may be overstated as a result of property tax tied to debt service payments • Identifying calculation used for the RETT transfer. Planning Commission Recommendation: A revised final fiscal impact report was submitted on August 14, 2001 to address the Finance Department's comments. Planning Commission believes that the Phase II proposal for the Club will have a favorable fiscal impact. The Planning Commission acknowledged that the Finance Department was reviewing the revised final fiscal impact report and recommended that the Town Council consider the findings of the Finance Department. See page 15 of the Planning Commission resolution. (13) Energy conservation. What will be the energy utilization of the significant energy- consuming elements of the project(such as heating systems, swimming pools, saunas, Jacuzzis, etc.). What specific active and passive techniques will the development employ to promote energy conservation and take advantage of solar and alternative energy source opportunities? Analysis: The schedule of passive or active techniques proposed in the construction of the buildings seems reasonable. The replacement Tennis Structure will significantly save energy over the Tennis Bubble. The Tennis Pro- Shop is planned to be passively cooled. Staff Recommendation: It is staffs understanding that there will be no hot tubs placed on the exterior decks. This could be a condition worth incorporating into the resolution since it would result in reducing energy loss significantly. Natural gas fireplaces are proposed for the units and other portions of the new buildings on the site. Otherwise, staff has no other comments. Planning Commission Recommendation: Please see page 15 of the Planning Commission resolution. (14) Air quality. What will be the primary sources of air pollution from the project? What will be the quantity and composition of pollutants that will be discharged on a daily and seasonal basis and what are the dispersal qualities of the site that will affect the pollutants that are generated? What geographic area will be impacted by these pollutants? What techniques will the development employ to reduce the impacts of these pollutants? _ 0 _ 30 Analysis: The Air Quality Analysis indicated that no special control techniques are required to maintain air quality standards. Staff Recommendation: The Clubhouse Drive extension, if not the entire road length, should be improved initially in an attempt to mitigate fugitive dust from construction vehicles and reduce the construction traffic and pollution entering from Snowmass Club Circle. Disturbed areas should be frequently watered during dry spells. Planning Commission Recommendation: Please see page 15 of the Planning Commission resolution. (15) Construction management plan. What is the proposed plan for phasing of the project? What is its construction schedule? What measures will be employed to mitigate construction impacts? Analysis: After reviewing the separate letters from the contractors addressing the individual timing for each of building on the site, staff requested one table or matrix identifying the timing of each improvement or building for the entire site. Staff Recommendation: The applicant augmented the construction schedules by submitting one letter dated August 1, 2001 summarizing the construction phasing for the entire project. Staff recommends that the scheduling be analyzed to address the construction phasing and timing for the replacement parking facilities, condominium buildings and the tennis structure in particular. In addition, staff recommends that the extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road be constructed at least part way to enable construction vehicles to access the site prior to construction of any of the buildings on the site. This would reduce the construction traffic entering from Snowmass Club Circle. Planning Commission Recommendation: Please see page 15 of the Planning Commission resolution. (16) Community welfare. Does the proposed development in its totality promote the public health, safety and welfare? Analysis: The proposal improves the golf course for the recreational enjoyment of the residents within the Club and community, a new nature trial location is shown along enhance Brush Creek for future development, trail connectivity is being improved, Brush Creek is being enhanced, and permanent recreational facility (Tennis Structure) is proposed to be constructed, a new regional bus shelter will be installed along Brush Creek Road, and Clubhouse Drive is being extended to form a convenient four-legged intersection at Horse Ranch Drive and Brush Creek Road. Per the Fiscal Impact Analysis, it shows that revenue would be increased for the Town. Staff Recommendation: No comment. _ (Qq 31 Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission resolution forwarded the community benefits outlined in the Town Council resolution for the Sketch Plan and also noted the acceptance of the applicant's proposed language concerning the fees/rates, conditions, and restrictions for users of the golf course. See pages 15 through 17 of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 24, Series of 2001. Summary of Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Town Council consider the Planning Commission findings and conditions in its resolution and follow the review criteria and the staff recommendations under each of the Core Issue items when preparing the Town Council resolution for the Preliminary Plan PUD application and subdivision exemption. Per the Land Use and Development Code, and upon completion of the review of the application, and considering the staff recommendations, public testimony and the Planning Commission resolution, must by resolution, either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. The Code further states that if the Town Council approves the Preliminary Plan application, it may require, as a condition of that approval, that the Final Plan be reviewed by the Planning Commission before it is reviewed by the Town Council. Part 2: Detailed Case Analysis (for reference and informational purposes only) Public Notification: A 30-day public notice was published in the Glenwood Springs paper on August 17, 2001 and subsequently in the Snowmass Sun on August 22, 2001. The applicant submitted verification that public meeting notices were sent to adjacent owners and that the site was posted to alert the general public of the scheduled public hearing on September 17, 2001. Community Referrals: Referral packages were mailed to the following groups and agencies for review and comment: Public Works, Transportation, Police, Engineering, Snowmass Water and Sanitation, Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District, Landscaping/ Parks/ Trails, Holy Cross Electric, US West, and AT&T Cable. Attached are comments from Nordic Trails Coordinator (Exhibit B), Transportation (Exhibit C), Public Works (Exhibit D), and Finance (Exhibit E). Code Criteria (Please see the Core Issues section in this report for list of analyses and staff recommendations relating to the review standards): General Restrictions Criteria: General Restrictions: The following restrictions per Code Section 16A-5-300(c), generally outlined, shall apply to all PUD's: (1) Compliance with minimum land area requirements; WOW 32 (2) Compliance with PUD locational criteria; (3) Land uses permitted in a PUD shall be limited to those uses that are allowed, or are allowed by special review, in the underlying zone district; (4) Compliance with maximum buildout limitations and criteria, including the 65% development rule; (5) Compliance with the variation criteria concerning dimensional limitations; (6) Compliance with the Community purposes criteria for PUD's, if applicable, utilizing the following purposes: a) Provision for restricted housing; b) Encouragement of sustainable development; c) Provision of open space and/or avoiding wildlife habitat; d) Encouragement of better design; and e) Development of necessary public facilities. (7) Variations of Development Standards Criteria. Any PUD that requests any of the dimension limitation variations authorized in Code Subsection (c)(5) of 16A-5-300(c), shall also comply with the following standards: a) Height. 50% of the building or structure within the PUD shall conform to the height limits of the underlying zone district,, b) Open space and minimum lot area. Variation shall not be detrimental to the character of the proposed development or to surrounding properties, shall include open space for the mutual benefit of the entire development, and the open space that is provided is accessible and available to at least all dwelling units and lots for which the open space is intended; c) Minimum building setbacks. Adequacy of distance between buildings for necessary fire access and protection, to ensure proper ventilation, light, air, and snowmelt between buildings, and to minimize the effects of transmission of noise between units and buildings. (8) Parking. Compliance with the underlying zoning's parking requirements, unless a reduction in that requirement is granted, pursuant to Code Section 16A-4-310(c). (9) Road standards. A PUD may be permitted to deviate from the Town's road standards to generally achieve greater efficiency of infrastructure design or to achieve greater sensitivity to environmental features, when the following minimum design principles are followed: a) Safe, efficient access to all areas of the proposed development; b) Provision for internal pathways to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off-site; c) Design of roadways to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units, including provision of access easements; d) Acceptable design of principal access points to provide for smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic, and to avoid direct access onto highway, arterial, or collector streets from individual lots, units or buildings when other reasonable access options are available. W441 4 33 Review Standards: In addition to demonstrating its compliance with the provisions of Section 16A-5- 300(c), General Restrictions, and with all other applicable provisions of this Code, a proposed PUD shall also comply with the following review standards: (1) Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; (2) Preservation of community character, including consistency with the standards of Code Section 16A-4-340, Building Design Guidelines, in order to be compatible with or enhance the character of existing land uses in the area and not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area; (3) Sufficiency of proposed landscape buffering both within and between the PUD and surrounding lands to minimize noise, glare, and other adverse impacts, create attractive streetscapes and parking areas, and be consistent with the character of the Town; (4) Compliance with development evaluation criteria of Article IV of the Town's Development Code (see below); (5) Suitability of the development, considering its topography, environmental features and any natural or man-made hazards that affect its development potential, (6) Adequacy of facilities for utility services, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection, roads and pedestrian circulation;location of site is reasonably convenient to police and fire protection, emergency medical services and schools, and the accommodates the efficient provision of transit facilities and services; (7) Avoidance of creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services or that require duplication of premature extension of public facilities to achieve roadway continuity and alignment with existing platted streets to create connectivity, and to ensure that water and sewer lines are consistent with the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District's service plan; and (8) Provision that each phase of development shall contain the required streets, utilities, landscaping and other improvements that are necessary and desirable for residents of the project, including trail connections, which are for the benefit of the Town, are constructed with the initial phase of the development or as early in the project as is reasonable. Article IV Standards: a) Protection of Environmentally Sensitive Areas, b) Brush Creek Impact Area; c) Flood plain and wetland areas, d) Geologic hazard areas, steep slopes and ridgeline protection areas; e) Streets and related improvements, f) Public trails; g) Water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal and utilities; h) Fire protection; i) Storm drainage; j) Easement characteristics, �, 34 k) Survey monuments, /) Off-street parking standards; m) Landscaping, grading and other design standards; n) Energy conservation; o) Building design guidelines to preserve community character,• p) Restricted housing requirements; q) Sign standards. Exhibits: (for reference and Informational purposes only) Exhibit A Preferred intersection redesign for Snowmass Club Circle and Clubhouse Drive per the Sketch Plan Exhibit B Memorandum e-mail dated July 23, 2001 from the Nordic Trails Coordinator Exhibit C Memorandum dated July 27, 2001 from the Town's Transportation Division along with attachment of the cost allocation by route for the year 2000 Exhibit D Memorandum dated July 31, 2001 from the Town's Public Works Department Exhibit E Memorandum dated July 22, 2001 from the Town's Finance Department Supplemental Package: The Supplemental information package includes the following information, part of it supplied to meet the application requirements and part of it supplied to address staff comments and concerns: A. Landscape Plans with Plant lists B. Revised Site Lighting Plans C. Residence Property Boundary Plan D. Enlarged Steep Slope Plan E. Residence Retaining Wall Plans F. Residence Illustrative Section G. Residence Trash Enclosure Plans H. Bridge Design Elevation I. Clubhouse Drive Road Sections and Intersection Design J. Residence/Tennis View Simulations K. Golf Clubhouse Rendering L. Supplemental Transportation Report M. Revised Fiscal Impact Report N. 404 Permit Submissions O. Golf Course Grading Plan with Letter P. Referral Agency Review Letters • DOW and Larry Green letters • Nordic Council • Public Works letter Q. Sanitation District Utility Review R. Jazz Aspen-Snowmass Review Letter S. Compiled Construction Management Schedule nt �/�i ' 35 19-i5-UU U9:.37- rrom-�x r;.;nnl�o ........... Exhibit A \ Page 1 of 1 \ \\ tJO;YRAys ICN (sI ,PATn) ` ` �,', , ; �:;•f;= S-A: 6+51.45. n.. I —. ' .` gGS�jHC `� \ ' I `•y�__ .` - - SEE SHEET 2 NFL DE7AILS-1 .,. I I 1 \ 9b j.il Exhibit 13 page 1 f 1 Austin Weiss Trails Coordinator, City of Aspen Aspen/Snowmass Nordic Council 585 Cemetery Lane Aspen, Colorado 81611 THE CITY OF ASPEN RECEIVED Jim Wahlstrom AUG 2 7 2001 Senior Planner Town of Snowmass Village Snowmass Village Dear Jim, CommunRy Development Thank you for sending me a copy of the preliminary Snowmass Club PUD..Cross- country skiing is an important part of both the Snowmass and Aspen communities and vital to a complete resort package that we sell to tourists. To not have good Nordic skiing In a ski town is like a 5 star hotel without a swimming pool. Over the last 10 years, the Aspen/Snowmass Nordic trail network has slowly been squeezed and encroached upon by numerous developments. We feel it is crucial to maintain high quality cross-country skiing on the Snowmass Golf Course. The following are concerns that the Aspen Snowmass Nordic Council has over the proposed plan. There are several issues surrounding the proposed access road to the new clubhouse. Will this be a seasonal access road or will it be used year round to access the club and housing? This road will impact the Nordic access to the northwest quadrant of the golf course. If this road is seasonal, can we keep snow on sections to facilitate XC skier crossings? If this is not the case,we would need some other solution that would allow for grooming equipment access. • We would like the Nordic Trails license agreement to insure that the new golf course will allow for at least the same length of Nordic trails (or more) as the current golf course configuration. • We would like the PUD to indicate the exact location of the new, year round, Nordic storage facility. , . We need clarification on how the Nordic skiing operation will be affected during the construction phase of the golf course re-design. It also seems to us that this would be a perfect opportunity to have more trees planted in strategic locations around the golf course. Much of the current course is out in the open and there are numerous areas where both golfers and cross-country skiers have'to watch the constant parade of traffic moving up and down Brush Creek Road. We feel It would benefit golfers and skiers alike to screen the golf course from the road with more trees. Thank you for your time and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincer ly, Austin Weiss so 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN,COLOM00 81611-1975 PHONE 970.920.5000 PAX 970.920.5197 %ww.aspengov.wm Mnied on Reryled P�Pe Exhibit C Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION TO: Jim Wahlstrom THROUGH: Hunt Walker FROM: David Peckler RE: Snowmass Club Subdivision PUD for Phase II DATE: July 27, 2001 Parking: I think that the proposed parking plan is an improvement over the build-out assumptions in - Phase I. 1 do feel that there is a certain amount of overlapping of demand for parking by the various activities, but the applicant has shown that there is enough parking for the general operations ("within 10% of the absolute maximum parking demand.") The applicant has made provisions, but not shown them, for additional parking should the need be demonstrated. The applicant has also suggested that additional parking could be made available (hopefully, they will have a favorable relationship with any future owner of the property) at the Two Creeks ski area. You could always require that any shortcomings in their parking would need to be corrected on site or be addressed at another privately owned property. 1 would not be too concerned with occasional use of public parking for special events, as long as there is adequate notice and no conflicts. Traffic: You may want to have a traffic engineer review the findings. The forecast of 105 vehicle trips per day and 11 in the peak hour sound understated. It is not clear if this is a generation rate on a standard unit, or if it takes into account the traffic generated by valet shuttle service that includes a return to the property. There must be an assumption that transit will help mitigate the demand. The applicant's statement about the left hand turn from Owl Creek Road onto Brush Creek Road projected to be at LOS F is probably true. Is it solely the Town's obligation to correct the situation? Transit: I have no hard data about "fractional ownership" from the operation of Phase I to make a definite statement about the demand for transit service in Phase 11. 1 do feel that the projection in the submission is low and that there will be an impact to the Route 3 operations. I based an increase in passengers on Route 3 to the financial forecasting projections, because there is a relationship there: 21 units X 5 people per unit X 75% of the units are occupied during the average winter season X 50% of those people used the bus (20% drove their car and 30% rode the Club shuttle) X 60% of the Route 3 passengers rode home during the peak hour = 24 Route 3 passengers. With four buses an hour that would be roughly an additional six people per trip. Not enough surplus capacity exists today for the six people on Route 3 during the peak hour. In Phase II, Transportation Impact, Table 1 the average number of 2001 passengers per bus being picked up between the Mall and the Center was 35. In Phase I, Transportation Impact, Table 2 the average number of 1998 passengers being picked up between the Mall and the Center was 35 also. 35 passengers is the stated reasonable capacity of our present vehicles. Some passengers may have gotten off at the Center, but probably not six people. The applicant also used the total Marginal Cost per passenger of $2.53 from our Cost Allocation Model, but not the total Fixed Cost per passenger of $3.17. 1 feel that the Fixed Cost is reflective of the total impact to the Town. now7/ • Zjo Z e6ed fill pp g N{ St R a a p p a �� AAAAAAAA i AAAAAAAA 3 9 IAi ;9a k � spa JAI s =J�ka� aa ° a Maxa a � Hila,� S Q, 114 A a a� a till im hil :I! a a � �� Will Exhibit D Page 1 of 3 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Wahlstrom RECEIVED FROM : Hunt Walker AUG 2 2001 RE: Club Phase II Comments Snowmess Vdlege DATE : July 31, 2001 community Development I have received the application and have the following comments : New Access Road The proposed new access road, which creates a "T" intersection with Horse Ranch Drive, is an improvement over the alternate access road proposed during sketch plan review. . Staff agrees with the plan to install a westbound left have turn lane on Brush Creek Road at the new "T" intersection. Club House Drive According to the Town Code, Club House Drive would probably be classified as either a local or minor road, which requires a 20-ft paved surface with 3-ft or 2ft . shoulders . If the applicant is proposing a 22-ft wide paved surface plus at least 2ft . shoulders, he meets the standard for a local road. If the applicant is proposing a total road width of 22 ft . including shoulders, the applicant needs to widen the road an additional 2 ft . Staff agrees with the Transportation Report (page 27) , which suggests improving the current site distance at the Clubhouse Drive/Snowmass Club Circle intersection beyond 250 feet . Parking The applicant proposes using the 28 spaces (Site J) across from the current golf clubhouse for parking for the Fairway Center. Staff feels the 28 spaces at Site J are too far from the Fairway Center, and people will probably park in the Snowmass Club Circle Right of Way instead. Another site should be identified for Fairway Center parking. -73 Exhibit D Page 2 of 3 Staff recommends that the spaces be eliminated because backing on to a public road from a parking space is undesirable. If the Town allows continued use of the 28 spaces which are in the Town' s ROW, the applicant should either lease the spaces from the Town or obtain a License Agreement . Controlled access Although Clubhouse Drive is a private road, staff recommends the controlled access be eliminated. By maintaining Clubhouse Drive as a through road, it allows our Transportation Department to serve the club better. In the future, the Town might want to establish a route, which loops through Clubhouse Drive from Highline Road to Brush Creek Road. Dead ends and cul de sacs make it difficult to schedule efficient bus service . Trails Although the existing trail from the Meadow Road/Brush Creek intersection is the best alternative, the new trail from the Brush Creek Trail to the new golf clubhouse is on a much better alignment than the trail alignment proposed during sketch plan. Replacing the trail from the Commons to Horse Ranch Drive along Clubhouse Drive is clearly needed since the employees staying at the Commons use the existing trail frequently. Softball Field Although I haven' t verified the measurements on the three softball field options, I 'd recommend the Town accept the dedication of the land if it meets the criteria for a softball field and Jazz Aspen. 0y- Exhibit D Page 3 of 3 Solid Waste Staff approves of the Solid Waste Plan as described by the applicant with the following conditions : 1 . The Public Works Director approves of final design and access . 2 . The width of the access driveway be increased from 8 ft . to a minimum of 10 ft . 3 . The trash truck be allowed to access within 8 ft . of the dumpster shed. It appears the applicant has provided enough dumpster capacity at the new golf clubhouse and the North and South buildings of the new condominium buildings . Exhibit E Page 1 f 1 Mere ® To: Jim Wahistrom Franc Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director Date: 7122/01 R•s Snowmass Club-Phase If I have done a preliminary review of the Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Snowmass Club-Phase II development. As stated In the report prepared by BBC, the fiscal impact analysis for Phase II Is done very similar to the Phase I analysis. The report is based on assumptions that were developed during the Phase I process with a few minor adjustments. The following is a list of Items that need to be addressed. I have not had an opportunity to speak to Ford Frick regarding these concerns. ✓ Page 5—The analysis shows a 10%turnover each year for memberships, is that what they are still finding is the industry standard? • The report doesn't show the proposed sale'prices per unit type. It Is hard to tie out the numbers since they only give an average unit sales price. • Although the revenue ratios are the same as in the 1999 report and use the same methodology,there are a number of independent calculations for which detail Is not provided. ✓ Community Development should make sure to review the revenue calculations and expenditure calculations shown in the report. The general fund summary shows revenues far exceeding the expenditures. Are administrative(direct and Indirect) expenditures taken into account? Is the methodology consistent with the Phase I report? ✓ Ukewise, each department should provide a review of their individual departments projected impact-particularly Public Works. ✓ There is no language addressing the impact that TABOR(Taxpayer Bill of Rights)has on the property tax revenue—i.e.for the General Fund, if the assessed valuation increases,the mill levy will probably decrease,therefore the General Fund will probably not receive the additional revenue that BBC has projected. ✓ The additional revenue in the Debt Service Fund may also be overstated,since the property tax revenue is tied to the debt service payments. ✓ What is the calculation used for the RETT transfer? Once this information is provided, I will be able to complete my review. ts�� TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: September 4, 2001 Agenda Item: Public Hearing — Resolution No. 34. Series of 2001: Snowmass Center Redevelopment and Expansion Sketch Plan P.U.D. Review Topics: • Zoning related items -- buildout of residential uses • Shifts of buildout allocations between parcels • FAR limits • Height Variance vs. FAR limits • 30% Slopes and Access Issues • Drainage concerns • Shuttle route Presented By: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner Core Issues: Attached is a list of core issues generally following the Code questions that should be applied in reviewing Sketch Plan applications broken out topically by date. General Info: Please reference the previous staff report and the Planning Commission Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001, for recommendations, comments, concerns and conditions related to the core issues. The staff report summarized the proposal (page 3) and specifically described the issues along with a summary of the Planning Commission's discussion and recommendations concerning these items (pages 6-11). The report also referenced attached exhibits, such as information tables, comments from Town Departments or outside agencies, plan excerpts, and a letter from Woodbridge Condominiums. The report was provided, as required by Code, for information and reference purposes. Also reference the separate handout, given at the August 13, 2001 Town Council meeting, which includes the application booklet amended May 21, 2001, the applicant's response to staff comments, and copies of photo simulations and cross-section studies presented at the Planning Commission meetings. Handout: See separate handout of Center's redevelopmentlexpansion proposal overlapped on an enlarged version of the existing conditions map for use during the site visit (labeled Sheet L-2). Attachments: • Proposed Schedule of Discussion Topics • Discussion points made at the August 20 Town Council meeting • Recent memorandum dated August 14, 2001 from the Town's �� _ Transportation Division describing a different explanation of th position concerning the shuttle route on the Center site. \\NT_TOSV\BLD_PLAN\usee4w\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 09-04-01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan.doc Council Options: 1) Continue to identify core issues of importance; and/or 2) Provide direction to staff in preparing a draft resolution; and/or 3) Continue item for discussion at the October 1, 2001 meeting. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the joint meeting follow the conduct of meetings per the Code as follows: 1) Summary presentation by staff of the application, the Comprehensively Planned Area elements, and the core issues, as needed; 2) Applicant's presentation of the proposal or detailed aspects of the design; 3) Questions to staff or applicant by Town Council members with subsequent response by applicant and/or staff; 4) Accept comments or question from the public; 5) Provide direction to the applicant and staff in preparing a draft resolution; and 6) Continue discussion of application to October 1, 2001 meeting. do \\NT_TOSV\BLD PLAN\useNw\snowmass CenteATC Memo 0304.01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan.doc 2 PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF DISCUSSION TOPICS Below is a list of remaining core issues, generally following the Code questions that should be applied in reviewing Sketch Plan applications, broken out topically by date. Please note that the applicant requests continuation of the discussion to the October 1, 2001 meeting due to scheduling conflicts. MONDAY. OCTOBER 1. 2001 • Employee Housing • Community Based Retail/Office Space Needs • Parking Needs • Pedestrian Circulation • Utility and Sewer Issues • Off-site Impacts/community purposes • Phasing P:\user\jw\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 09-04-01 S'ma Sketch Plan.doc 3 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION ITEMS AT AUGUST 20, 2001 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING • Possible resolution of multi-family designation on the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Plan map • Not sure why proposed single-family should be on Parcels H and H-1. Note: - Current SPA designates the permitted uses on Parcels H and H-1 as Tennis Courts. - Buildout analysis designates area at Woodbridge Condominiums for 30 units (line B56) - Applicant is proposing zoning to SF-30 for parcels H and H-1 - 8 single-family unit equivalents proposed based upon house sizes proposed • 30% slope impacts concerns • Access roads— road will be visible — concerned about aesthetics • Encroachment issues concerning road access and 30% slopes • Retaining walls— not comfortable with walls in East Village area • Snowmass Mountain Association: - Culvert overflows - Very interested in how drainage will work on the site • What are the community benefits • Physically stake the proposed site improvements/right-of-way for a site visit. IVJI 11NT_TOSVI8LD_PLANluserlJw�Snowmass Cenler=MMee I o 0/%4-01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plen.doc 4 TRANSPORTATION DIVISION TO: Jim Wahlstrom FROM: David Peckler RE: Bus Stop Locations at the Snowmass Center (Center) DATE: August 14, 2001 ISSUE: Concern has been expressed about moving the Center's uphill bus stop away from the grocery store, principally that people would have to haul groceries a long way. The Transportation Division is concerned about the impacts of delays on the proposed upper road to the Town's service overall. CORE POINTS Lost Time: Our route's headways are determined by the time that it takes a bus to get from point A to point B and back again. The headways are timed with minimal surplus, and can run behind during the peak periods. Today, the most consistent and greatest loss of time to our headways occurs on the upper road in the Center. Routes 1, 2, 3, 5/6, 7 and 8 all travel through the Center: possibly 48 buses in the winter P.M. peak hour, or 36 buses during midday. My concerns about the sketch plan's proposed bus stop on the upper road are: • Increased demand for the prime parking along the upper road, due to the distance and vertical grades to the lower lots, may increase the occurrence of gridlock on the upper road. Most transit services do not drive through parking areas because of traffic congestion. • Confusion is created at a single bus stop for multiple route destinations, or when the reverse direction stop is out of line-of-sight. Delay is created by the need to direct passengers. • A longer building may increase the number of stop requests along the upper road. This would be contrary to locating uphill and downhill stops in one area to decrease stops and help separate passengers. • A longer roadway that has more intersections would probably increase driving time. • An increase in commercial/residential traffic could add more internal travel time. The Bus Is Serving More Than The Grocery: Bus stops that are centrally located, possibly by the Alpine Bank entrance, could improve service to the other interests at the Center. They would be closer and visible to the proposed people mover location. The businesses on the west end of the building, and the offices above, generate requests for stops here today. The new residential properties above would add demand to this location. Alpine Bank generates stops here. The BJ Adams property could generate more demand here. Redevelopment of the Snowmass Resort Conoco could generate demand here. Development of the Draw parcel on the west side of the property could create demand here. RECOMMENDATION: In the future, centralization and efficiency are key to serving the customer in the system overall, as well as, the Center. Bus stops on the lower road may reduce the time we spend in the Center today. The overall roadway length would be shorter, and the traffic congestion on the lower road is, and probably will continue to be, significantly less than on the upper road. Ask the applicant to study developing uphill and downhill stops: that are on grade with the commercial level, that don't require use of the upper road and that are in line-of sight of each other. SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JULY 23, 2001 Mayor Manchester called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday; July 23, 2001 at 2:05 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Manchester, Douglas Mercatoris, Richard Virtue and Robert Purvis COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Arnold Mordkin STAFF PRESENT: Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Trudi Worline, Town Clerk; Carey Shanks, Assistant to the Town Manager; David Joyner, Fleet Supervisor; Greg Smith, Street Supervisor; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Steve Connor, Town Attorney; Joe Coffey, Housing Manager; Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director; Art Smythe, Chief of Police; David Peckler, Transportation Manager; Greg Shugars, Transportation Foreman; Bernadette Barthelenghi, Landscape Architect; Dean Gordon, Town Engineer PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Benson, Doug Faurer, Jim Gustafson, George Huggins, Bill Boineau, Mark Stout and Bob Fridstein PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Brent Gardner Smith, Mark Gould and other members of the public interested in Agenda items for this Meeting. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL DISCUSSION AGENDA—2:05 P.M. Item No. 2: PRELIMINARY BUDGET DISCUSSION Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director, explained that prior to the development of the revenue budget, staff is requesting Council feedback regarding sales tax projections and the Aspen Skiing Company mitigation fee. She informed Council that staff has developed a list of additional revenue sources for Council to consider enacting in the future. Council reviewed and made the following decisions: rw M 07-23-01tc Page 2 of 5 ➢ Review Building Permit and Plan Check Fee Waivers on a case-by-case basis. Continue to honor the agreement with Water and Sanitation. Continue to waive fees for TOSV projects. The General Ledger should reflect all grants/donations whether or not it occurs through a waiver of fees or in-king services; Capture additional sales taxes on single-family vacation rentals; ➢ Ballot issue to expand allowable RETT uses in 2002; ➢ Council requested more time to consider the Ballot issue to extend term of the RETT. Mercatoris commented that he would be more apt to approve RETT for Employee Housing than for general fund operations; ➢ Implement contractors to obtain a business license at Renewal time; ➢ Proceed with costs analysis regarding Increasing Building Permit Fees; ➢ Council requests that staff identify specific services to support a Property Tax increase prior to implementation; ➢ Requested that the Housing Manager bring back information showing what staff is spending with fully allocated costs to administer accounting, shop and road work to the Housing Funds; ➢ Continue with research in an effort to determine a way to collect sales tax on natural gas that is run through the gas valve located outside Town limits either through annexation of the site or renegotiation of the franchise agreement; ➢ Requests that the CGRB explain to all grant applicants budget constraints and the Town Council may lean towards the Health and Human Services organization this year. The CGRB should encourage all organizations to reapply next year in hopes of a more profitable budget year; ➢ Council would like to give more thought before considering a charge for donated bus service to SRA conference services and the Suzuki Music School at grant processing time and during the Plan Check Fee discussion; ➢ Council would like to consider implementation of billing JAZZ Aspen/Snowmass for General Fund expenditures related to their events; ➢ Implement increasing rates for solid waste fees; ➢ Council does not recommend use of RETT funds to pay for operations that the General Fund has been paying for and stated that there is also the possibility that it may be a revenue stream that goes away; Ow S3 an 07-23-Otte Page 3 of 5 Item No. 3: OWL CREEK TRAILHEAD PARKING LOT UPDATE Hunt Walker, Public Works Director stated that Larry Green, Wildlife Specialist, maintains his previous recommendation regarding utilization of Parcel F as a parking lot, due to negative impacts to wildlife in that area. Bernadette Barthelenghi, Landscape Architect, stated that Parcel F is currently impacted by Owl Creek Road on the North, Sinclair Road easement on the South, as well as by Nordic, equestrian and summer trail easements. She stated her concern that further uses of Parcel F could eventually cumulate to such a point as to seriously degrade value for wildlife. Green's recommendations suggested moving the parking lot next to the West edge of the migration corridor, keep the lot as close to Owl Creek Road as possible, revegetate the old parking lot area on Parcel F, and close the new lot during the trail closure dates (April 251"to June 20`^). Council discussed the need for a Parking Lot and recommended a flexible revegetation plan. Mayor Manchester requested that Walker and Barthelenghi provide topography maps and a template for further discussion at a future Town Council Meeting. Item No. 4: SNOWMELT ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN Hunt Walker, Public Works Director, explained that per Council's request, staff investigated the advantages of including reconstruction of upper Snowmelt Road to the end of the Road, during Phase II of the Snowmelt Road reconstruction. He explained that reconstructing the top of the Road at this time would beat the inflation of constructing in future years and would impact the Village with one construction rather than two separate construction times. Dean Gordon, Town Engineer, presented and outlined a conceptual plan for the reconstruction project. He explained funds necessary for the project and presented two options for financing. The options were to pay for 100% of the project using the Road Fund, continuing to assess five mills and borrow the necessary money from the RETT Fund or fund Upper Snowmelt Road through the Road Fund and the TOV section from the RETT Fund. Walker stated that the goal is to begin infrastructure construction on September 4, 2001 to be completed on November 1, 2001. He outlined a traffic control plan. On approximately April 16, 2002, demolition and reconstruction of upper Snowmelt Road will commence with a goal of one lane to be completed by June 1, 2002 and both lanes completed by June 15, 2002. Construction of the sidewalks, aprons leading to the side roads and parking lots will continue until the job is complete. Staff is working on details regarding potential lease of parking spaces and width of the sidewalks. Council directed staff to move forward with the cross section part of the project. Manchester requested that Walker investigate the cost for heated and colored concrete sidewalks, and determine the cost difference of reconstructing the road at s BY• 07-23-01tc Page 4 of 5 the current location and building the new road as discussed during Transit Plaza discussions. Mercatoris stated that he feels further discussion is necessary regarding cost sharing for construction of the TOV section. Manchester requested that Walker determine cost differences for constructing in two separate seasons and as two separate projects. Item No. 5: NOISE REGULATIONS — DISCUSSION Mayor Manchester suggested that this discussion item be postponed until a Meeting when Council Member Mordkin would be present. Item No. 6: BREAK Council determined that a break was not necessary at this time. REGULAR AGENDA—4:00 P.M. Item No. 7: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items at this time. Item No. 8: FIRST READING — ORDINANCE NO. 18, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-235 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REDEFINING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD. Mercatoris explained that there are currently no members serving on the Financial Advisory Board (FAB). He further explained that this Ordinance would allow Council to proceed with budget review without a review and recommendations from the FAB. Mayor Manchester encouraged members of the public to consider serving on the FAB. After further discussion, Mercatoris made a motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2001, seconded by Virtue. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Council Member Mordkin was absent. Item No. 9: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT -AND- Item No. 10: CALENDARS Agenda Item Nos. 9 and 10 were discussed as one item. Suiter's Performance Standards Purvis stated that the Town Manager has provided a final Job Description, Performance Standards and Specific Objectives for 2001. Purvis stated that Council would further discuss the roles of the Specific Objectives on July 26, 2001. Mayor Manchester requested that staff provide a copy of the Performance Standards to Jose Santiago, Consultant. He also requested that a copy of all the documents be iw 00 07-23-01tc Page 5 of 5 mailed to the Town Manager, who was out of Town, and a Meeting scheduled with Town staff on Wednesday, July 25 to receive their perception on the issues. RFTA Bus Staging Relocation - Brush Creek Road/Divide Road In response to a question posed by Virtue, Walker stated that Brush Creek Limited owns the area being considered for staging RFTA buses. Walker suggested creating an area on nearby Town property to accommodate two buses. The Town Road Department crew would provide the base preparation and construction. Council agreed to Walker's suggestion and Mercatoris requested installation of a stonewall on the slope side of the area. Walsh Residence — Burned Structure Steve Connor, Town Attorney, stated that citations are being filed to force owners to comply with a request made by the Town to fence the area by June 26, 2001. Virtue requested that Connor investigate the Town's liability and insurance coverage. Meeting Times & Length Mercatoris stated a concern regarding the length of time effecting productivity of meetings scheduled with Jose Santiago followed by a Village Leadership Forum Meeting on July 27, 2001. He requested that staff take this into consideration when scheduling future meetings. Budget Manchester informed Council that he has requested one Council budget review session to discuss philosophical issues that affect the budget and another session to formalize and balance the budget. Council agreed with the change. Item No. 11: ADJOURNMENT At 4:40 p.m. Mercatoris made a motion to adjourn the Meeting, seconded by Virtue. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Council Member Mordkin was absent. Submitted By, Donna J. Garcia-Spaulding, Secretary/Records Clerk e �� SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 6, 2001 Mayor T. Michael Manchester called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, August 6, 2001 at 2:34 p.m. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor T. Michael Manchester, Richard Virtue, Arnold Mordkin, Robert Purvis and Douglas Mercatoris COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager, Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Joe Coffey, Housing manager; Greg Smith, Road Supervisor; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Chris Conrad, Planning Director; Carey Shanks, Assistant to the Town Manager; Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner; David Peckler, Transportation Manager; Larry Green, Wildlife Specialist; Bernadette Barthelenghi, Landscape Architect; Tina White, Animal Control Officer; Laurie Smith, Animal Control Officer; Trudi Worline, Town Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: John Rex, Michael White, Martin Mata, Jim France, John Schuster, Bernie Grauer, Bill Kane, David Bellack, Madeleine Osberger, Pat O'Donnell, Jim Hooker, Jack Hatfield, Brent Gardner Smith, Russell George, Kevin Wright, Paul Shepard, Dave Kleinkoff and other members of the public interested in Agenda items for this Meeting. DISCUSSION AGENDA- 2:30 P.M. Item No. 2: GUESTS — PAUL SHEPARD AND DAVID KLEINKOPF OF INTRAWEST CORP. =W87 40 08-06-01 tc Page 2 Pat O'Donnell of Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) introduced new Intrawest community partners Paul Shepard, Director of Development for the Base Village project, and Dave Kleinkoff, President of the Resort Development Group for North America. Kleinkoff outlined the process, which he explained will develop as the group moves toward development of the Base Village area. He proposed that his company would work with the Village Leadership Forum (VLF) and conduct a series of public meetings to receive input from the public. Bob Purvis explained how the VLF would interact with the developer. Kleinkoff stated that his company's goal is to submit a Sketch Plan to the Town in October, 2001. Jack Hatfield, Snowmass Village citizen, encouraged the community to participate in the public process and stated his objection to all private meetings. Pat O'Donnell informed the public that all meetings would be open to the public. Bill Kane of the ASC explained that joint planning for Base Village began with Council in 1996 and ASC have kept in constant contact with all neighboring properties since that date. Jim Hooker, past Snowmass Village Mayor speaking as a citizen, stated that he feels the outcome of necessary specialized meetings would be provided to the public. Item No. 3: TOP OF THE VILLAGE SNOWMELT ROAD OWNERSHIP ISSUE Hunt Walker, Public Works Director, referred to a previous discussion when Council directed staff to continue with the design and planning for redevelopment of upper Snowmelt Road, from Elbert Lane to the Timberline Condominiums. At Council direction, Staff has also proceeded with planning for redevelopment of upper Snowmelt Road from the Timberline to the Top of Snowmelt Road. Dave Spence, General Manager of Top of the Village, requested that during construction, the Town snowmelt the Road aprons, parking lots and eight carport lanes, and maintain these areas in the future. After further discussion, Council requested a meeting with the TOV Board of Directors in order to obtain their views on this issue. Item No. 4: ELECTION ISSUES DISCUSSION Mayor Manchester explained that this item was placed on the Agenda as a tickler, in order to allow Council to further discuss potential election issues if necessary. Council agreed that discussion was not necessary at this time and requested that this item be listed on the next Regular Meeting Agenda. Manchester stated that September 12, 2001 is the deadline for the Town to certify ballot questions to the County Clerk for the November, 2001 election. erg% go 08-06-01 tc Page 3 Item No. 5: BREAK Council determined that a break was not necessary at this time. REGULAR AGENDA-4:00 P.M. Item No. 6: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items at this time. Manchester stated that he would again call for Public Non-Agenda items after 4:00 p.m. NOTE: Council determined that the Agenda Items would be rearranged to accommodate the public. Item No. 8: SECOND READING — ORDINANCE NO. 18, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-235 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REDEFINING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD Virtue made a motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2001, seconded by Mordkin. There being no further discussion, a roll-call vote was taken and the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 10: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT Citizen Complaint Manchester requested that staff respond to a recent citizen e-mail regarding the unkempt conditions of a home site located just outside the Town limits. He identified the site as being located on Brush Creek Road, although in Pitkin County's jurisdiction. Appreciate Stream Restoration Jim Hooker, past Mayor of Snowmass Village, stated his appreciation to Town staff for the recently completed landscaping at the "Welcome to Snowmass Village" sign located on Brush Creek Road. Hooker also stated his appreciation for the stream beautification including restoration and enhancement, which is nearing completion across from the Owl Creek Road intersection and extending to the Woodbridge entrance. ow 87 40 08-06-01 tc Page 4 Hwy. 82/Brush Creek Road Siqn Mayor Manchester stated that the Entrance Sign proposed for location at the intersection of Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road is scheduled for final approval on the Wednesday, August 8, 2001 Pitkin County Meeting Agenda. He reported that he recently met with concerned citizens as well as with several homeowners from Brush Creek Village, who stated their support for the current design and location. The Brush Creek Village homeowners informed Manchester that they would inform the County Commissioners that they do not object to the current plans. Council Members were encouraged to attend the Meeting. Summer Lift Ride Closed Manchester informed Council of an e-mail he received from a recent guest of Snowmass Village, who complained that the advertised summer lift operation was closed upon his arrival. Council requested that staff respond and inform the guest that closure of the lift operation was a financial decision made by Snowmass Resort Association. Tree Replacement— Daly Townhomes Manchester requested that staff facilitate the re-planting of trees at the Daly Townhomes construction site. He explained that the trees were removed during installation of sewer and water lines. Council directed staff to use Real Estate Transfer Tax funds and move forward with this project. NOTE: Council took a break until 4:00 p.m. Item No. 6: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS - Continued Manchester called for Public Non-Agenda items. There were no Public Non- Agenda items at this time. Item No. 7: GUEST — RUSSELL GEORGE DIVISION OF WILDLIFE PRESENTATION Council welcomed past State Representative Russell George, presently Director of the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW), and Kevin Wright of the DOW. Wright presented an award to the Town of Snowmass Village for their cutting- edge wildlife protection Ordinance. The plaque stated appreciation and recognition to the Town for their support and protection of Colorado wildlife native species. He stated that Snowmass Village has served as a model for the State of Colorado for wildlife protection and minimization of bear conflicts, by regulating the handling of trash, garbage, pet foods, bird feeders, etc. Wright recognized the Town's Animal Control Officers for diligence in working to educate the public -go - 08-06-01tc Page 5 on the Ordinance requirements. He stated that bear problems within the Town have been reduced to a minimum this year. Russell George introduced a DOW brochure, enhanced by the Town to educate the public on how to prevent and handle bear-related incidences. He also commended the Town on the bear-proof dumpsters and trash receptacles, and referred to them as also being "DOW Director-proof'. George stated that the Town's efforts serve as safety precautions for the bears as well as for the citizens. Item No. 10: DISCUSSION — Cont'd COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT Manchester stated his appreciation to John Wilkenson of the Trails Committee for his assistance with the Regional Bicycle Race recently held in Snowmass Village. The event drew 600 participating bicyclists. The participants reported that it was a well-organized event. Item No. 9: RESOLUTION NO. 19, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR LOTS 4, 5 AND 8, WOODRUN UNIT 1 (FULLER) IN ORDER TO RE-ESTABLISH BY EXEMPTION PLAT THE THREE (3) ORIGINAL PLATTED LOTS Chris Conrad, Town Planner provided background information regarding Woodrun Unit 1, Lots 4, 5 and 8, and referred to information contained in Council's packet provided for this Meeting. He stated that this Resolution clarifies the status of the three parcels. Conrad requested changes to the Resolution in Paragraphs 3 and 7 of Section Three: Conditions of Permit Approval. Mercatoris made a motion to approve Resolution No. 19, Series of 2001, as amended. Virtue seconded the motion. After further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 10: DISCUSSION — Cont'd. COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT - AND — Item No. 11: CALENDARS Wq` 08-06-01 tc Page 6 Upcoming VLF Meeting Purvis suggested a format for the next Village Leadership Forum (VLF) Meeting, when Intrawest will discuss their plans for development of the Base Village area. He suggested the original meeting round table setup for members of the VLF and seating made available for the participating public. He suggested Jose Santiago facilitate the meeting and that a briefing package be distributed to the players and the public well in advance of the meeting. Council discussed financial costs to the Town for the VLF process and requested that a Scope of Work and a budget for the VLF process. Council requested an update on the VLF process, including a full report on costs and expenditures to date. Purvis requested a meeting with Town Department Heads to review issues related to the their comments provided to Santiago. Manchester requested that the Town Manager devise a plan to enact the concepts identified at the last Meeting. Council discussed and identified potential dates for the next VLF Meeting with Intrawest, which will be determined in the near future. Staff will contact Aspen Skiing Company to determine dates that would be satisfactory for them. The Meeting will be recorded on video. Council Meeting Follow-Up Mayor Manchester reported that he will begin meeting with the Town Manager on Tuesday mornings to discuss and clarify issues brought up or discussed at Monday Council Meetings. Commendation Mercatoris commended John Wilkenson of the Trails Committee, as well as members of Town staff who contributed to the success of the recent World Cup Bicycle Race held in Snowmass Village. New Police Vehicles Mercatoris commended the Police Department on the recently delivered Police vehicles. Fox Run — No Rentals Manchester stated a concern that the Fox Run Homeowner's Association voted to prevent short-term rentals within their subdivision. He stated that the decision substantially diminishes the Town's rentals. After further discussion, Council dw %� Ow 08-06-01 tc Page 7 requested that the Town Attorney investigate the prospect of requiring home rentals as a part of the Land Use process. Revegetation — Daly Townhomes The Town Manager reported that the Housing Manager has signed a contract with a landscape business to install trees and vegetation, which were removed during excavation related to sewer and water line installation for the Daly Townhomes project. An irrigation system has been installed to water the new plantings. September Council Meetings Council discussed September Council Meeting dates and determined that the first Meeting in September would be held on September 4, 2001. NOTE: The following item was not included on the Agenda for this Meeting. Item No. 11a: EXECUTIVE SESSION At 5:00 p.m. Mordkin made a motion to convene to Executive Session to discuss personnel matters. Virtue seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. At 6:30 p.m. Virtue made a motion to reconvene the Regular Meeting, seconded by Mordkin. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 12: ADJOURNMENT At 6:30 p.m. Mercatoris made a motion to adjourn the Meeting, seconded by Virtue. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Submitted By, Trudi Worline, Town Clerk _93 _ SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 08-13-2001 Mayor Manchester called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, August 13, 2001 at 2:34 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Michael Manchester, Douglas Mercatoris, Richard Virtue, Arnold Mordkin and Robert Purvis COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Carey Shanks, Assistant to the Town Manager; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Steve Connor, Town Attorney; Joe Coffey, Housing Manager; David Peckler, Transportation Manager; Robert Voigt, Senior Planner; Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner; Chris Conrad, Planning Director; Donna J. Garcia-Spaulding, Secretary/Records Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Todd Gardner, John Rex, Rick Graphe, Richard Shaw, Suzanne Richman, and other members of the public interested in Agenda items for this Meeting. Item No. 1: ELECTION ISSUES Gary Suiter, Town Manager, presented Council with the following issues as potential ballot questions for the 2001 November Special Election. The issues included Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) Extension, an Aquatic Center, a Marketing Tax and an Excise Tax. He explained that the Community Development Director is contacting realtors and contractors in an effort to determine if there is a problematic trend with the existing Excise Tax rate. Council determined that this issue would be tabled until the research is completed. Suiter identified the RETT Extension question as being risky at this time. He recommended and Council agreed, that this issue be tabled until next year. He explained that the RETT does not expire until 2006 and requires a clear strategic approach in determining length of the extension. ow IN a 08-13-01 tc Page 2 of 6 Suiter reported that the ballot language for construction of an Aquatic Center limits its location to the general vicinity of the community park. Suiter suggested an advisory question be placed on the ballot to determine the community stand on this issue, although an advisory question would not meet the requirements of Initiative Ordinance No. 01, Series of 2000. Council requested advice from the Town Attorney regarding this issue. Council requested that the Town Attorney investigate whether ballot language in excess of the already approved FAR needs to be subtracted from the 10-percent of additional square footage, or was it included in the implementation ordinance, and would this require a vote from the community. Item No. 2: DIAL-A-RIDE Dave Peckler, Transportation Manager, commented on Dial-A-Ride (DAR) service to be considered for funding during the upcoming budget process. He provided a brief history of DAR and presented three alternatives. Todd Gardner of High Mountain Taxi explained that the Taxi Company is unable to perform this service due to staff shortages and resources available. Peckler explained that he is unable to provide budgeting amounts at this time as a service of the Town. Although recognizing the potential marketing and social benefits of DAR, he explained that the peak demand time for DAR coincides with other demands of the Transportation Department service and recommended focusing on funding the Village Shuttle services to areas of higher density rather than reestablish DAR. Based on last year's financial information, cost for the service, less the potential revenues derived from fees at $1.00 per person, would be approximately $10,000. After further discussion, Council requested that staff investigate a means to increase customer service while managing costs and servicing other high density areas, and build in the DAR feature as part of that program. Item No. 3: SIGN CODE DISCUSSION Robert Voigt and Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planners, provided a visual presentation and requested Council comments regarding standards for all signs and a means to regulate those standards. After further discussion, Council directed staff to refine the focus of the policy examination regarding the Sign Code. In addition, staff was directed to revise the format of the review process to be more manageable and effective by compartmentalizing the policy direction being sought in subsequent meetings. BREAK 3:55 — 4:00 P.M. REGULAR AGENDA—4:00 P.M. vow 99" 08-13-01tc Page 3 of 6 Item No. 4: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items. Item No. 5: SNOWMASS CENTER SKETCH PLAN REVIEW AND DISCUSSION SNOWMASS CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND THE SNOWMASS LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY SKETCH PLAN P.U.D. APPLICATION FOR REDEVELOPMENT AND EXPANSION Jim Wahlstrom provided an outline of the Sketch Plan to be presented by the applicants. He explained that the applicant's request is for approval of the Sketch Plan, including a proposed rezoning from SPA-1 to Mixed-Use 2 and /SF- 30, a height variance and encroachment onto 30% slope areas. Manchester stated that Council would like to retain the option of remanding the Sketch Plan back to the Planning Commission, if they feel it is necessary. Richard Shaw and Suzanne Richman, representing Design Workshop, presented several sketches of the Snowmass Center Redevelopment and Expansion Plan. -The Plan included increasing the size of the grocery store and post office, reducing the amount of office area, adding 59 residential units behind the Center, redeveloping the character of the existing center, providing 3,200 square feet in the west building for a people mover linked to the new Base Village. The Plan also included reconfiguring and constructing new parking lots above and below the center, reconfiguring and landscaping the access road to the new multi-family units, reconfiguring and landscaping the entry road to the Snowmass Center, improving and expanding the parking facilities and circulation around the center, reconfiguring the service and loading area for four delivery trucks, widening the road in front of the Snowmass Center and constructing a . new access road to the proposed 8 single-family lots. The Mayor stated that a Public Hearing would be held in September to receive public comment. Ken James, a local homeowner voiced concerns that the plans do not reflect an improvement over the existing architecture and elevation. Mr. Crawford, a Snowmass Village resident, suggested that the Planning Commission consider reducing density, explaining that retail density would increase substantially when Base Village is constructed. Manchester explained that Council is looking for opportunities to increase the rental/hotbeds within the core area. Purvis outlined Council's goals for the community. Virtue invited Crawford to attend the next Village Leadership Forum meeting in September to share his views and ideas, and offer solutions to potential problems. ftb 94 ow 08-13-01tc Page 4 of 6 Council voiced concerns regarding the transit function, proposed phasing, hotbeds/high occupancy turn over, rental requirements, employee housing, a people mover, a bridge between the Center and Wood Road, heated walkways in front of the stores, width of the road, construction on 30% slopes, drainage, the road accessing the single-family homes, density in the core and condominium areas, and an enhanced transportation system connecting the commercial cores. Council requested that Community Benefit be addressed. Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO. 35, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO APPROVING 2001 SUPPLEMENT BUDGET EXPENSE ITEMS FROM THE PITKIN COUNTY ''/: CENT TRANSIT SALES AND USE TAX FUND Mercatoris made a motion to approve Resolution No. 35, Series of 2001, seconded by Virtue. The Resolution was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 7: DISCUSSION — HOUSING COMMITTEE UPDATE Joe Coffey, Housing Manager, introduced Barbara Lucks, a member of the Housing Committee, who provided Council with names of those serving on the Committee. She commended both Joe Coffey and Lisa Henkel for services at the Housing Meetings. Lucks gave a general status report and stated that the Committee has come to a consensus for Housing Guidelines related to seniority, family priority and ownership of additional property. The issues of retirement and smoking are open for Council's consideration. She stated that Issues requiring further discussion are improvements to deed restricted units and whether or not those improvements will be recoverable from resale, income and assets guidelines, quality assurance on resale, and rental of deed restricted units. Lucks further stated that the Committee plans to provide recommendations to Council by October 15, 2001. Mordkin requested that when recommendations from the Committee are given to Council, that they include the reasoning for the recommendations. Coffey stated that all Housing Committee recommendations would be provided at one Council Meeting. Town Council commended Joe Coffey, Barbara Lucks, and the Housing Committee members, for donating their personal time toward this effort. Coffey reported that he has received the foundation permit for Daly Townhomes and that excavating for the foundations may begin within the upcoming week. He also reported that planting to replace the trees and vegetation removed during installation of the water and sewer lines is schedule to begin tomorrow. Mercatoris stated that RETT funds are available to be used for planting the trees. 47 00 08-13-0)tc Page 5 of 6 Item No. 8: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS -AND- Item No. 9: CALENDARS Items 8 and 9 were discussed as one item. Bus Pullover- Brush Creek /Divide Roads Intersection Virtue requested that the Public Works Director inform Council with completion of work. Hwy. 82/Brush Creek Road Intersection Sign Manchester reported that the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) has approved the Town's application to construct a sign at the intersection of Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road. The Town Attorney stated that the contracts are being reviewed. The Community Development Director outlined the next steps necessary for the construction process. Council requested that the sign be completed before the 2001-2002 ski season begins and that landscaping and irrigation be completed this fall. Comprehensive Plan Manchester requested that the Town Manager schedule Meeting Agenda time to discuss the philosophy and necessary revision of the Town's Comprehensive Plan and provide direction to staff and the Planning Commission. RTA/RFTA Board Meeting Manchester reported that the Rural Transportation Authority (RTA) Board began a process to resolve the contractual elements of the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for cost allocation methods and asset distribution. He requested that the Public Works Director be given the memorandum distributed by Walter Keiser to follow up on issues discussed at that meeting. Manchester stated that the trunk line to Eagle County is on the next agenda for discussion. He also reported that follow up on the Strategic Plan is scheduled for August 17, 2001, which proposes additional representation from the jurisdictions as part of the Board of Directors, and create subcommittees to handle separate issues. Manchester stated that Union talks are still ongoing for RFTA and mitigation is likely to occur in September of this year. The Town Manager reported the word is that a Resolution is being written to approve the absorption of RFRA into the RTA. GPW fig 08-13-01tc Page 6 of 6 Village Leadership Forum (VLF) Carey Shanks reported that a VLF Meeting will be tentatively scheduled for September 14 or 17, 2001. Paul Shepard from Intrawest will provide information regarding development of the Base Village area. Shanks will inform Council of the meeting time and date. Item No. 10: EXECUTIVE SESSION Colorado revised Statues 24-6-402 (4) (b) Snowmass Village Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article III, Section 2-45 (c) (2) Executive Sessions. At 6:30 p.m. Virtue made a motion to convene to Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions regarding 7 Star Ranch Annexation, Woodrun V Litigation, Rodeo Property Acquisition and Land Use Application. Mercatoris seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 opposed. At 7:55 p.m., Mercatoris made a motion to reconvene the Regular Meeting, seconded by Virtue. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 12: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Purvis made a motion to adjourn the Meeting, seconded by Virtue. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. The Meeting adjourned at 7:56 p.m. Submitted By, , Donna J. Garcia-Spaulding, Secretary/Records Clerk OW r 91 TO: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: GARY SUITER, TOWN MANAGER RE: MANAGER'S REPORT DATE: AUGUST 29, 2001 HOUSING ISSUES Recently,I provided you with a memo regarding several housing issues including real estate ownership, renters, a residency violation and mandated HOA assessments. If you have additional comments or concerns on these matters please let me know. I expect that the Housing Committee will address these issues directly or indirectly. *JOB DESCRIPTION. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND PROJECT CHART I have provided to each of you a revised version of the Town Manager's Job Description and Performance Standards. The Specific Objectives have been incorporated into the chart for ease of reading. As you know, I am meeting with each of you to gain your insight onto these standards. This is an important exercise and your honest feedback is important to me. I should complete my meetings with you this week and will bring this back to you on the 10 for final agreement. Also, I have attached an outline of the project chart that lists Town Council's 2001 projects. The chart will ultimately include details on accountability, deliverables and due dates. Carey and staff are in the process of filling in the blanks, with my oversight. I wanted you to see this outline and comment on format and content. This is a "work in progress" and your feedback is appreciated. I will continue incorporating your comments and refining these documents until mutual agreement is reached. *FOLLOW-UP WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS Per Council's request, I have asked Department Heads to attend this Council Meeting as a follow-up to our meeting with Jose Santiago last month. As you recall, the Department Heads had several recommendations to improve Council/Staff communication, expectations and overall effectiveness. I have delivered Council's message to the staff and your responsiveness is appreciated. 0 00 Manager's Report 8/29/01 Page 2 of 2 FIRE-DAMAGED HOUSE For your information, the owners of the fire-damaged house located at 638 Meadow Road, Melton Ranch Unit 2, have applied for a demolition permit with the Town. Once issued, the house needs to be removed within 30 days. The permit should be issued this week. We will keep you posted. `TOV LETTER You've probably seen the "Snowmelt Road" letter from the President of the Top of the Village (TOV) Board of Directors. Based upon their statements, it sounds like we have a common "middle ground" upon which we can negotiate an agreement. I am comfortable directing Hunt Walker and Dean Gordon to work out the details of an agreement whereupon the Town vacates the carport driveways to TOV, while retaining ownership of Upper Snowmelt Road. A final agreement would, of course, need Council approval. Please let me know if you have any problems with this direction. 'Response requested Town of Snowmass Village: Year 2001 Projects and Key Milestones for Q3 and Q4 Project Name Accountability Major Current Due Done? Deliverables! Date Town Projects 1 . SVRA Issues Town a. Council/Gary? b: 2. Rodeo Town a. ' Council/Gary?? b. Purchase �'� 3. VLF Process Town a. Council/Gary? b. 4. Forward Plan Town b a. Council/Gary? . 5. Community Town a. Pool Council/Gary? b. 6. Upper Hunt b Snowmelt C. Road 7. Daly Joe a b. Townhomes 8. Residential Hunt a. Trash b. Enclosures 9. Brush Creek Craig a and 82 Sin b. 10. Performance Gary and Staff a. b. I Measurement 11 . Brush Creek Hunt a and Highline b. 1 Intersection 12. Brush Creek Craig a. b. Trail 13. Land Use Craig & Staff a Code b. Revisions 14. Election Trudi a. b. System 15. Housing Joe, Dick Virtue, Issues Bob Purvis b. Committee • a. 16. RTA T. Michael Transition B.Purvis; Hunt b. Walker Development Review Projects Due Date? Done? 1 . Snowmass Town Council / a. Club Phase II Community b. Development 2. Seven Star Town Council / a- Ranch Community b. Development 3. Base Village Town Council / a 1 COmmilrllty b. Development 4. Snowmass Town Council / a. Center Community b. Development PLEASE TURN IN YOUR STATUS REPORT UPDATES TO DONNA BY 5:00 P.M. September 12, 2001 STATUS REPORT September 4, 2001 Town Council/Town Manager VLF/Forward Plan ■ Next meeting September 14". Gary Suifer Job Description/Performance ■ Scheduled for discussion with Town Council Standards September 4th. Gary Suitor Rodeo Acquisition ■ Negotiations ongoing. Town Council Pool ■ On Temporary hold. Gary SulterlCrela Thompson SVRA ISSUeS ■ Lease payment made. Board-Meeting on Ga SuiterrlownCounUl August 319. Public Works Snowmelt Road ■ Developing preliminary cost estimates. Hurl Welker Summer Road Project ■ Elam Construction will be back September 9 Hunt Walker to pave Meadow Lane,Wildridge Lane and other roads. RFTA Bus Staging ■ Will be completed In September. Hunt Walker Housin No Daly Townhomes ■ Site and infrastructure work continues. Joe coMe Housina Committee ■ Meets regularly on Tuesdays at 5:30 P.M. Finance 2001/2002 Budget ■ Preparing budget report for discussion with Marianne Rakowski Town Council Public ety Town Clerk New Employee ■ Hired new Front Desk Secretary Sandra Trodi Wodine Roberts Grants Review Board ■ Meetings scheduled with Grants Applicants Donna Garcia Spalding August 8th through August 30th, 2001 1 PLEASE TURN IN YOUR STATUS REPORT UPDATES TO DONNA BY 5:00 P.M. September 12, 2001 Communit Development De artment Pitkin County GIS ■ Preparing updated street map for Welcome Cmig Thompson Center. Sign Code Review ■ Town Council to discuss Exempt Sign policy Chris Comed0m WehlslmniRobert V i f issues at September 4'"6 I&meetings. Code— Building Height ■ Anticipate Planning Commission discussion on Chds Conrad September 5 . XI Ma'or Develo I ment Review U date Snowiness Center Expansion Sketch • Scheduled for Town Council Review(tentative) Plan on September 4 and then on October 1". Jim Wehlstmm Snowmass Club— Phase II ■ Town Council discussion commences on Preliminary Plan September 4". Chris CwmdrJim Wehlstmm Minor Develo ment Review Update Snowmass Chapel Sketch Plan ■ P.C. Meeting scheduled for September 5"'. Jim Wehlshom Aspen Skiing Company—Vehicle 0 PC Review resumes on September 5'p. Maintenance Facility At The Divide Minor PUD Amendment Jim Wshlsfmm Communit Enhancement Pro acts a Brush Creek— Seasons 4 ■ Construction underway. Bemedehe Barlhelenghl Parcel F — Parking Lot ■ Working on concepts and alternatives per Town Bemadeae Beilhelenahl'Lany GreenMunt Walker Councils direction. Brush Creek Trail ■ 1041 Hearing scheduled for Augusl28 . Crala ThmpsorilBemadetle Berfhelen hl Project Update Coordination-Gary Suiter 923-3777 ext.206 Public Works-Hunt Walker 923-5110 ext.201 Housing-Joe Coffey 923-2360 ext. 10 Community Development—Craig Thompson 923-5524 ext.247 Town Clerk -Trudl Wodlne 923-3777 ext.202 Finance-Marianne Rakowski 923.3796 ext.241 Police Chief-Art Smythe 923-5330 ext.217 _jbc,- 2 F'SeptemberPacket Calendar Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LABOR DAY! 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. :i a u 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 2:00 P.M. VLF MTG. T.C. MTG. 9:OOAM— 4:OOPM Daly Room Snowmass Club 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2:00 P.M. T.C. MTG. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2:00 P.M. Special MTG (Tentative) 30. Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 2:00 P.M. T.C. MTG. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 2:00 P.M. T.C. MTG 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 HALLOWEEN �I IMMUM MEN • DESIGN WORKS HOP . . 0000